It’s shutdown day two, even more apocalypse time, and nothing has changed. Neither side is appreciably changing its stance, and The Post’s headlines indicate we’re all settling in for a long winter’s stalemate.
But wait! Turn to the Opinions page and there’s an editorial busting through two of the big complaints commenters have about editorials — that they’re painfully evenhanded to the point of being useless and that they’re mindlessly partisan. Right in the headline, The Post says that House Republicans are the ones failing Americans. And in the third paragraph, The Post lists previous political struggles when it hasn’t come down so hard on either side.
Commenters who wish The Post would more clearly take a side in issues without resorting to “both sides are to blame” rejoice!
After a ton of equivocation, the Post’s Editorial Board has finally stood up and spoken the truth to Speaker-in-Name Boehner, Glorious Leader Cantor and the rest of the Horatio at the Bridge impersonators. It won’t help, these thugs in Armani suits are beyond reasoning in their desperate attempt to stay in power.
Okay, PostScript avows that that’s not exactly rejoicing. It’s a pat on the back for ineffectual effort.
glaucomatose rejoices a bit, but declares it too little, too late:
The Post finally decides to lay the blame for the shutdown at Congressional Republicans’ feet, but that’s only half the story. The truth is, those Republicans were elected by their constituents, and those constituents chose to vote for them because they’ve been let down by the media. Not just the Rush Limbaughs and Breitbarts of the world, but mainstream publications like this one, which are terrified to be seen as taking sides – even between truth and falsehood – and so peddle lies like “Both parties need to start acting responsibly” or “There’s enough blame to go around” or “All politicians are the same.”
And the criticism that The Post is too partisan remains in place for bethg1841, despite the editorial’s careful list of ways this situation is unique. Agreeing with one side is practically collusion:
I hold the President and the Democrats responsible for the shutdown. The editors comments that the GOP will not come to the table to discuss a budget is laughable. Much of the content in this editorial have many of the key phrases repeated by Democrats and the President. Is this a reprint from the White House?
But editorials have to make an argument. Is the commenter really saying that any time the board agrees with one political party it is unacceptable partisanship? That seems pretty extreme to PostScript, but other commenters say it, too.
This editorial board functions like a political arm of the Obama campaign. Anyone with some intelligence can read the bills House passed and hear what Reid and Obama said, and it becomes obvious that it’s Obama and Reid who shut down the government. GOP offered many ways of continuing government in operation.
The Dems said they will not listen. To blame GOP is pure partisanship, not journalism.
As this editorial clearly demonstrates, the mainstream media is colluding with the Democrats.
Really? The only legitimate space an editorial opinion can legitimately occupy is somewhere in between the two parties. It is never okay to agree with political actors entirely.
On the other hand, those pleased with the editorial, who say it represents an important step they’ve long asked for, simultaneously say it will have no effect.
There is just no pleasing any people.
Meanwhile, though, PostScript will post another jab from glaucomatose, who is just killing it these days:
Harry Reid should propose a deal to John Boehner: House Republicans agree to a clean CR and raising the debt ceiling. Democrats agree to amend Obamacare to get rid of death panels, ensure that illegals can’t get covered, allow people to keep the insurance they currently have, remove Congress’s exemption, and make it deficit neutral. Deal?
Add no-federal-funds-for-abortion and it might be the longed-for compromise.