Originally posted by: Engineer
Nevada Appeal's Kerry endorsement.
Link to the actual Nevada Appeal Website page
Any eligible voter who fails to cast a ballot in this presidential election is telling us a lot about themselves. Seldom has the course of the nation been so clearly in the balance. Seldom has the choice been so clearly defined in three debates and a flood of news stories, commentaries, films and books.
As with any race, there is an element of hype and exaggeration in much of what?s in the public domain. But sifting through it all, one may observe a clear picture of the choice we face.
In the simplest terms, if you like what you?ve seen in the White House over the past four years, you ought to vote for President George W. Bush. There is no evidence that President Bush will offer anything different in a second term. If you do not like what you?ve seen, there is a clear choice in Sen. John F. Kerry.
The contradiction of the Bush presidency is that the man who lost the popular vote in 2000 and narrowly won the electoral college vote chose not to appeal to the vast mid-section of the electorate, but instead has run a radical presidency that rewards a narrow demographic slice of the nation. On almost every front, the Bush administration has turned back years, if not decades, of precedent and turned its back on bipartisan accords that were honored by Republican and Democratic presidents.
It is ironic that a Republican president would squander a budget surplus and run up the largest federal deficit in history. Between the folly of a tax cut for the very rich and a costly Medicare bill, Bush is leaving future generations a legacy of enormous debt.
You don?t need to be a member of the Sierra Club to grasp the breathtaking revision of bipartisan accord in the president?s environmental record. Public lands are under siege for oil and gas exploration. Clean air enforcement has been weakened. National parks and historic sites are being starved.
The president?s most costly venture, in dollars and lives, has been the Iraq War. The situation in Iraq is deteriorating. By trashing our longstanding alliances in his hurry to war, the president has left American troops alone, but for the British presence.
John Kerry is a highly reasonable, compelling alternative to President Bush. On the most visible challenge, Iraq, he offers a sound strategy, and one that Bush could not hope to execute. Kerry would rebuild our alliances and seek financial and military help in stabilizing Iraq.
Kerry would roll back the Bush tax cuts for the very rich, and he would more adequately fund the No Child Left Behind Act.
Most significantly, Kerry has promoted the idea of energy independence through encouragement of alternative fuels and renewable energy. That makes enormous sense when a debilitating war reminds us of our economic dependence on the Middle East.
A presidential race is a referendum on the incumbent. The three debates between Bush and Kerry and the debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards revealed the extent to which the president and his lieutenants rely on fear and smear.
Mr. Bush is selling fear and smearing his opponent because he?s got nothing positive to sell.
The Iconoclast received considerable criticism this past week
after its editors endorsed John Kerry for President. Several subscriptions and advertisements were canceled after the newspaper hit the stands Tuesday morning.
The editorial, co-authored by the newspaper?s publisher, W. Leon Smith, and writers Don Fisher and Nathan Diebenow, expressed the opinion that Kerry would take the country in a better direction. There have been both positive and negative comments.
We expected that perhaps a few readers might cancel subscriptions, and maybe even ads, but have been amazed at a few of the more intense communications, some of which bordered on outright personal attacks and uncalled-for harassment.
We have been told by several avid Bush supporters that the days when newspapers publish editorials without personal repercussions are over. As publishers, we have printed editorials for decades, and have endorsed candidates, both Republican and Democrat. When Bush was endorsed four years ago, the Gore supporters did not respond with threats, nor did Democrats when we endorsed Reagan twice. Republicans did not threaten us personally or our business when we endorsed Carter and Clinton for their first terms.
In the past, when individuals disagreed with an editorial, they would write a letter to the editor politely expressing a different point of view in contrast to the views of the publishers, which we have usually published. Occasionally someone would cancel a subscription or an ad, but this was rare.
The goal of the editorial page has been to provide an arena for the expression of a variety of thoughtful opinions, some by the publishers, some by columnists, and some by our readers.
The new mode of operation, I am told, is that when a newspaper prints an editorial of which some sectors might disagree, the focus is now upon how to run the newspaper out of business. Out the window are the contributions the newspaper has made to the community in the past and the newspaper?s extensive investment in the community.
We do understand peoples? rights to pull subscriptions and ads, and to express a differing opinion, but we have some trouble understanding threats and payback since in politics there are often a variety of options. For the publishers to herald one of the options should be no cause for persecution.
When you think about it, editorials are often displayed in people?s yards with campaign signs. These are endorsements by residents. Is it proper to persecute them for stating their opinions in this manner if you disagree with their choices? Should they be harassed and threatened? We don?t think so.
Unfortunately, for the Iconoclast and its publishers there have been threats ? big ones including physical harm.
Too, some individuals are threatening innocent commercial concerns, claiming that if they advertise in The Iconoclast, they will be run out of business. We consider this improper in a democracy.
Several young members of our staff covering Tonkawa Traditions this past weekend were angrily harassed and threatened that they must leave, which cut short their ability to fully do their jobs and instilled in them considerable fear for their safety. These reporters had nothing to do with that editorial. They were part-time college students working to pay their way through school and better themselves.
Although several members of the community are upset at the newspaper, there are still those who want us to continue with local coverage as we have in the past. We do have concern for the safety of our staff, however, and find it troubling when they are bullied and cannot do their jobs.
From the period of Tuesday through noon Saturday of this past week, The Iconoclast has received over 700 letters to the editor related to the editorial which received more attention than we had expected. Some of the dispatches are very critical and some are very supportive of the editorial. And a few do offer a thoughtful, differing point of view on the issues, which we do appreciate.
Since The Iconoclast has a very small staff, it has been impossible for us to verify each and every signature as is our normal procedure prior to publication, but to provide the letters for the public to read, we are posting them on our website with the names of the authors listed as initials.
We have been told that some letters e-mailed to us did not get through, perhaps since our internet system became overloaded at times this past week. The letters posted are the ones we received that pertained to the editorial (as opposed to being simply questions or other correspondence).
A few have been edited slightly due to offensive language or the writer?s identity being revealed in the body of the letter, but we have attempted to publish them, with few exceptions, just as we received them.
To publish them in the print edition would require substantially too much space (about 30 pages, in our estimation). So go to http://www.iconoclast-texas.com if you want to peruse the letters.
Nearly a hundred individuals (including some Crawford residents) have purchased new subscriptions to help replace those lost, and a few have expressed a desire to become new advertising clients. For this, we are thankful.
The publisher has read every e-mail and letter received and sends appreciation to each and every letter-writer for expressing an opinion, pro or con, as this shows a passion for their positions and a keen interest in the upcoming election.
Whether readers agree or disagree with the recommendation rendered by the publishers, we do encourage them to vote in the upcoming election. We consider it more than a privilege, but a duty.
? W. Leon Smith
ST. PAUL - Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura has officially endorsed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
The announcement was made during a 30-minute news conference at the State Office Building. The former Minnesota was there, but did not make any comments.
Just days ago, Ventura had said that he did not plan to support Kerry or President Bush this election year.
Also at the news conference was former Maine Gov. Angus King, who was the only other third-party governor during Ventura's years in office. He said Ventura changed his mind and decided to endorse Kerry.
Organizers didn't even know Ventura was going to show up until the news conference started. He told reporters who followed him out to his car afterward that he'll be doing interviews in Los Angeles.
Originally posted by: conjur
Jesse Ventura endorses Kerry
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3582.html?cat=1
ST. PAUL - Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura has officially endorsed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.
The announcement was made during a 30-minute news conference at the State Office Building. The former Minnesota was there, but did not make any comments.
Just days ago, Ventura had said that he did not plan to support Kerry or President Bush this election year.
Also at the news conference was former Maine Gov. Angus King, who was the only other third-party governor during Ventura's years in office. He said Ventura changed his mind and decided to endorse Kerry.
Organizers didn't even know Ventura was going to show up until the news conference started. He told reporters who followed him out to his car afterward that he'll be doing interviews in Los Angeles.
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Wow, newspaper supports are pretty nasty...
62 Support Kerry
13 Support Bush
A fast scan...
I guess it's hard to be a hillbilly and a reporter!
EXPERTS TELL US that most voters have had no difficulty making up their minds in this year's presidential election. Half the nation is passionately for George W. Bush, the pollsters say, and half passionately for John F. Kerry -- or, at least, passionately against Mr. Bush. We have not been able to share in this passion, nor in the certainty. As readers of this page know, we find much to criticize in Mr. Bush's term but also more than a few things to admire. We find much to admire in Mr. Kerry's life of service, knowledge of the world and positions on a range of issues -- but also some things that give us pause. On balance, though, we believe Mr. Kerry, with his promise of resoluteness tempered by wisdom and open-mindedness, has staked a stronger claim on the nation's trust to lead for the next four years.
Originally posted by: daveshel
Originally posted by: Infohawk
What is the "Trib"? Never heard of it...
Chicago Tribune
Originally posted by: wirelessenabled
Originally posted by: daveshel
Originally posted by: Infohawk
What is the "Trib"? Never heard of it...
Chicago Tribune
"Trib" better be braced for a fall in circulation. Kerry is up in IL by 55-39 according to USA poll.
See electoral vote map.
Originally posted by: SViscusi
Originally posted by: wirelessenabled
Originally posted by: daveshel
Originally posted by: Infohawk
What is the "Trib"? Never heard of it...
Chicago Tribune
"Trib" better be braced for a fall in circulation. Kerry is up in IL by 55-39 according to USA poll.
See electoral vote map.
The Trib always endorses the Republican candidate so I don't think it will affect them too much.
New York Senator John Kerry continued his raid on newspapers that backed President George W. Bush in 2000, grabbing 22 new "flip-flops," as well as The Washington Post. He has now won over at least 33 papers that went for Bush in 2000, while Bush has only earned two Gore papers.
However, Bush got a prize in Ohio, the Columbus Dispatch.
Kerry now leads Bush 122-69 in endorsements in E&P's exclusive tally, and by about 14.9 million to 8.9 million in the circulation of backing papers.
And more setbacks for Bush: The Detroit News, which has never endorsed a Democrat, and backed Bush in 2000, announced that it would sit out the 2004 election, not happy with either candidate. The New Orleans Times-Picayune, another Bush fan from 2000, said the same thing today in an editorial titled "No One to Champion." A third Bush backer in 2000, the Harrisburg Patriot-News, also declared neutrality today.
In gaining the Orlando Sentinel (one of the switches from Bush), Kerry completed a sweep of major papers in top swing state, Florida.
The Chicago Sun-Times, the Los Angeles Daily News, and the Memphis Commercial-Appeal were among the 17 papers which backed Bush in 2000 but today chose Kerry.