In a December 10 editorial entitled "Miracle of democracy," the Lawrence Journal-World praises actor Richard Dreyfuss, who, in a "recent appearance on HBO’s 'Real Time with Bill Maher'" (he actually appeared on the program on November 17, suggesting the author didn't actually watch the program), "decried what he called 'our partisan-addicted society.'”
According to the Journal-World, "Skills like reason, logic, clarity, dissent, civility and debate are essential tools of democracy, he said, and 'without them you can kiss this thing (democracy) goodbye.'”
Dreyfuss had a few others things to say on "Real Time," but those statements didn't find their way into the editorial. Here are just a few of them:
"And it’s one thing to say that Bush is a villain for getting us into a war, and it’s another thing when we realize that he couldn’t do anything without our eventual consent."
"And lying to the Congress about the reasons for war. And once the Republicans are placed in the position of having to endorse torture, you’ve got a bad problem on your hands."
"Even if we lose – if you lose an impeachment hearing, whoever 'we' are, then at least you have a body that says, 'We stand against these things.' And unless you do that, then you’re for them."
So Dreyfuss characterizes President Bush as a "villain," calls him a "liar," and calls on the Democrat-led Congress to begin the process of impeaching Bush, yet the Journal-World praises Dreyfuss for calling for civility and decrying our "partisan-addicted society."
Dreyfuss's message about teaching civics in our schools is a good one, but Dreyfuss is an extremely bad messenger. And it would be difficult to think of a more inappropriate forum than Bill Maher's.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Friday, December 08, 2006
Oldie: Conservatives slam door on moderate
While preparing my post on the Lawrence Journal-World's latest editorial on the Republican Rift, I was reminded of 1998 editorial that failed to report the facts accurately and thoroughly.
After the elections for the Douglas County GOP leadership that year, a Journal-World editorial reported the following:
"Tuesday's meeting at the Lawrence Holidome apparently was a disheartening display. The tone was set before the official meeting when favored conservative party members gathered in a separate meeting room and shut the door in the face of a moderate Republican who was seeking to chair the county party."
An earlier Tim Carpenter article reported the following:
"Prior to the reorganization meeting, conservative precinct representatives assembled in a Holidome meeting room for snacks and soft drinks. Watkins prevented [Craig] Templeton from entering the room."
A Carpenter article from the previous day quoted a moderate Republican who placed blame on the conservative leadership of the county GOP for Democrat Dennis Moore's victory over Republican Vince Snowbarger earlier that month. ""These people have not led," Johnston said. "You can't lose your congressman. The county chairman ... was sitting on his hands."
If you buy the Journal-World's version of events, the conservatives sat on their hands and allowed Vince Snowbarger to be defeated. They then displayed intolerance by not even allowing a moderate seeking the chairmanship of the party to enter a room.
Not surprisingly, the facts behind this story are quite different. Nowhere in the Carpenter articles or the editorial was it mentioned that Craig Templeton was elected to the board of directors of the newly-formed MAINstream Coaltion of Douglas County in May 1998. This is not a minor detail since the MAINstream Coalition's PAC, MAIN*PAC, mailed 67,000 postcards in OPPOSITION TO THE RE-ELECTION OF SNOWBARGER. In other words, Templeton, who had hopes of leading the Douglas County GOP, belonged to a group that worked to defeat the Republican congressman who represented the county.
Interestingly, former state Sen. Wint Winter Jr. was part of the moderate faction promoting Templeton's candidacy. Winter's brother, Dan, was on the MAINstream Coalition's board of directors. According to the Statement of Organization filed with the Federal Elections
Commission by the MAINstream Political Action Committee (PAC) on June 17, 1998,
the PAC’s bank was the Johnson County Bank of Overland Park, Kan. Coincidentally, Dan Winter was the president and CEO of Johnson County Bank.
Now, back to the door being shut in Templeton's face. Earlier that day yours truly informed the conservative faction of Templeton's membership in the MAINstream Coalition. At the time Templeton attempted to enter the room, the conservative precinct representatives were discussing Templeton's situation. It was, as John Watkins stated, a "private party."
The Journal-World reported on Templeton's membership in the MAINstream Coalition six months prior to the the reorganization election. Either they forgot about it or deliberately hid that fact in their November 1998 articles and editorial. In either case, the omission of that fact does not reflect well on the newspaper's reporting.
After the elections for the Douglas County GOP leadership that year, a Journal-World editorial reported the following:
"Tuesday's meeting at the Lawrence Holidome apparently was a disheartening display. The tone was set before the official meeting when favored conservative party members gathered in a separate meeting room and shut the door in the face of a moderate Republican who was seeking to chair the county party."
An earlier Tim Carpenter article reported the following:
"Prior to the reorganization meeting, conservative precinct representatives assembled in a Holidome meeting room for snacks and soft drinks. Watkins prevented [Craig] Templeton from entering the room."
A Carpenter article from the previous day quoted a moderate Republican who placed blame on the conservative leadership of the county GOP for Democrat Dennis Moore's victory over Republican Vince Snowbarger earlier that month. ""These people have not led," Johnston said. "You can't lose your congressman. The county chairman ... was sitting on his hands."
If you buy the Journal-World's version of events, the conservatives sat on their hands and allowed Vince Snowbarger to be defeated. They then displayed intolerance by not even allowing a moderate seeking the chairmanship of the party to enter a room.
Not surprisingly, the facts behind this story are quite different. Nowhere in the Carpenter articles or the editorial was it mentioned that Craig Templeton was elected to the board of directors of the newly-formed MAINstream Coaltion of Douglas County in May 1998. This is not a minor detail since the MAINstream Coalition's PAC, MAIN*PAC, mailed 67,000 postcards in OPPOSITION TO THE RE-ELECTION OF SNOWBARGER. In other words, Templeton, who had hopes of leading the Douglas County GOP, belonged to a group that worked to defeat the Republican congressman who represented the county.
Interestingly, former state Sen. Wint Winter Jr. was part of the moderate faction promoting Templeton's candidacy. Winter's brother, Dan, was on the MAINstream Coalition's board of directors. According to the Statement of Organization filed with the Federal Elections
Commission by the MAINstream Political Action Committee (PAC) on June 17, 1998,
the PAC’s bank was the Johnson County Bank of Overland Park, Kan. Coincidentally, Dan Winter was the president and CEO of Johnson County Bank.
Now, back to the door being shut in Templeton's face. Earlier that day yours truly informed the conservative faction of Templeton's membership in the MAINstream Coalition. At the time Templeton attempted to enter the room, the conservative precinct representatives were discussing Templeton's situation. It was, as John Watkins stated, a "private party."
The Journal-World reported on Templeton's membership in the MAINstream Coalition six months prior to the the reorganization election. Either they forgot about it or deliberately hid that fact in their November 1998 articles and editorial. In either case, the omission of that fact does not reflect well on the newspaper's reporting.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Journal-World's nonsensical spin on GOP rift
The Lawrence Journal-World's December 5 editorial had so many nonsensical comments in it that I have added extended commentary in red.
"Monday’s leadership elections in the Kansas House seem to point to a continuation of the rift between conservative and moderate Republicans in the Legislature."
The editorial does not explain how electing a moderate Speaker would have pointed away from a continuation of the rift between conservative and moderate Republicans in the Legislature. For years now, the Journal-World has reported on the rift between conservatives and moderates. The Journal-World has reported on that rift regardless of whether conservatives were in charge or moderates were in charge. In August 1999, Journal-World reporter Chris Koger wrote that a meeting of Douglas County Republicans "apparently only increased tensions between conservatives and moderates."
At the time of that meeting, Mark Parkinson, who was in attendance, was the moderate chairman of the Kansas GOP. Parkinson switched parties this year and ran as Gov. Sebelius' running mate. The House speaker at the time was Republican Robin Jennison, another moderate.
"On the first ballot, Neufeld received 29 votes to Wilk’s 25 and O’Neal’s 24. After O’Neal was eliminated, most of his votes went to Neufeld, resulting in a 47-31 victory on the second ballot.
The choice of a solid conservative, Neufeld, over a solid moderate, Wilk, is a strong indication that conservatives still will be a dominant force in the Kansas House."
Republicans lost just five seats in the House in November. Does the Journal-World really believe that a handful of losses would make the conservatives less than a dominant force?
"It seems Wilk would have been in a much better position than Neufeld to work with moderate Republicans and Democrats in the House. That will be even more important this session given that Democrats gained five House seats in the recent elections."
The role of Speaker of the House should not be to "work with moderate Republicans and Democrats in the House." The goal should be to work to pass good legislation and to stop bad legislation. The Democrats did gain five seats, but, as noted in an earlier post, they still remain far weaker than they were just 14 years ago, when they actually had a majority in the Kansas House.
"Unfortunately, it seems the state has heard from Neufeld mostly when he was opposing some initiative or action."
And the country heard mostly from Abraham Lincoln when he was opposing slavery. Legislators should oppose poor legislation.
"He was among those who bottled up budget measures last year with a proposal to define cloning and ban state funding for it. He dug his heels in against the Kansas Supreme Court during the school finance debate. And he’s certainly no friend of higher education in the state, attacking university budgets and saying as recently as this fall that most Kansas workers don’t have a need for a college education."
The editorial failed to tell us why most workers in Kansas should have a college education. According to the Census Bureau, 28 percent of Kansas have a bachelor's degree or higher. Can the editorial writer explain why at least an additional 23 percent NEED a college education?
Republican rift
It’s unfortunate Republicans in the Kansas House passed over
Rep. Kenny Wilk for the speaker’s job.
It’s unfortunate Republicans in the Kansas House passed over
Rep. Kenny Wilk for the speaker’s job.
"Monday’s leadership elections in the Kansas House seem to point to a continuation of the rift between conservative and moderate Republicans in the Legislature."
The editorial does not explain how electing a moderate Speaker would have pointed away from a continuation of the rift between conservative and moderate Republicans in the Legislature. For years now, the Journal-World has reported on the rift between conservatives and moderates. The Journal-World has reported on that rift regardless of whether conservatives were in charge or moderates were in charge. In August 1999, Journal-World reporter Chris Koger wrote that a meeting of Douglas County Republicans "apparently only increased tensions between conservatives and moderates."
At the time of that meeting, Mark Parkinson, who was in attendance, was the moderate chairman of the Kansas GOP. Parkinson switched parties this year and ran as Gov. Sebelius' running mate. The House speaker at the time was Republican Robin Jennison, another moderate.
"On the first ballot, Neufeld received 29 votes to Wilk’s 25 and O’Neal’s 24. After O’Neal was eliminated, most of his votes went to Neufeld, resulting in a 47-31 victory on the second ballot.
The choice of a solid conservative, Neufeld, over a solid moderate, Wilk, is a strong indication that conservatives still will be a dominant force in the Kansas House."
Republicans lost just five seats in the House in November. Does the Journal-World really believe that a handful of losses would make the conservatives less than a dominant force?
"It seems Wilk would have been in a much better position than Neufeld to work with moderate Republicans and Democrats in the House. That will be even more important this session given that Democrats gained five House seats in the recent elections."
The role of Speaker of the House should not be to "work with moderate Republicans and Democrats in the House." The goal should be to work to pass good legislation and to stop bad legislation. The Democrats did gain five seats, but, as noted in an earlier post, they still remain far weaker than they were just 14 years ago, when they actually had a majority in the Kansas House.
"Unfortunately, it seems the state has heard from Neufeld mostly when he was opposing some initiative or action."
And the country heard mostly from Abraham Lincoln when he was opposing slavery. Legislators should oppose poor legislation.
"He was among those who bottled up budget measures last year with a proposal to define cloning and ban state funding for it. He dug his heels in against the Kansas Supreme Court during the school finance debate. And he’s certainly no friend of higher education in the state, attacking university budgets and saying as recently as this fall that most Kansas workers don’t have a need for a college education."
The editorial failed to tell us why most workers in Kansas should have a college education. According to the Census Bureau, 28 percent of Kansas have a bachelor's degree or higher. Can the editorial writer explain why at least an additional 23 percent NEED a college education?
In any case, it appears the editorial writer misquoted Neufeld. In the September 17, 2006 issue of the Journal-World, reporter Scott Rothschild writes, "And, [Neufeld] said, changes in the workplace have in many instances placed less emphasis on a college education."
"'The economy does not have a demand that everyone have a fine arts degree. Employers care if someone has the specialized training to do the job,' Neufeld said."
There is a difference between "most" and "everyone." Saying that the "economy does not have a demand that everyone have a fine arts degree" is not tantamount to being an enemy of higher education. It's a statement of fact.
"Given that more moderate Republican leadership will remain in control of the Kansas Senate — President Steve Morris and Majority Leader Derek Schmidt — the election of Neufeld seems to ensure continued discord between the two chambers."
Apparently, it never occurred to the editorial writer that the Republicans in the Kansas Senate could choose a conservative majority leader in order to end the discord between the two chambers. After all, there are far more conservative Republicans in the House than there are moderate Republicans in the Senate. Why does the Journal-World believe the majority should capitulate to the minority?
"It also is likely to mean that moderate House Republicans will continue to look to House Democrats, rather than members of their own party, for support on key policy issues."
So if a moderate Speaker had been chosen, moderate House Republicans would have had no need to look to House Democrats for support on key policy issues? Where would they then look? There are not enough moderate Republicans in the House to pass anything on their own.
"It seems likely that if both Democrats and Republicans had voted on a House speaker, Wilk would have won. But that’s not how it works."
No, that's not how it works. Never has worked that way. So why share this hypothetical nonsense with your readers?
"Republicans hold the majority in the House and conservatives apparently still hold the majority in the Republican House delegation."
Well, of course they do. Although I should point out that Wilk’s and O’Neal’s votes totaled 49 to Neufeld's 29. On the second ballot, Neufeld picked up 18 of O'Neal's votes while Wilk picked up just six. If conservatives do not hold a majority in the Republican House delegation, then a large number of moderate Republicans thought Neufeld was the better choice to led them.
"There has been considerable talk since the November elections about the positive aspects of 'divided' government, referring to the Republican president and the newly Democratic Congress. If such divisions really do force more discussion and compromise and lead to better policy, then Kansas should be in for a banner year."
Speaking of the Democratic Congress in Washington, perhaps some day the Journal-World will editorialize on how Democrats in the U.S. House should have elected a moderate speaker over ultraliberal Nancy Pelosi even though liberals still hold a majority in the Democrat House delegation. After all, it seems a moderate would have been in a much better position than Pelosi to work with moderate Democrats and Republicans in the House.
Don't hold your breath waiting on that editorial.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Blue Dog Boyda?
In his November 24 column in the Topeka Metro News, Peter Hancock writes that "Kansas Rep.-elect Nancy Boyda hopes to join fellow Kansan Dennis Moore in the centrist-conservative caucus known as the 'Blue Dog Democrats.'"
"Boyda says there's an interview process that goes along with it," Hancock writes. "If it's fiscal conservatism they want, she might just get away with faxing over a copy of her expenditure report."
I have already dealt with the Myth of the Moderate Moore. I believe Boyda will be just as "moderate."
As far as Boyda's fiscal conservatism, as of October 18, her campaign had outstanding debts totaling $316,742.
"Boyda says there's an interview process that goes along with it," Hancock writes. "If it's fiscal conservatism they want, she might just get away with faxing over a copy of her expenditure report."
I have already dealt with the Myth of the Moderate Moore. I believe Boyda will be just as "moderate."
As far as Boyda's fiscal conservatism, as of October 18, her campaign had outstanding debts totaling $316,742.
Oh brother, Broder!
In today's Lawrence Journal-World, liberal columnist David Broder discusses Sen. Mitch McConnell and his new position as leader of the GOP senators:
"Ask Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky to name his role models for his new responsibilities as the leader of Senate Republicans, and the answer is surprising. 'Mike Mansfield and George Mitchell,' he replied the other day. 'I know they’re both Democrats, but I admire the way they ran things here.'"
Broder then wrote the following:
"Mansfield allowed Everett McKinley Dirksen, his Republican counterpart, to claim most of the credit for the civil rights bills of the 1960s...."
Mansfield did not "allow" Dirksen to claim most of the credit. Dirksen rightfully earned that credit.
Mansfield was unable to prevent a 74-day filibuster led by members of his party when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was being debated. In the end, just 69 percent of Senate Democrats voted for the act. Eighty-two percent of Dirksen's Republicans voted for the act.
When the Voting Rights Act of 1965 came up for a vote, 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted for it, while 17 Democrats voted against it.
Dirksen gets most of the credit for the civil rights bills of the 1960s because his Republicans passed those bills over the opposition of a large percentage of Senate Democrats.
"Ask Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky to name his role models for his new responsibilities as the leader of Senate Republicans, and the answer is surprising. 'Mike Mansfield and George Mitchell,' he replied the other day. 'I know they’re both Democrats, but I admire the way they ran things here.'"
Broder then wrote the following:
"Mansfield allowed Everett McKinley Dirksen, his Republican counterpart, to claim most of the credit for the civil rights bills of the 1960s...."
Mansfield did not "allow" Dirksen to claim most of the credit. Dirksen rightfully earned that credit.
Mansfield was unable to prevent a 74-day filibuster led by members of his party when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was being debated. In the end, just 69 percent of Senate Democrats voted for the act. Eighty-two percent of Dirksen's Republicans voted for the act.
When the Voting Rights Act of 1965 came up for a vote, 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted for it, while 17 Democrats voted against it.
Dirksen gets most of the credit for the civil rights bills of the 1960s because his Republicans passed those bills over the opposition of a large percentage of Senate Democrats.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
The phantom "overtly racist" Kline commercial
Kansas Media Watch does not usually scrutinize college newspapers. The writers are young, inexperienced, and, therefore, prone to making mistakes. For example, Frank Tankard, writing for the University Daily Kansan editorial board on November 6, endorsed Rep. Dennis Moore for re-election. Tankard's praise for Moore, however, was not unqualified:
"Republican challenger Chuck Ahner, who has never held elective office, says he would vote to make President Bush’s tax cuts permanent, which could hurt the U.S. economy when the country is in a deficit. Moore voted for the cuts in 2000, before the economy went into recession, but voted against extending them permanently."
Of course, Bush's tax cuts were passed after Bush became president in 2001. Also, the Clinton-Gore recession began in March 2001 (i.e., under Clinton and Gore's final budget), months prior to Moore voting for the Bush tax cuts.
I'm reluctant to scrutinize Peter Hancock's work because it often resembles that of a college sophomore's.
Hancock, a statehouse reporter for Kansas Public Radio and a columnist for the Topeka Metro News, on November 17 wrote a column which included the following paragraph:
"And how about the other [Phill] Kline commercial - the one about the horribly ugly-looking black man who was let out of prison early, only to rape and kill more innocet white women - that was so overtly racist and demagogic that it made George H.W. Bush's 'Willie Horton' ad look tame by comparison?"
"Overtly racist" commercial? If there were such a commercial, surely the Kansas media would have written much about it. Yet a Google search of the words "Phill Kline racist commercial" turns up nothing. Phill Kline's campaign Web site has a page for his commercials, but the links are inactive. Several of those commercials are available at YouTube, but none shows the "horribly ugly-looking black man."
I contacted Hancock, but he offered few details other than saying he saw the commercial while a guest on public television's "Kansas Week."
In the same column, Hancock noted that he was "eating the same stale carry-out pizza from 20 years ago."
I'd like to give Hancock the benefit of the doubt, but it appears that his 20-year-old pizza brought on some serious hallucinations.
"Republican challenger Chuck Ahner, who has never held elective office, says he would vote to make President Bush’s tax cuts permanent, which could hurt the U.S. economy when the country is in a deficit. Moore voted for the cuts in 2000, before the economy went into recession, but voted against extending them permanently."
Of course, Bush's tax cuts were passed after Bush became president in 2001. Also, the Clinton-Gore recession began in March 2001 (i.e., under Clinton and Gore's final budget), months prior to Moore voting for the Bush tax cuts.
I'm reluctant to scrutinize Peter Hancock's work because it often resembles that of a college sophomore's.
Hancock, a statehouse reporter for Kansas Public Radio and a columnist for the Topeka Metro News, on November 17 wrote a column which included the following paragraph:
"And how about the other [Phill] Kline commercial - the one about the horribly ugly-looking black man who was let out of prison early, only to rape and kill more innocet white women - that was so overtly racist and demagogic that it made George H.W. Bush's 'Willie Horton' ad look tame by comparison?"
"Overtly racist" commercial? If there were such a commercial, surely the Kansas media would have written much about it. Yet a Google search of the words "Phill Kline racist commercial" turns up nothing. Phill Kline's campaign Web site has a page for his commercials, but the links are inactive. Several of those commercials are available at YouTube, but none shows the "horribly ugly-looking black man."
I contacted Hancock, but he offered few details other than saying he saw the commercial while a guest on public television's "Kansas Week."
In the same column, Hancock noted that he was "eating the same stale carry-out pizza from 20 years ago."
I'd like to give Hancock the benefit of the doubt, but it appears that his 20-year-old pizza brought on some serious hallucinations.
Journal-World publishes dishonest LTE
In today's Journal-World, letter writer Karl Brooks writes, "The weekend before Election Day, right here in Kansas, [President Bush] denounced Democrats as unpatriotic and misguided for simply asking him to share the facts about Iraq!"
This is a false statement. I was at the event in Topeka and Bush explicitly said Democrats were not unpatriotic for questioning his policies in Iraq. The Topeka Capital-Journal accurately reported on Bush's statement:
"Bush said he didn't think Democrats with alternative views on Iraq were unpatriotic."
The Journal-World's own reporter, Scott Rothschild, heard the same thing:
"Democrats who have criticized the president for the war and his tactics in fighting terrorists aren’t unpatriotic, Bush said, 'I’m just saying they’re wrong.'”
One would think such claims would be fact-checked before they are published. The failure to do so does not reflect well on the editorial page editor or the newspaper as a whole.
This is a false statement. I was at the event in Topeka and Bush explicitly said Democrats were not unpatriotic for questioning his policies in Iraq. The Topeka Capital-Journal accurately reported on Bush's statement:
"Bush said he didn't think Democrats with alternative views on Iraq were unpatriotic."
The Journal-World's own reporter, Scott Rothschild, heard the same thing:
"Democrats who have criticized the president for the war and his tactics in fighting terrorists aren’t unpatriotic, Bush said, 'I’m just saying they’re wrong.'”
One would think such claims would be fact-checked before they are published. The failure to do so does not reflect well on the editorial page editor or the newspaper as a whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)