The Roanoke Times endorsed Democrat Ward Armstrong over Republican Charles Poindexter in the 9th House of Delegates district race. While that comes as no surprise to anyone who reads the RT, the tortured path they follow to make that endorsement is somewhat amusing. On the matter of Armstrong’s enduring and fact-challenged crusade against Appalachian Power, the paper’s editorial board brushes it aside:
…[Armstrong] often undermines his own causes with his purple language and flamboyant behavior. He formed a study commission that included two former regulatory judges to recommend changes in utility laws, but his exaggerations and misrepresentations of Appalachian Power Co.’s finances have distracted from the valid issues raised by that panel.
There was no mention that Armstrong stands by those “exaggerations and misrepresentations” and considers any evidence to the contrary as some sort of conspiracy.
In contrast, the editors find Poindexter’s “low-key statesmanship” to be a good thing. But his “brand of conservatism is reflexive and unnuanced,” which is a bad thing. As evidence, they point to a long list of regulations Poindexter is against. But when they ask him “to name a beneficial regulation,” he fails their litmus test badly, endorsing only abortion clinic regulations.
One assumes that if Poindexter had lauded regulations of the moon, sky and all the fish in the sea the RT would have clucked approvingly. And then still endorsed “purple rage” Armstrong.
The deal maker for the RT seems to be transportation. They, like many editorial boards across the state, have an abiding affinity for higher taxes of one sort or another to expand and repair the state’s road network (in addition to further wealth transfers to mass transit). But this is how they characterize Armstrong’s work on this issue:
Armstrong has been a dependable supporter of regional projects like U.S. 58 and statewide transportation investments. He is skeptical of gas tax increases, but has sponsored legislation to boost auto titling and regional sales taxes. He understands the shortcomings of tolls and opposes efforts to dump road maintenance onto counties.
So Route 58, which remains a largely two lane road despite Armstrong’s long, long support, is a good thing. And while he may be shy of hiking the gas tax, he’s keen on raising other taxes to support roads, which qualifies as good enough in the RT’s eyes.
The kicker, though was the editorial’s conclusion:
…we find little fault in the causes he embraces.
So…a Delegate of long service who has the demeanor of a junkyard dog and little to show for his time nipping at passers-by is better than a “low-key” conservative who “‘can focus on what has to be done.'”
The RT could have saved itself a great deal of time by simply writing: “We endorse Ward Armstrong because he’s as liberal as we are. And he looks great in a kilt.”
