Thursday, October 21, 2004
Lie down with dogs
This post is in response to Don Wycliff's attempt to justify his paper (the Chicago Tribune) and its endorsement of George W. Bush this year.
Sometimes you have to take a stand & vote with your feet, Don. Wycliff's article was a joke -- especially his selective citing of the paper's Rules of Engagement. A paper that values free speech and personal liberty endorsing George Bush?? The few acts of political courage he cites in the paper's long history actually only serve to underline the fact that they are blind and deaf to the absolute seriousness of this election.
They are out of touch, and for them, this is a game.
The 10 people who reached "consensus" on this decision have made a horrible, hopefully fatal (to their careers) choice: tradition over correctness, lies over truth, exploitation of gays over gays (on National Coming Out Day, Red Eye had an "ex-gay" as their coverboy). The people who sat by and acceeded to this decision, frankly, should have quit. Moreover, Eric Zorn's "I don't give it much weight" excuse seems more like than a pathetic attempt to justify his own complicity in this joke.
Substance matters, EZ. (P.S., Mr. Zorn, I don't think John Kerry has ever used the words "Mary Cheney in public, so please stop with the "Vanessa Kerry" analogy. Have him say "my opponent's daughter" instead.)
This is no normal election. Endorse Keyes, fine. Endorse Hyde, whatever. But to decide that a FAILED PRESIDENT deserves four more years in office is disgraceful. They actually could have made a difference. If Bush wins, their complicity will not save them from the consequences.
Sometimes you have to take a stand & vote with your feet, Don. Wycliff's article was a joke -- especially his selective citing of the paper's Rules of Engagement. A paper that values free speech and personal liberty endorsing George Bush?? The few acts of political courage he cites in the paper's long history actually only serve to underline the fact that they are blind and deaf to the absolute seriousness of this election.
They are out of touch, and for them, this is a game.
The 10 people who reached "consensus" on this decision have made a horrible, hopefully fatal (to their careers) choice: tradition over correctness, lies over truth, exploitation of gays over gays (on National Coming Out Day, Red Eye had an "ex-gay" as their coverboy). The people who sat by and acceeded to this decision, frankly, should have quit. Moreover, Eric Zorn's "I don't give it much weight" excuse seems more like than a pathetic attempt to justify his own complicity in this joke.
Substance matters, EZ. (P.S., Mr. Zorn, I don't think John Kerry has ever used the words "Mary Cheney in public, so please stop with the "Vanessa Kerry" analogy. Have him say "my opponent's daughter" instead.)
This is no normal election. Endorse Keyes, fine. Endorse Hyde, whatever. But to decide that a FAILED PRESIDENT deserves four more years in office is disgraceful. They actually could have made a difference. If Bush wins, their complicity will not save them from the consequences.
