Sunday, February 22, 2015

Journal Sentinel produces mini-comment on Walker uproar

I said on this blog Friday we'd be checking to see how the Journal Sentinel editorial board handled Scott Walker silence in the face of Rudy Giuliani's low-blow and uninformed attack on President Obama's patriotism at a Wednesday event in New York City for Walker

Well, here it Sunday, and while it would be unfair to say the newspaper has whiffed on the issue, you can't say it's done more than take a late cut and foul a tip into the dirt, as there is still no full-blown editorial from The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel about it.

Yes, the newspaper, Wisconsin's largest, did post a short, three paragraph comment on its editorial blog Saturday, and yes, the language was strong, though a bit dashed off - - 
Gov. Scott Walker could have shown some leadership and political courage by repudiating Rudy Giuliani's shameful attack on President Barack Obama. Instead, Walker dodges and equivocates,and parses his words with lawyerly cleverness, His performance drew this blistering, and well-deserved criticism from The Washington Post under the headline "Scott Walker's spineless silence."
And Walker double-downed on his weaving by telling the Journal Sentinel's Craig Gilbert on Friday that he doesn't know if the president loves his country because he hasn't spoken to the president personally about it. Really? Walker can't simply take the president at his word? He can't presume the president loves his country?
There are plenty of reasons to criticize Obama's policies. But these kinds of personal attack - and Walker's attempt to dodge because he doesn't want to be seen as being critical of other Reoublicans - should be beneath anyone who seriously wants to vie for the highest office in the land.  
But I just checked and the item has three Facebook and fourteen Twitter repostings. I don't think it's getting a lot of exposure.

You'd think that all the national attention the Governor focused on himself through this episode, and our state, by extension, would rate something more substantial, especially given Walker's tendencies to punt or lapse into 'I don't know' about which the paper knows full well.

As the Journal Sentinel noted in its blog entry, The Washington Post did carry a lead Saturday editorial posted online Friday about the matter, and its word count was more than three times what the Journal Sentinel put up.

Too bad the ratio wasn't reversed, with The Washington Post being able to cite an analytically comprehensive Journal Sentinel editorial about the Wisconsin governor whom the lead Wisconsin paper twice endorsed for Governor and three times for Milwaukee County Executive.

The Journal Sentinel no longer publishes editorials on Saturdays or Mondays, so we'll see whether Tuesday's edition gives Walker's unseemly evasion its due.


Sue said...

I'm having a little trouble getting past "double-downed".
The editorial board wrote this little gem? This is getting beyond pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Monday mjs will be full of the usual pro-walker propaganda.

Even if they publish something some minimal remarks on Tuesday, it will get little-or-no attention and will be entirely outweighted by the republican and walker talking points that outnumber factual reports at least 4-to-1 at mjs.

James Rowen said...

@Sue. Doubled down, I believe.

Sue said...

Maybe I'm being too picky, James. I don't like it when writers use 'Attorney Generals' or even 'handfuls'. Amateur time, and I don't expect it on a professional page.
But I've never heard of 'double-downed'. That's a new one.

James Rowen said...

The short posting has several errors. I don't think a copy editor sees the blog posts when they go out, and if staffers use the same blogging tool provided to the outside bloggers on Purple Wisconsin, I can tell you it has no spell check. In 2015. Maybe the item about it I posted will bring about the corrections.