At the risk of sounding like the groom left standing at the altar, I couldn’t resist the urge to challenge the Paradise Post’s recent congressional endorsement editorial.
Frankly, I’m surprised, disappointed and disheartened by the Post’s apparent casual dismissal of many of those running for congress as not being ‘serious’ candidates, myself included. Simply making the statement, without any explanation, doesn’t make it true.
In their own words, they say:
“Congressman Wally Herger, who will conclude 26 years in Washington in December, announced late last year that he would not seek re-election. His decision sparked a flood of candidates to enter the race, though not all of them were serious candidates. We whittled the field down from the nine that are on the ballot to four candidates that we feel are serious:”
The Post’s flippant, unsubstantiated labeling of some of the congressional candidates as not being ‘serious’ candidates is incredibly insulting, irresponsible and ignorant…to say the least.
Dare I say, anyone who decides to run for public office, voluntarily subjecting themselves to the public scrutiny and grueling rigors of a campaign, deserves to be taken seriously. Preserving and protecting this very basic American right is, in large measure, the reason I served this great Nation for 26 years in the US military.
Unlike the Paradise Post, I would never think to belittle, demean or so casually discard any citizen who chooses to participate in America’s political process. To the contrary, we should be encouraging all citizens to become more actively engaged in determining the future direction of our country, leaving the ultimate choice up to the voters.
So, tell me. In the Paradise Post’s opinion, what makes one a ‘serious’ candidate? I can find no such explanation in their recent editorial.
Do you mean to imply only establishment politicians are ‘serious’ candidates? Or, perhaps, only those who agree with you on the issues? Or, is a ‘serious’ candidate defined as one with serious name recognition, or one of the good ‘ole boys, or, perhaps, someone with a tidy sum of cash in their campaign coffers? Who can know for sure?
Heck, I’ve attended 80+ campaign events and traveled some 7,000 miles; spent weeks writing my position on the issues; self-funded a large portion of my campaign; worn down shoe leather walking the cities and towns in the congressional district; walked in lots of parades; fielded tough questions at candidate forums; and, run my campaign without the aid of high priced consultants, managers and speech writers. Does any of this make me a ‘serious’ candidate?
Just as it would be inappropriate for me to suggest the Paradise Post is not a ‘serious’ newspaper without the necessary substantiation to back it up, it is inappropriate of the Post to make a similar proclamation about those running for political office.
Come on Paradise Post, you’re better than this….at least I thought so. And, same goes for all the other North State media outlets intent on making political endorsements. Your readers, viewers, and listeners deserve a more detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of all the congressional candidates.
Until then, your endorsement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
A link to the referenced Paradise Post editorial, along with a full text version, is provided below: