Wow....this is all going into today's paper:
http://www.sltrib.com/opinionEditor's note
Owing to the large volume of letters we have received regarding The Tribune's endorsements Sunday in the presidential and gubernatorial races, we have expanded The Public Forum today to include the op-ed space normally devoted to syndicated opinion columns. We will resume publishing op-ed columns on Wednesday.
Meaningless endorsement
Newspaper endorsements for candidates become meaningless when they are the policy of the publisher. The editors have little choice but to pick a candidate and then try to justify their decision to the readers. The endorsement of President Bush (Tribune, Oct. 24) is a good example.
To maintain some degree of objectivity, there were negative comments made about the president. Such as, “Readers know that this newspaper has been consistently critical of a number of the president's policies, particularly the war in Iraq, his tax cuts for the rich and his abysmal environmental record. It was his blinkered determination to topple Saddam Hussein that led him and the nation disastrously astray. The justifications for war-weapons of mass destruction and collaboration with al-Qaida have been thoroughly discredited.”
To add to the rambling stream of facts, that you have to assume are the reasons for supporting the president, the editorial continues: “High on the president's to-do list should be the removal of ideological extremists, particularly Attorney General John Ashcroft, from his cabinet, in favor of Republican moderates like Mike Leavitt.” Then playing armchair general, it goes on to say Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz should get the boot for the failed policies in Iraq.
This editorial doesn't endorse anything. It was just a bunch of political rhetoric to please the publisher. It probably did more harm than good for the president.
William F. McKnight
Vernal
Absence of sanity
In your endorsement of George W. Bush for the presidency on Oct. 24, you painstakingly mention a number of President Bush's failings, including his disinclination “to listen to dissent and to study available facts,” his “determination to topple Saddam Hussein that led him and the nation disastrously astray,” his failure to militarily and strategically prepare to enforce the peace in Iraq, his unnecessary alienation of old allies, and his tax policy which “exacerbated the growing income disparity in America.” You then declare that he should remove John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz in his second term.
How can you believe that a person who pays no attention to dissent, and who can't think of a single mistake he has made, would make the changes you call for? His record proves that he is convinced that he is on the right track and is determined to lead the nation on this path, no matter what disaster lies ahead.
Despite this track record, which you clearly recognize, you still call for four more years of the same.
Benjamin Franklin declared that, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” By endorsing President Bush for another term, you are displaying an obvious absence of sanity.
Thomas J. Wright
St. George
That rips it
I am not a Mormon. I am not a Republican. So the only time I ever feel that anybody - anybody - speaks for me is on The Tribune's editorial pages. Now your endorsement of Ivory, Bush and Huntsman has ripped it! You can take my 50-year subscription and shove it up Dean Singleton's ego.
Tony Smith
Salt Lake City
An appalling choice
I am flabbergasted and appalled at The Tribune's choice of Bush for president. The endorsement itself lists mistake after mistake that Mr. Bush has made in his term as president. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I've always believed in voting for the best man for the job!
The editorial seems to say, “Well, he has screwed up pretty badly, but if we give him another chance, I'm sure he'll shape up.” This kind of attitude is great if you're dealing with a slow learner (perhaps a child left behind by the president's underfunded No Child Left Behind program - another mistake). But I would hope an attitude of accountability is more appropriate when choosing the leader of the free world.
This president has made far too many mistakes to be given a second chance. The Tribune (being a newspaper) should be well aware of these mistakes. I cannot begin to understand your endorsement of Bush.
Topher Mehlhoff
Salt Lake City
Cowardice and hypocrisy
Your Oct. 24 editorial, “Bush for president,” was an appalling example of cowardice and hypocrisy. As you stated in the editorial, “Tribune readers know that this newspaper has been consistently critical of a number of the president's policies, particularly his war in Iraq, his tax cuts for the rich and his abysmal environmental record.”
The endorsement is of a piece with your endorsement of Ellis Ivory for Salt Lake County mayor, a man with no evident experience or qualifications for the office, who planned to insulate himself from voter reaction by not accepting salary for the position. Worst of Bush's faults is that he has consistently lied to us and apparently himself. The apparent reason for the endorsements is that their Republican affiliation automatically gains the approval of 75 percent of the readers. No way to run a democracy!
Thomas A. Liese
Salt Lake City
Enough said
I have been a Tribune subscriber for almost 20 years. I gulped when it was sold to Dean Singleton's Media News Group, but have felt comfortable with the results. Until today.
You endorse President Bush for a second term while saying he is stubbornly overconfident, his justification for war has been proven wrong, the U.S. was militarily and strategically unprepared to enforce peace in Iraq, he has alienated old allies, his tax cuts for the rich exacerbated the growing income disparity in America and should have been aimed at only the middle class as well as it having caused havoc with the federal budget and his environmental record is abysmal.
You left out the Medicare prescription joke, the contract handouts in Iraq to his old friends and the underfunded No Child Left Behind and Head Start programs.
Pardon me if I do not want four more years of the same. You also state John Kerry has proved himself in combat and may have the right stuff to be a wartime president, and if chosen our leader you are confident he will move the country forward. Enough said. But while I'm at it, please cancel my subscription.
Susanne Reeves
Riverton
Trust betrayed
I am writing to express my extreme shock, sadness and disappointment in your endorsement of George W. Bush for re-election. I moved here from Philadelphia a little over a year ago, and when I began subscribing to The Trib I initially had to make some adjustments to its style of coverage, but overall I was pleased with the perspective the paper offered.
I was disappointed at the endorsements of Ivory and Huntsman, but I understood that it is the right of the paper to diverge from my own beliefs in its support of who would be a good leader. It is true that issues and candidates are often not black and white. However, there is absolutely no good reason to endorse Bush for president.
The editors provide us with a list of pipe dreams - Bush needs to not make the tax cuts permanent, he needs to kick extremists out of office, he needs to balance the budget and he needs to bring the troops home soon - none of which he has given any indication, either through promises or actions, that he will do.
Rather, Bush has shown us through words and deeds that he will continue to represent the extremist wing of the conservatives in his domestic and international policies. This threatens the balance of our country and our future welfare. It is truly a shame and a disappointment that the editors endorsed Bush. I feel betrayed by something I had grown to trust.
Shannon Mussett
Salt Lake City
Having it both ways
The way The Trib's editorial board worded its endorsement of George Bush for president tries to have it both ways. Bush's mishandling of the war on terrorism by invading Iraq, his tax cuts that tilt to the extreme for the corporate/rich on top of his abusive environmental record are irresponsibly wrong-headed and have been clearly critiqued by The Trib over and over again.
In order to side-step this editorial record and make the endorsement, hopes are expressed that a second Bush term will be more fiscally responsible, that he'll disband and expel the neo-conservatives that currently surround him and that the Iraq war will somehow finally conform to Bush's interpretation of it. If Bush is “too disinclined to listen to dissent and available facts,” “stubbornly ” and his “justifications for war have been thoroughly discredited,” how much hope and faith can The Trib honestly invest in endorsing him?
Bagley's accompanying cartoon states the reality of the board's decision - their inability to withstand the Utah conservative repercussions of a Kerry endorsement.
Robert Stam
Salt Lake City
Selling out
After reviewing your endorsements for the 2004 election, I believe it is time to replace the “Utah's Independent Voice Since 1871” banner with “Selling out our heritage to the Republican Party since 2004.”
Ronald Snyder
Sandy
Flabbergasted
For the past year I have appreciated The Salt Lake Tribune's egalitarianism in printing my letters to the editor, all of them critical of the Bush administration. Perhaps as a result of my political naivete, I was flabbergasted reading the paper's full-page editorials (I cannot recall any other issue you found deserving of a full page) endorsing George Bush for president and Jon Huntsman Jr. for governor.
It would be interesting to know how many letters The Tribune received either endorsing or criticizing the editorial within the first 24 hours following the printing of the endorsement. It would help us understand the political tone of our sorely divided community.
Louis Borgenicht
Salt Lake City
Shame on you
Your unfathomable endorsement of George W. Bush wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that your CEO, William Dean Singleton, is a longtime friend and financial supporter of President Bush, would it? Maybe that would also explain why The Tribune has been endorsing so many Republicans this election.
Shame on you. You've turned into sheep.
Ken Roach
Salt Lake City
A biased newspaper
I have never been without a newspaper in my home; however, after reading the Bush endorsement in The Tribune this morning, I will no longer be reading the paper. I truly feel that a newspaper shouldn't be in a position of endorsing any candidate.
The editorial was, with the exception of the third and last paragraphs, an endorsement of John Kerry, my candidate of choice. All the mistakes Bush has made were written about in great detail. The Tribune suggests he get rid of most of his cabinet were he to be elected again. Right! Why then, based on that suggestion, would anyone vote for him, because obviously he isn't going to do that. A vote for him is a vote for his existing cabinet.
John Kerry is being accused of not having a firm policy on anything. In today's complex world, how can anyone, regardless of party, predict what will happen in the future? All one can say is, “This is what I will try to do, with the help and cooperation of the Congress of the U.S. and the international community. I can't promise anything, but I will try with all my heart to solve the problems we face.”
It will be a major change for me to not have the hands-on reading experience each morning; however, I cannot in good conscience, continue to read such a biased newspaper.
Kaye D. Murdock
Salt Lake City
Logic is lame
Wow, I am amazed! As I opened the Oct. 24 Opinion section and saw the headlines, “Bush for president” and “Huntsman for governor,” my heart skipped a beat. My husband said, “What do you expect, we're in Utah. They have to sell papers.”
Unfortunately he is right. The Tribune's logic for endorsing Bush is not only lame, but unbelievable. Bush is not going to get rid of John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld or Paul Wolfowitz; he would then have to admit he did something wrong. He is not going to scale back his tax cuts - that would make him look like a flip-flopper.
To say Bush is the better man than Kerry to get us out of this mess is na•ve, at the least. The only reason Bush should be re-elected is to make him fix the mess he made, but can the United States survive taking that risk?
Bush is not a little child who needs to clean up his room. He is the president of the greatest country on earth and has destroyed everything he has gotten his hands on, from the disinterest in and nonchalant way in which he approached the terrorist plan of attack before 9-11 to the shoot-from-the-hip attitude he had when he entered Iraq with his shock and awe campaign in Iraq.
When will this country wake up? I hope it is before we destroy ourselves.
Janis Morgan
Sandy
Illogical endorsement
We were baffled to read The Tribune's endorsement of George Bush for president. Reading through the editorial, we were unable to find mention of any one good policy decision by his administration during the past four years.
The one seeming exception was the toppling of the Taliban in Afghanistan, but that country is now in chaos and is run by warlords. It is unsafe to travel outside the capital, Kabul.
Surely, if George Bush were a good president, The Tribune would be able to list numerous accomplishments. It is illogical to endorse a candidate solely on the hope that he will change his behavior. Why doesn't The Tribune understand this?
Luckily, editorial writer George Pyle's intelligent assessment of the disastrous Bush presidency and the candidates' stands on real issues spells out why John Kerry would make a good president.
Mary Claire Huber
and Helge Gabert
Murray
Goodbye
I was disappointed in opening my newspaper Sunday to see that The Tribune endorsed Bush for president. I was also disappointed to see they endorsed Huntsman for governor and Ivory for Salt Lake County mayor.
I guess The Tribune editorial board does not read their own paper. If they had they would realize that the Republican Party in Utah has too much power and is corrupt. We need balance in our government.
I hope when you look at the amount of money you lose by endorsing these candidates you will realize how wrong you were. If I wanted to read a conservative newspaper I would subscribe to the Deseret Morning News. I have canceled my subscription and hope the former owners of The Tribune will start up a new daily newspaper that does not bend to the majority party to get more subscribers. Goodbye.
Gary Pratt Jr.
Sandy
Change quarterbacks
I read your editorial, “Bush for president,” Oct. 24, very closely. I thought it stated quite well a strong case for the election of John Kerry. How you conclude that Bush is the best choice for America boggles the mind.
It reminds me of a football coach with two quarterbacks. His seasoned quarterback led the team to a first quarter 14-point lead, only to blow it and trail by seven points in the fourth quarter. This seasoned quarterback has fumbled twice, thrown three interceptions, blames his teammates, consistently ignores the advice of the coaching staff and has a sprained knee and a broken hand. Yet, this coach refuses to replace him with a competent, though untested, J.C. transfer.
If The Tribune editorial board were coaching the Utes, they would not win a single game.
Dick Eubanks
Murray
Independence abandoned
We figured it was only a matter of time before The Tribune would lose its integrity and capitulate to the extreme right-wing agenda of its publisher.
Two famous quotes come to mind:
Dan Quayle: “A mind is a terrible thing to lose.”
Mark Twain: “You tell me where he get his cornpone from I'll tell you what his 'pinion is.”
We are shocked that, as you said in your Oct. 24 editorial, you disagreed with the egregious policies of the Bush administration and in the same breath endorse his candidacy.
How on God's green earth could Kerry or any other college graduate be worse than the worst president this country has ever had?
How could Kerry's presidency be worse on the environment?
How could Kerry be worse in international relations?
How could Kerry be worse for the national budget, or health care, or education?
We are flabbergasted. We have never canceled a newspaper subscription on principle. You owe your readers a prostrate apology for abandoning your “independent voice” for Utah. We are actually sick to our stomachs.
Please cancel our subscription immediately.
April and Edgar Squires
Salt Lake City
There ya' have it. Utahns are pissed and I have a feeling so is the editorial board of the Tribune (hence why they're allowing all these ltters). I hope these letters continue all the way to election day!
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
