Normally the Washington Post Opinion section is a pretty good read. If for no other reason than all of the humor that it provides. But the frequent reader will notice that the section lacks any real sense of cohesion. Maybe it doesn't really need one anymore. After all this is the age of the Internet and instant access. The world's reliance on newspaper editors to do its thinking is something long past. Now we can decide for ourselves which candidate is most deserving of our vote, or is at least more deserving than their opponents. But I digress.
The Post is still trying to tell readers not only who to vote for, but even which politician should run for office. Three weeks ago the Post's token conservative voice, George Will, laid out the precise reasons that Obama Barack should run for office. Today the Post is running an article from Ruth Marcus (Has she won the Pulitzer? Didn't think so.) laying out all the reasons he should stay his ass on the bench. In other words, let Hillary have this one for her turn. She is the darling of the liberal establishment. And she's endured all these years of being married to Bill so she deserves an easy shot at the Democratic nomination. Never mind that the public might want someone else, even if he did drugs as a college kid.
The public likes candidates with limited public records like Barack and Clinton. Why else would we consistently push "Washington Outsiders" to the top of national tickets? If we wanted a Bob Dole or Ted Kennedy then one of those two would have already been elected, twice. But I digress.
The Post needs to get it's Editorial Page act together. After all. There is only two years left before they have to tell us who to vote for. Lord knows that none of us are smart enough to work that one out on our own.
–
TC
