Why does The Columbian lie about their fake "lack of bias?"

Look, everyone locally knows The Vancouver Columbian is in serious financial trouble.

Besides an inability to adapt or innovate, they editorially covered the last election like the DNC was paying them. Yet, even though they continued to lie about their lack of bias, they seem to believe the average reader is too stupid to see through the smokescreen.

Take for example, one of the dimmer bulbs on their peculiar tree... their editorial page editor, Mr. John Laird.

Mr. Laird went so far as to burnish their lack of bias by spewing out this little tidbit:

Endorsements box score — For any liberals who fume that The Columbian is way too conservative: We endorsed 13 Democrats in the past two weeks.

For any conservatives who yelp that we’re way too liberal: We endorsed nine Republicans.

In legislative races, we endorsed six Democrats and five Republicans.

In county commissioner races, we endorsed one Democrat and one Republican.

Finally, to anyone who thinks any of this matters: It doesn’t. We endorse the best candidate in each race (strictly our opinion, remember), party notwithstanding. If that person represents the Progressive Lying Golfers Party, well, so be it.

John Laird is The Columbian’s editorial page editor. His column of personal opinion appears on the View page each Sunday. Reach him at john.laird@columbian.com.

Now, on the surface at least, that appears to be exactly what it is. For the uninformed, non-political reader, this appears to be a reasonable approach to endorsements. Balanced, possessed of all the right words and sentiments.

But when it comes to bias... it's all, every word, a complete lie.

No... the contents of those paragraphs aren't a lie. The endorsements were precisely what he said they were.

Where the lie comes in is this phrase: "We endorse the best candidate in each race (strictly our opinion, remember), party notwithstanding."

Now, the problem I have with that lie is this:

In every open seat where The Columbian provided an endorsement... in any seat where there wasn't an incumbent, this paper endorsed a democrat.

In
Every
Open
Seat.

Check it out.

The folowing are the endorsements made by the Columbian, minus incumbents.

President: Democrat Barack Obama

State treasurer: Democrat Jim McIntire

17th Legislative District Representative: Democrat Tim Probst

49th Legislative District State representative: Democrat Jim Jacks

Clark County commissioner: District 1: Democrat Pam Brokaw

Number of democrat incumbents this newspaper endorsed AGAINST: ZERO

Number of Republican incumbents this newspaper endorsed against: ONE

They endorsed David Carrier against one of the most heavily, bi-partisan-endorsed and experienced state senators in SW Washington, Don Benton.

So, on one hand, we have the editor of the editorial page telling us that party had nothing to do with it, and on the other hand, this same paper ONLY ENDORSED DEMOCRATS FOR OPEN SEATS, AND ONLY ADVOCATED THE REMOVAL OF A REPUBLICAN... AND NOT ONE DEMOCRAT.

Coincidence? Sure. It was pure coincidence that there were 5 open seats they endorsed in and each and every endorsement went to the democrat.

Towards the end of the election, folks were talking about putting lipstick on a pig.

And no matter how many layers of lipstick you put on THIS pig, it is most definately still a pig.

And, oddly enough, when someone commented to this effect under their articles bestowing the "unbiased, even-handed award" on themselves, it took all of about, oh, 5 minutes for that post to disappear.

Clearly, they don't like being called on it when they lie. Well, when they start reading this blog, they'd better get used to it.
.