This is almost laughable.
It comes as no shock that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has not endorsed Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner.
Editorial: It's time to send the congressman home
This is what they have to say:
Sensenbrenner has been wrong on too much, from an immigration policy that puts him at odds with much of his own party and the business community to failure to exert meaningful oversight over White House domestic spying policies.
What is staggering is this is exactly the reason the most conservative district in Wisconsin will overwhelmingly send Sensenbrenner back to Washington.
Without looking it up- quickly name Sensenbrenner's opponent. Can't do it?
His name is Bryan Kennedy and the MJS has chosen to endorse him.
The really funny thing about this ringing endorsement for Kennedy is that Sensenbrenner's name is mentioned 17 times in this article. Kennedy's is only mention 5 times.
Clearly MJS is only concerned about having a moderate in the 5th congressional district.
No doubt, the district loses something in experience and seniority if Sensenbrenner goes. But a return to more moderate positions and tone, especially on immigration and guns, is well worth that price.
Obviously, MJS believes that the representative that would best represent their values is Kennedy. However, Sensenbrenner represents the people in the 5th congressional distict.
Careful now, MJS, your bias and hatred towards conservatives is starting to show again.
4 comments:
But Kate, Sensenbrenner had always been endorsed by the Journal Sentinel prior to this year. What does that say about your "moderate" theory?
And btw: I live in this congressional district, too. Sensenbrenner most definitely has not represented me as I would like my congressperson to do.
And, one more thing ... the JS has endorsed quite a few Republican candidates. What does that say about your "bias and hatred" statement?
I read the endorsement of Brian Kennedy and failed to see any bias against conservatives. It merely detailed the Editorial Board's reasoning. While I agree that they have got it wrong, they were not bias, merely stupid, in their reasoning. Disagreement does not equal bias against. If it did, then you and I would be biased against each other on several issues. For my part at least, it is merely disagreement.
Other side-
Did you actually read the article? My so-called "moderate" theory was taken as a direct quote from the article-
"No doubt, the district loses something in experience and seniority if Sensenbrenner goes. But a return to more moderate positions and tone, especially on immigration and guns, is well worth that price."
You called it a bias against conservatives but besides my earlier points, the paper did endorse Paul Ryan for the 1st Congressional District. It would appear that this alone would sink your bias theory. That is, unless you consider Paul a moderate.
Post a Comment