Sometimes I wonder if the Virginian-Pilot reads its own editorials.
Today’s missive by the political experts at the Pilot opines that offshore drilling efforts should be stopped because its support is not unanimous.
Really?
Their editorial entitled “No unanimity on drilling” says we shouldn’t move forward with drilling off our coast because “if there is unanimity on the subject among Virginians, it isn’t obvious.”
Well, let’s just see where that takes us, shall we?
Abortion Using the Pilot’s rationale, no abortion should be legal unless Americans are unanimously pro-abortion.
Obamacare Is the Pilot suggesting the throwing out of that non-unanimous Supreme Court ruling? Heck, Obamacare didn’t pass unanimously in the first place. I’m looking for the Pilot editorial that says we should eliminate Obamacare because the lack of unanimous support, but I can’t seem to find it in the Pilot archives.
It must be there somewhere.
Gay Marriage No unanimity on gay marriage, Pilot, so I guess your position is to oppose it, right?
Right?
Heck, the voters chose to oppose gay marriage in a referendum, and the Pilot “came out” and said their opinion shouldn’t matter and gay marriage should be imposed.
No requirement for unanimity there.
This demand for unanimity is absent from every liberal cause the Virginian-Pilot supports. Many of the Pilot’s stands don’t even have majority support.
Here’s where it gets funny!
Don Luzzatto, head honcho on the Pilot’s editorial page, wrote a column 24-hours earlier that elected officials can lie about their stances, and he’s fine with it. It’s called “Changing minds, changing world.”
“The ability to adapt is a basic requirement of business and governance. If you can’t adjust, you can’t survive. And if you can’t change without discarding your values, you aren’t trying and thinking hard enough.”
So, why does unanimity matter if you want people to change their minds?
Don, really, do you read what you print on different days?
If you want elected officials to be so malleable that their positions are irrelevant and subject to change anyway, what’s the point of demanding what they are?
What’s the point of your questions during candidate interviews. Everyone should just say “I’ll change my mind in office, so who cares what I think now.”
The Virginian-Pilot has called campaigns a “job interview” and here they are encouraging candidates to lie on their applications.
§ 18.2-216. Untrue, deceptive or misleading advertising
…advertisement contains any promise, assertion, representation or statement of fact which is untrue, deceptive or misleading, or uses any other method, device or practice which is fraudulent, deceptive or misleading to induce the public to enter into any obligation, shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Now they want elected officials to advertise one position in their newspapers and then change it after the election?
I wonder if other Pilot advertisers get such encouragement.
On the one hand, issue positions are so important that any dissent at all is enough to quash offshore drilling, but issue positions are so unimportant that they can change and should change, and change often.
Don, your situational constructs make people’s heads spin.
There is one area where I believe I find profound agreement in your column.
“Everyone needs the room to be wrong.”
You have a full page every day to do so.
