This Sunday, the Big O editorial pages told us why we should all give Kulongoski the heave-ho. And if you don't care about things like 'logic,' their argument would make sense.
They open the editorial with the question, “Are you satisfied with Oregon and its state government? We’re not.” But on the right side of the same page, they decry Republican Karen Minnis for presiding over “two of the longest, most rancorous and least productive sessions in the history of the Oregon Legislature.”
Obviously, that is Kulongoski’s fault.
Their “state of the state” description in the editorial stumping for Saxton also contradicts Saxton’s own campaign ads. The Oregonian says, “School funding is below the national average.” But last night I saw a Saxton ad that said Kulongoski had increased school funding something like a dozen times!
So which is it? Is our school underfunded because other states spend more? Or is our state overfunded and mismanaged, as Saxton's attack ads claim?
When they bemoan the lack of a rainy day fund in Oregon, I couldn't help laughing out loud. Saxton is squarely against doing away with the kicker, which makes a rainy day fund impossible! I heard Kulongoski once say he would favor doing away with that archaic law, allowing us to have a rainy day fund. Yet because Saxton wants to keep our problems unsolved, we should elect him?
If a newspaper can’t make any coherent arguments for supporting the Republican candidate, perhaps it is time they buck the wishes of their Republican publisher and support another candidate.