LA Times Endorsement Limbo
Ken Reich at Take back the Times has an interesting note on the LA Times endorsement situation:
As the Los Angeles Mayoral runoff campaign continues, the Los Angeles Times editorial page, under the unsteady leadership of Michael Kinsley, continues its perplexing failure to follow through on its earlier endorsement of City Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa.
In what looked like a savvy move at the time, during the primary campaign, the LAT endorsed both Villaraigosa and former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg for spots in the runoff, wisely rejecting the reelection of the inept present mayor, James Hahn.
So, then, when Hertzberg failed narrowly to make the runoff, and Hahn did, running behind Villaraigosa, one would have thought the reasonable course would have been for the Times to say, "Well, one of our choices made it to the runoff, Villaraigosa, and he is our choice in the runoff."
...
Now, judging from the latest mayoral editorial in the paper Tuesday, March 29, the Times has more good to say about Hertzberg than either Villaraigosa or Hahn, and doesn't even mention that it once supported Villaraigosa.
...
The Tribune Co. continues to intensify its weakness in Los Angeles by making it clear it is not willing to take steps to show that it wants the Times to continue to be a respected paper.
Now, in the mayor's race, the Times continues to appear irresolute. Even its regular political coverage of the race is less voluminous than in past mayoral contests, reducing respect for the regular political writers.
However, the coverage there has been makes it clear that Hahn is waging a somewhat racist campaign, trying to suggest that the Latino Villaraigosa is too dishonest to be mayor. It's not as bad as the Yorty campaign against the black Tom Bradley in 1969, but there is a little odor about it, and Times editorials should have denounced it.
Come on, Kinsley, stiffen up. Show some courage for once, and go along with your original course: Villaraigosa for mayor.
As the Los Angeles Mayoral runoff campaign continues, the Los Angeles Times editorial page, under the unsteady leadership of Michael Kinsley, continues its perplexing failure to follow through on its earlier endorsement of City Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa.
In what looked like a savvy move at the time, during the primary campaign, the LAT endorsed both Villaraigosa and former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg for spots in the runoff, wisely rejecting the reelection of the inept present mayor, James Hahn.
So, then, when Hertzberg failed narrowly to make the runoff, and Hahn did, running behind Villaraigosa, one would have thought the reasonable course would have been for the Times to say, "Well, one of our choices made it to the runoff, Villaraigosa, and he is our choice in the runoff."
...
Now, judging from the latest mayoral editorial in the paper Tuesday, March 29, the Times has more good to say about Hertzberg than either Villaraigosa or Hahn, and doesn't even mention that it once supported Villaraigosa.
...
The Tribune Co. continues to intensify its weakness in Los Angeles by making it clear it is not willing to take steps to show that it wants the Times to continue to be a respected paper.
Now, in the mayor's race, the Times continues to appear irresolute. Even its regular political coverage of the race is less voluminous than in past mayoral contests, reducing respect for the regular political writers.
However, the coverage there has been makes it clear that Hahn is waging a somewhat racist campaign, trying to suggest that the Latino Villaraigosa is too dishonest to be mayor. It's not as bad as the Yorty campaign against the black Tom Bradley in 1969, but there is a little odor about it, and Times editorials should have denounced it.
Come on, Kinsley, stiffen up. Show some courage for once, and go along with your original course: Villaraigosa for mayor.
Posted by Anonymous @ 3/31/2005 07:57:00 PM
15 Comments
A larger than life figure in Los Angeles for years has been 
Our beat is City Hall, but once in a while we touch on the statewide scene. We hear that 
LA Observed is reporting that the Mayor is teasing a big endorsement tomorrow. Since we don't get the Mayor's press releases, all we can do is 
Now its up to the voters. The candidates have spun, lied, talked, cajoled, begged and pleaded. Until the runoffs begin, the campaigns are over. Taking a cue from 
No doubt many of you reading this are reacting "Well that's a shock." No doubt, I don't care.
Finally, though I am giving my nod to Bob Hertzberg, I'd like to give honorable mentions to Bernard Parks and Richard Alarcon. Neither will have any chance of making it into the runoff, but both would also be excellent mayors for various reasons. Alarcon may be way too liberal for me, but he's a decent man who works hard for the city and has great passion. Parks rocky relations with the LAPD likely disqualifies him from leading the City, but he has served his District well as Councilman. He isn't afraid to try new things and depart from the political orthodoxy, which I like. 
Our Mayoral Poll is over and if the votes on Tuesday go the way of our poll, we'll have a runoff beteween Richard Alarcon and Bob Hertzberg. I guess the anti-Antonio people are strongest here on the Sister City as Tony Villar came in a distant fourth place to Jim Hahn. And if our results mean anything (and we're not saying they do) Wacko Walter is in trouble having been bested nearly 2-1 by Billy Wyatt.
First off let's start off with who not to vote for.
Antonio Villaraigosa will be holding his election night celebration this Tuesday evening at the 
Wacko Walter must be shilling for Tony Villar or Mayor Poopy as he goes on the attack against Bobzilla. If Walter was honest, he would go after all the candidates, not just the one who represents the biggest threat to his ego (when he gets less than 1000 votes).
