"Cognitive Dissonance and Willful Ignorance"
This weekend, The Dallas Morning News endorsed John McCain for President. No surprise here. The reasons given were, at best, stretching the truth, putting lipstick on a pig to coin an expression. Burnt Orange Report describes such endorsements as "less like a 'voice for the community' and much more like a 'voice for the cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance that inhabits corporate board rooms.'"
- TDMN calls McCain "a decisive break from the Bush years". This is the candidate who boasted of having voted with Bush 95% of the time.
- TDMN praises McCain's support for the Iraq war as somehow in opposition to his own party. Like McCain had to talk Bush into a "stay the course" strategy.
- TDMN praises McCain for campaign finance reform, an issue McCain has run away from.
- TDMN praises McCain for immigration reform, even though McCain has said if given a re-do, he would vote against his own bill.
- TDMN praises McCain for promising to freeze domestic spending (except for all the things he's promising more funding for - the military, NASA, autism research).
- TDMN praises McCain for his "progressive conservatism." That's this year's version of "compassionate conservatism," which TDMN endorsed in 2000 and 2004. That worked out well, don't you think?
There's a lot of historical revisionism and wishful thinking in this editorial. But it had to be thus. How else to write an endorsement for a Republican candidate for President after the disasters that current Republican rule has left us with? TDMN says electing a president is not a popularity contest. No, for TDMN, it's simply a matter of looking for which candidate has the "R" after his name and pretending because the name is different, he represents change.
What strikes me about this editorial is the intellectual dishonesty of it. TDMN pitches McCain as a change agent. But it offers not a single example of where the platform McCain is running on differs from Bush -- not on the war, on taxes, on health care, not even immigration. I could understand if TDMN said it was happy with the results of the Bush administration and recommended four more years. I wouldn't agree with it, but it would at least be an intellectually honest endorsement.
This endorsement is particularly hypocritical given yesterday's TDMN editorial against voting a straight party ticket. After endorsing Cornyn, Sessions, Barton, Johnson and practically every other Republican in sight, TDMN now endorses... surprise, Republican John McCain. You have to get down pretty far on the ballot to find a token Democrat or two.
I suspect the editorial board was coerced into this endorsement. For evidence, I look to the wording of the endorsement itself, looking for a tell that signals coercion, like the SOS eye-blink of a prisoner of war. Maybe it's this sentence: "Mr. McCain offers the continuity, stability and sense of authority people want, as well as a decisive break from the Bush years." Continuity and a decisive break in the same sentence. Only an idiot would write a sentence like that but the editorial board is not made up of idiots. Coercion is the only explanation that makes sense.
5 comments:
We're now 24 hours beyond that endorsement and not a word from any of the editorial board members on how the endorsement was arrived at. Draw what conclusions you want from that. That the board feels pride in a well-reasoned argument is one conclusion I have a hard time drawing.
Maybe they like being losers. After all their paper is losing. Like you would be more impressed (but would disagree) if the DMN wrote an editorial with reasonable grounds instead of half truths at best.
Maybe it was a ploy to increase Collin county subscriptions so they can move the paper there and ignore Dallas county.
What I don't see in the editorial is a true understanding of leadership. We live in a new century and its time to move into it. Compare Colin Powell's words about Obama to DMN's and McCain. Its clear Powell "gets it." He understands that much of this isn't about policy and resume comparison as it is about leadership.
A McCain presidency sends a message to that the presidency is really for old white men. An Obama presidency sends a message that reflects the evolving make up of America.
Sorry. there was a typo above.
It should say, "Like I you would be more...."
I need coffee, Ed!!!
I cant get it right! hahaha
We're now three days after the endorsement and the editorial board is silent as clams on the subject. No explanation. No defense. That can't be a good sign for any intellectual honesty behind the endorsement.
No matter what's happening to circulation, TDMN should show intellectual honesty, not pander to its readers. I suspect the real explanation behind this endorsement lies in the executive board room, not the editorial offices or the circulation area.
Post a Comment