Brancaccio claims the Columbian ISN'T a leftist rag. When set straight, he ignores the evidence.

One of the more delightfully delusional impacts of a leftist newspaper editor is, that like most leftists, he actually sees himself as a mainstream, balanced moderate.

Now, I have little doubt that everything he does results in further inculcating the belief that he's doing what's right for the people, and that we need to be saved from ourselves. While those beliefs are the hallmark of the leftist and, come to think of it, many of the more self-delusional and violent dictators in world history, that doesn't make them true.

Any newspaper that does what it can, either explicitly or implicitly, to silence the people or to avoid demanding their voice be heard is nothing more than a stain on their community specifically and on democracy generally. their "my way is the only right way" worldview notwithstanding.

This paper is all that AND a bag of Doritos.

Below is a little exchange that took place under the start of the Columbian's most recent damage control campaign concerning our own despicable cowardman, one Brian Baird. It really speaks for itself.

by Pants On Fire : 8/15/09 11:51am - Report Abuse

The mask slipped and we saw the REAL Baird. I'm thinking he should have phoned in his taxpayer-paid vacations instead of his town hall meetings.

But it's too late. For whatever the reason, Baird, who has been an intellectual coward all year in violating his own 72 hours to read the bill rule by voting for a bill he hadn't read; for voting for cap and swindle, and for voting for a bill with 9000 ear marks has also shown his political cowardice by calling those wise enough to disagree with his positions and that of the messiah's "Nazis" and "Brown Shirts."

And there is no way to unring that bell.

Had it been a GOP congressman this paper would have hounded him or her out of office. But because Baird is owned by the leftists in this paper and the other downtown interests, he's going to get a pass... and there is no way this paper would ever endorse anyone else.

Will that be enough to keep Baird in office? This paper has no real impact in the community... if they did, the Port Levy would have passed. So this means that those of us personally insulted by the little worm representing us will have to get involved to get rid of his fringe-left voting record and get somebody else in who is not afraid to face us and be held accountable for what they've done... like lying about not making up his mind, on the health care bill that he WILL vote for, yet.

Lou, being Lou, responded thusly:

by Lou Brancaccio : 8/15/09 12:53pm - Report Abuse

Thanks all for the conversations. Some stuff, as a reasonable person would reasonably conclude is a bit off the wall. But that is the way it is.

I still respect Baird overall and feel he's a bright guy. I have to admit I get a kick out of those folks that -- even when I feel it's appropriate to take him to task, which I did here and in my last column and as we've done in a couple of editorials -- some still manage to try and spin it that we're still liberal and still in his back pocket.

Still love it however.

Truth is I'm a believer in holding folks accountable, D or R. I guess it's just a little confusing to those who want to so badly proove that we're liberal, they still have to somehow make that case even when we're holding a Democrat accountable.

Keep the conversation going! I think those who are writing and just reading are enjoying!

And my two cents? I think Baird and his folks do try to read these comments. It helps keep them in the loop.

"Truth is I'm a believer in holding folks accountable, D or R."

Right. And I'm Mother Teresa.

"I still respect Baird overall and feel he's a bright guy."

Of COURSE you do. Why wouldn't you? YOU weren't insulted and slandered. You SUPPORT Baird. Therefore, NOTHING he could do would cause you to change your mind.

If you opposed him, like you do, say, Mielke, you'd be all over him like white on rice.

There is where the self-delusion of the leftist comes in. I have no doubt that Brancaccio actually believes this stuff is true. Unfortunately for Lou, though, there is a sizable portion of the world's population that actually believes the world is flat. That certainly doesn't make it so.

Anyone reading the despicable rag he works for for any extended period of time would quickly ferret out the petty arrogance, the completely leftist bent that paid off for his rag with a massive B&O tax cut in the midst of an unspeakably huge, $10 BILLION budget deficit for this state.

Writing like the democrats pay you is a GOOD thing when they're in charge, right, Lou?

Anyway, Lou responded with his typically smarmy and snarky response, opening the door wide for what happened next:

by Pants On Fire : 8/15/09 11:34pm - Report Abuse

I appreciate the challenge. But then, if I provided a video and a stack of bibles, you still wouldn't believe this paper is printed like the DNC was paying you.

You see, there is far more to this then nailing Baird over this one issue. The other 9 times out of ten you SHOULD have popped him, you either remained silent, or applauded him.

Here's what a liberal paper would do: A liberal paper would:

Let Baird get away with voting "yes" on a bill he hadn't even read... and THEN print an article about how that hypocrite wants a 72 hour rule on bills BEFORE the vote... because you happen to like the goodies he got in it for this area.

Support gay marriage.

Oppose the 2nd Amendment in National Parks, because, after all, arbitrary lines like the Scenic Area suspend the Constitution.

Support felons voting before they've completed their sentences.

Support requiring all ballots be on hand by COB election night.

Do nothing to demand proof of citizenship and identity to register to vote and then actually TO vote.

Support gerrymandered tax districts that keep people from voting, but don't keep those same people from paying for C-Trans and loot rail.

Believe the Columbia Gorge was it's private fiefdom and the people living there are second class citizens.

Failed to mention why Mike Heywood had to leave your paper, because you want him to win.

Condemn chump change like the East Fork Project; remain silent in the face of Obama's incredible waste of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Use an early Jefferson quote to pat yourself on the back, while ignoring a later Jefferson quote that said, much later: "Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper," Jefferson later said. "Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle."

Support a huge gas tax increase and then remain silent when they chopped the promised project list by at least 30%

Beat the hell out of a defenseless couple building a home in the Gorge because this paper is incapable of understanding that "visually subordinate" (as required by the Act) did not mean "invisible," and then fail to even apologize when the paper's position was slaughtered by a 9-0 state supreme court decision;

Demand that a state representative "resign, before the people do it for him," only to see that same Representative, a Republican, get elected and re-elected 5 more times.

Support a city suing its people into silence... twice... because they don't want the will of the people to interfere with their agenda of downtown redevelopment at taxpayer expense.

Support ramming a multi-billion dollar bridge and light rail scam down our throats without a vote, because THEY (you) want it, and YOU don't have to pay for it; 65,000 others do... as a result of a $100,000,000 study with a pre-ordained outcome that just HAPPENED to be PRECISELY what this paper wanted... as if no other sensible, cheaper alternative existed.

Endorse democrats and democrats only for every open seat from the presidency on down in the last election, only to receive a massive B&O tax break from their grateful democrats in the legislature in the midst of a huge, $10 Billion budget deficit.

Endorsed a senatorial candidate over a Republican incumbent, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD NEVER LIVED IN THE DISTRICT.

And yes, I know that you have endorsed Republicans in the past. But, just for yucks, what say you look back over the last 20 years or so, and see how many Republicans you endorsed in the general elections from the Prez on down to state representative.

If you're as balanced as you claim, the numbers would support that.

Endorse the Port Levy, again, supporting their efforts to ram one of the largest tax increases in area history down our throats.

Allow an editorial page editor to beat the hell out of anyone or anything to the right of Lenin, as John Laird has done since he got here. And when it comes to "balance," I'm sure that it's mere coincidence that the LAST editorial page editor your paper had now just happens to edit the county democrat newsletter. Sheer coincidence, of course.

Your candidate endorsements with sickening double-standards: "experience" matters when you WANT it to matter, but in, say, the Brokaw-Mielke race, where Mielke had 8 years of experience in the legislature and 4 terms of elective office, compared to Brokaw's zero... that made no difference to you as you, again, tossed Mielke under the bus.

Steve Stuart is a wholly-owned subsidiary of David Barnett, who paid $100,000 for him as if the 13th Amendment was never passed. And yet, you have endorsed Stuart every time he's ran, and will no doubt continue to do so in the future. And, by the way... what party do Brokaw and Stuart belong to?

You people don't like the findings of KMac's polling... and what do you do? Attack her methodology. You don't provide ANY proof she's wrong, you understand... but because you don't like her numbers, you have to attack hers. And to attack her that way in the face of the bogus polls you've used (another liberal tactic)in the past is the height of reeking hypocrisy.

You print articles that absolutely lie about what this county can do to curtail illegal aliens from getting free health care... just like several counties in California ARE doing.

I could write for pages about how corrupt and leftist your newspaper has been. And again, calling Baird out this ONE time when you should have done it a DOZEN times does not a balanced paper make.

I hope this brief recitation amuses you even more, Mr. Brancaccio. Based on the circulation figures, it doesn't seem to amuse us.

Well, ol' Lou asked for it, and chapter and verse was provided proving the theory that our leftist rag is, well, a leftist rag.

Would Lou deny it? Would he attempt to explain it? Would he deny the issues raised?

Nope. The little worm ignored it.

Lou Brancaccio : 8/15/09 11:46pm - Report Abuse

So here's hoping we can stay a bit more on topic (I'll take the blame for getting us off topic) and discuss Baird, his actions and the upcoming public town hall meeting. Thanks!

You see, this is the biggest problem with our local newspaper. Brancaccio ASKED for it... It got delivered, and he ignores it in his typically cowardly way.

The issue isn't that this paper is a leftist piece of crap (They have every right to be.) but that they refuse to admit it and pass themselves off as some sort of unbiased arbiter of all things SW Washington while arrogantly ignoring the facts.

They harm the community unfortunate enough to have them. Tens of thousands will PAY thousands because these clowns see THEIR vision as superior to that who pays the bills.