Crybabies At The Washington Post
Washington Post editors and reporters: What a bunch of crybabies.
Unfortunately, they lack the self-awareness to be embarrassed. In fact, the petulant “journalists” at The Washington Post are shamelessly throwing tantrums. In public. They’re incensed because their editorial page didn’t endorse Kamala Harris.
Yep, they’re soiling their diapers because they’re desperate that this empty vessel, this incoherent mess of a candidate, this abortion-loving cypher, become the next president of the United States.
They’ve been spitting mad since Friday when The Post announced that there would be no WaPo presidential endorsement this year. The first time the paper has shrugged and essentially said “Make your own decisions” or “A plague on both their houses” since the editors declined to endorse in 1988.
In every other election year, beginning in 1976 with Jimmy Carter, The Post has endorsed the Democrat.
But the editors insist they are NOT an arm of the Democrat Party. Odd, because when the Dems nominate a certified boob - Michael Dukakis or Kamala Harris - the newspaper sits it out rather than casting its lot with a Republican.
Sigh.
The Post’s announcement came one day after the Los Angeles Times declared that there would be no presidential endorsement on its pages this year.
Spoiled brats on both papers are fuming and resigning. That includes The Post’s Editor at Large, Robert Kagan and columnist Michele Norris and LA Times Editorial Editor Mariel Garza.
Great!
Now maybe the newspaper can hire some real editors and reporters. You know, the kind that report the news without tailoring their coverage to aid their preferred candidate and party.
And don’t bother coming at me with loser layman arguments, like the editorial board has the right to make its own endorsements and The Post’s endorsement - picking Harris - was ready for publication.
I actually worked on an editorial board for about five years. I know how this works. When The Virginian-Pilot board debated endorsements (they no longer engage in that paternalistic exercise) it was with the collaboration - consent, really - of the publisher.
It was HIS paper, after all. Not ours. In reality, we were just worker bees.
Papers that want to be trusted sources of unbiased news ought not endorse. Cover the news fairly and informed readers will manage to make educated decisions without being told how to vote by out-of-touch beard tuggers on a cloistered editorial board.
What, exactly, is the purpose of tossing bouquets to candidates, other than to boost the prospects of staff favorites and to undermine the supposed impartiality of the outlet?
Since the overwhelming majority of journalists are leftists - I can count on one hand how many conservatives I ever worked with in more than 40 years in the business - this communal outrage at two of the largest papers in the country shows that America’s newspapers really are run by the radically woke and are cheerleaders for the left.
It’s also one of the many reasons the legacy media is circling the drain while the alternative media led by smart people like podcaster Joe Rogan are in the ascendancy
Frankly, the end of what passes for journalism these days can’t come soon enough.
What’s even more amusing than the antics of sore losers on the newspaper staffs are the rash of cancellations by subscribers. Liz Cheney and Stephen King were among lefties celebrities who announced their cancellations to The Post this weekend.
Hmmm, I wonder if they also canceled their Amazon Prime accounts to send a message to Post owner Jeff Bezos?
I’d ask these fools to put themselves in the shoes of conservatives who faithfully subscribed to these newspapers for decades despite the editorial pages sticking a thumb in their eyes every year at election time.
Frankly, this newspaper meltdown is both amusing and encouraging. As someone who one worked at The Post, it’s the first time in decades I’ve been halfway proud of my old employer.
