A Hearty Endorsement - WHAT?

A hearty endorsement of George W. Bush by the Bloomington Pantograph in Illinois has this great statement:

Bush's methods and rationale can be -- and have been -- questioned. The intelligence information provided to Bush and Congress before the invasion of Iraq was clearly faulty. The Bush administration also underestimated the difficulty of stabilizing Iraq after the toppling of Saddam Hussein

Oh, they underestimated? They ignored EVERYONE who tried to counsel them on reality.

And in trying to justify their endorsement by raising economic issues, they talk about tax cuts:

Plenty of Democrats have gone along with the so-called "Bush tax cuts." Kerry has said he would retain tax reductions for the "middle class" and working poor.

Both candidates -- and Congress -- should pay more attention to spending reductions and paying down the national debt rather than pandering to certain sectors with tax cuts. Use the veto, if that's what it takes.

In determining who would better control the tax-and-spend mentality of Washington, it is revealing to look at the ratings given by the National Taxpayers Union to lawmakers. These "taxpayers scores" are based on votes with an impact on federal taxes, spending, debt and regulation.

In the last five years, 1999 through 2003, Kerry's scores have ranged from 7 percent to 18 percent. His running mate, John Edwards, wasn't much better, with scores of 12 percent to 22 percent over the same period. Having not served in Congress, Bush was not rated by NTU. However, during Vice President Dick Cheney's service as a Wyoming congressman, 1979-88, his ratings ranged from 50 percent to 70 percent.

In other words, because Cheney has a better record concerning "tax and spend" sensibilities, even though his running mate has ballooned the federal budget deficit to record levels, Bush is clearly the better choice to reign in that mentality.
It looks as though the Pantograph believes (because we're engaged in a war on terror) "borrow and spend" is a much wiser policy.

I have been asking myself (and only myself, thus far) for an articulate argument from someone about why they would support another four years of Bush in the White House. I think I've found the perfect specimen. They appear to be articulate to some degree, but I should have asked for "intelligent" as well.

I sure hope the Bloomington Pantograph serves its community with the most outstanding coverage of local news. Given this endorsement, I can't see any reason why they should keep publishing.