| Filed under, "Newspaper endorsements are like a bad relationship that you should get out of, but won't because it's so comfortable." It comes as a surprise to learn that Hoekstra feels the key to Michigan’s economic revival is making sure the state has low-cost energy available, including the use of coal and natural gas. Hoekstra feels that’s the only way manufacturing can grow and succeed in the state. His argument has merit, and it should be central to his message, rather than the focus on Stabenow’s record. Say nothing that the cost of coal energy is no longer low, and say nothing about how one of the papers involved -- the Bay City Times -- should know this since they had a major coal plant expansion scheduled for their backyard canceled due to cost projections. Instead, say much about how the endorsement registered surprise that a Republican would endorse coal and natural gas energy. We don't just live in interesting times. We live in ignorant times. It all sounds terrific. The problem is that the country is using its credit card to pay for spending. The trillion-dollar overspending seen each year in the federal budget has to stop, and Stabenow doesn’t have a plan for that other than to tax high-income earners at a higher rate. It simply isn’t enough. Not only are these three MLive papers unaware that Republicans generally support coal and natural gas energy, but they are apparently unable among the three of them to muster up someone who understands how a basic budget works. Or, who's taken a look at charts about the cause of the national debt, a leading cause of which are the so-called Bush tax cuts that MLive is criticizing Stabenow for wanting to repeal ... while delivering their tongue lashing over her "unseriousness" regarding deficit spending. By the way, if you read the whole thing their criticism of Hoekstra is over his campaign strategy, that he spends too much time criticizing an incumbent who's always been good at campaigning. It's not so much that I disagree with the editorial choice of Hoekstra over Stabenow (I do), it's that their endorsement appears to be written by someone who understands neither politics nor policy. |
