Reading the Virginian-Pilot editorial page is like reading the Democratic Party Platform. Pick an issue, and they side with the left.
During candidate endorsements processes, they read off a list of issues with their positions and ask candidates if they agree and 100% of their positions are Democratic Party line.
That’s fine since readers don’t expect them to be conservative, or even moderate. The Pilot can hire whatever scribes they want, as demonstrated by their constant promotion of Democrat blogger Vivian Paige (a government employee) who gets her own section of columns while George Will is termed under “other columns.”
But when they tell others they have to be bipartisan, their call has absolutely no credibility.
They repeat their call for bipartisan redistricting, because partisan decisionmaking is bad government.
Read this tripe:
“The resulting politically homogenous districts destroy electoral competition and further polarize the legislature and voters. The current process sacrifices representative government and public service for political power and party fealty.”
Meanwhile, their editorials sacrifice journalistic integrity and public confidence for the same.
The homogeneous editorial board opposes homogeneous districts. Oh, the irony!
Even in calling for bipartisanship, the Pilot practices partisanship by blaming Republicans for gerrymandering and excusing Democrats when they gerrymandered like gangbusters.
“Democrats have their own, much longer history of gerrymandering districts. But their ability to do it effectively has never been enabled by the kind of modern data analysis used today.”
Partisan districting is just fine and dandy without “modern data analysis” huh? That’s the difference? Really? Really?
Democrats did it for decades, but these Republicans actually use data, and that makes it bad. Really? Are Pilot writers that dumb?
Democrats gerrymandered well enough to keep control of government for decades. Is the Pilot’s real problem the use of “modern data analysis?”
Any bipartisan redistricting commission would also use “modern data analysis” – would the Pilot oppose that? The Pilot would have to oppose bipartisan redistricting that uses modern data analysis.
Either that, or their reasoning for defending Democrat gerrymandering is a big lie.
The Pilot only opposes “modern data analysis” or partisan redistricting for that matter when it benefits Republicans.
My call to the Pilot is a simple one. It requires honesty, integrity, consistency and all those things that journalism used to display when it was respected.
If you call for bipartisanship, be bipartisan yourself. Want a bipartisan redistricting commission? Offer a bipartisan editorial board.
If you’re not willing to practice what you preach, then step aside.
