(updated September 1) (updated September 2)
If you didn't see this morning's editorial, "Diverting Attention From Real Issues," you missed a 217 word personal attack on the president. The excuse is that the president has criticized those who disagree with him about the Iranian nuclear treaty. (The nerve of that president!) Here's an example from the editorial:. . .
The weekend presented us with the usual anti-Obama /EPA columns and editorials and as I've noted in a number of previous posts, they don't change very much from week to week. Rather than repeating myself every weekend, I've decided to compile a list of the recurring argument and then reference them as needed.
. . .
With an edited front-page AP report and an enthusiastic editorial, the Wheeling Intelligencer made it clear that Ohio Govenor John Kasich is their current favorite in the 2016 presidential election. Kasich officially announced for the presidency yesterday and today the Intellgencer began its campaign to get him elected.
If you read . . .
The Tuesday editorial on alternative energy
The Intelligencer is once again shilling for the fossil fuel industry - this time in its lead editorial, "Ohio Right on Renewables." The editorial begins:
Renewable portfolio standards were quite trendy for state governments a while back. In fact, 30 states now have in place mandates that require greater use of energy . . .
Monday's editorial page
I will confess that this morning's lead editorial in the Intelligencer surprised me. "Restoring Trust Of Police Officers" deals with the problems in the Cleveland police department and the mistrust it has created among its citizenry. The editorial uses the recent shooting of a 12-year-old and the killing of two unarmed suspects . . .
(except when Republicans are involved)
Today's editorial on having Democratic candidates debate isn't about West Virginia but it does illustrate another Intelligencer hypocrisy. It seems that the paper is all in favor of debates if it means that the likely Democratic candidate might be hurt by them but conveniently avoids the subject when it's applied to Republicans.
. . .
Shorter version of today's Intelligencer editorial: "We weren't there but that won't stop us from making up stuff."
It's a follow-up editorial to yesterday's front-page "fair and balanced" story about the WL Faculty Senate meeting.
Today's editorial continues where yesterday's front page editorializing left off (see post below). It begins:
How much control over discussion of ideas for West Liberty . . .