My weekend column for the local media outlet, the San Luis Obispo Tribune is available and it focuses on the contempt too many politicians—both left and right—have for our constitution. I think we'd have a much less divided and contentious nation if there was less government meddling in places where it has no constitutional sanction.
On Sunday, the Tribune endorsed Democrat Dawn Ortiz-Legg for the local state Assembly district. Ortiz-Legg's opponent, Republican Jordan Cunningham, is such a "conservative Republican" in the words of the Tribune editorial board, that he's endorsed by the California Teacher's Association—one of only four Republicans in 80 assembly districts to receive their endorsement.
Let that sink in for a moment. The Tribune is more left-wing than the state teacher's union.
A few days earlier, they endorsed Democrat Salud Carbajal for Congress, lazily lifting nonsense verbiage from the candidate's own website. Carbajal, according to the Tribune, wants to ban "high-capacity ammunition purchases." I challenge anyone, including Carbajal, to define what that actually means.
In a comment on the Ortiz-Legg endorsement, local radio personality Dave Congalton notes:
But I point out for the record that The Tribune has endorsed the liberal Democrat in all five of the major local races: Steve Martin in District 1, Adam Hill in District 3, Eric Michelsen (last spring) in District 5, Dawn Ortiz-Legg for state assembly, and Salud Carbajal for Congress.
So it's a fair question to ask: What exactly does a conservative Republican have to do to get the endorsement of The Tribune? Is there not a Republican worth supporting in any of these major races? Why is the Tribune bias so painfully obvious?
He's right. And they don't care. My response to Dave:
I think it's obvious, Dave. A conservative Republican has to be a "moderate Democrat" to get the Tribune's endorsement.
The San Diego Union-Tribune used to have a conservative editorial page (the newsroom was never heavily populated with conservatives). No longer.
Last week, the editorial page came out in support of Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom's Prop. 63 That's not a conservative position. It's not even a moderate position.
The Center for Public Integrity has an excellent article out showing that journalists have donated $396,000 to presidential campaigns this year—with $382,000 going to Hillary Clinton.
If you do the math, that means $14,000 went to Trump (the analysis didn't look at contributions to third parties).
That ratio seems about right to me.
Buried in the body of the Center for Public Integrity Report is this tidbit.
Then there’s Ellen Ratner, who leads the Talk Media News service and reports on federal government for her company. She also serves as a Fox News commentator. Ratner has given nearly $2,800 to Clinton’s campaign, explaining she contributed the money at the request of a man who made a $100,000 contribution to help her charitable efforts in war-ravaged South Sudan.
“I am happy to help him out … It is well known that I am a ‘wacko, liberal Democrat,’” Ratner said, adding this about her journalistic work: “I will put our news product right down the middle as opposed to just about anyone's news product.”
Somebody gave Ratner's charity $100,000 and asked nicely that she donate nearly $2,800 to Hillary Clinton's campaign. And she did so.
Depending on how exactly "his" contribution was conditioned, this sounds like it could be a straw donation. Ratner is likely safe no matter what under the Obama and likely the Hillary Clinton legal regime. It's not like her name is Dinesh D'Souza or something.