The insane nature of Columbian endorsements.

The Columbian, aka, "The Democratian" for their bizarre fixation on acting like the democrat's public affairs organization here locally, once again follows their predictable pattern of endorsing democrats whenever and however they can: mainly in any competitive race or in any non-competitive race where the GOP'er has no chance.

They likewise jack their statistics (and yes, we're going to get another in the series of articles they put out after every candidate election to "prove" they're not leftists when drilling down on the numbers proves otherwise) by these kinds of endorsements: the GOP will likely never be competitive in the 49th; the dems will likely never be competitive in the 18th.

Their endorsements in the 49th speak to the absolutely schizophrenic nature of their endorsement process:

For state senator, Eileen Qutub has actually served in that capacity:

When it comes to experience, Republican Eileen Qutub has the edge, having served in the Oregon Legislature as state representative and state senator in the late 1990s. Like her opponent, Qutub grew up in Clark County, but she faces an uphill battle in the mostly blue 49th.

Her opponent has never been elected to anything, of course, so Qutub's experience is meaningless to them because Qutub is not a democrat.

Our choice is Cleveland, who has learned the intricacies of the legislative process through her work in health care services and experience in several political arenas before making her first bid for elective office.

I can, for one, describe the "intricacies" of the process of childbirth, but if you're looking for "experience," shouldn't you go to someone who has actually given birth?

So, to translate:

Obviously Qutub is the best choice, having served in the past in both the House and the Senate in Oregon while her opponent has zero elective experience, but we're going to endorse her opponent anyway, because, well, the Senate may be up for grabs this year and Qutub's a Republican.

To the democratian, Qutub's past experience in both Houses of a legislature is meaningless... and yet:

State rep, Pos. 1: Sharon Wylie has found her stride as a studious and collaborative state representative since being appointed to the Legislature last year and later winning voter approval by 13 percentage points. Her rapidly acquired traction in Olympia comes as no surprise because -- like Qutub -- Wylie served two terms in the Oregon Legislature in the 1990s. Her recent legislative achievements have come in job creation, education and social services.

Wylie's opponent, Republican Debbie Peterson, brings many years of impassioned civic activism to this campaign, but she lacks Wylie's experience, not to mention Wylie's ability to work harmoniously with both conservatives and liberals.

The lies here are obvious: Wylie has accomplished precisely dick in Olympia... she's nothing more than a chair-warming yes-woman.

But to use Peterson's "lack" of experience as a reason to keep that manikin Wylie up in Olympia after completely disregarding that same criteria to endorse Cleveland?

Their endorsement of Jim "My middle name is Hussein - Candy Man" Moeller, for example.

State rep, Pos. 2: We have often criticized Jim Moeller for his ultra-liberal stances on taxes, public-employee unions and other issues. But there is no doubting his passion, commitment to hard work, eagerness to learn about multiple issues and willingness to be held accountable in contentious public arenas. Nor is there any doubt that Moeller knows how to appeal to his district's voters, previously as a Vancouver city councilor and since 2003 as a legislator.

Let's take part of that endorsement and apply it to someone the Democratian loves to trash:

Nor is there any doubt that Benton knows how to appeal to his district's voters, previously as a state representative and since 1996 as a state senator.

Odd, isn't it, what happens when a rag allows their personal hatred to leak over into the political realm?

Because all of this begs the question:

If Moeller's longevity in office is a reason to keep him... then why isn't Benton's?

But THE most psychotic element of these endorsements is this... as it so often is:

Of the 9 endorsements made in legislative races, 5 of them were for democrats.

Yet, this rag incessantly complains about public unions and how much they're screwing us all.

So, what we have here is a concerted effort by this newspaper to have those who would screw us the most, elected into office to help them enable the process that this rag complains about because they're there.

Insanity has frequently been described as doing the same thing, over and over again while expecting a different outcome.

If that's the case... then what would you call the democratian's insistence on endorsing democrats when they allegedly despise what so many of them do?

The fact is that their leftward bent forces them to overlook reality and engage in knee-jerk endorsements to assist in the very thing they claim they DON'T do:

Elect democrats and those who support their agenda to the exclusion of all else.

That, of course, is their right.  Democracy, as this paper frequently illustrates, includes the right to be stupid.

But to complain about what these people do once they've worked to put them into office?

That... is insane.