Today, the Washington Post issued its endorsements for Virginia Governor, Lt. Governor, and Attorney General. For all three offices, the Post endorsed the Democratic candidate.In endorsing Tim Kaine, the Post wrote, ?Mr. Kaine has the potential to be a remarkable governor -- a responsible, forward-thinking, unifying, principled politician with brains, guts and know-how.? The Post added that Kaine is ?[p]ossessed of an agile, incisive mind and slightly allergic to the allure of sound-bite politics? and ?would make a much better governor than former attorney general Jerry W. Kilgore.? In contrast, the Post said the following about Kilgore:
Mr. Kilgore has taken the path of least resistance in this campaign, adopting doctrinaire GOP positions, brandishing the word "liberal" as a weapon directed at Mr. Kaine and opportunistically trying to exploit hot-button issues that come his way -- illegal immigration and the death penalty, in particular. His record as the state's secretary of public safety in the 1990s and, more recently, as attorney general, is solid if unremarkable. But he has given Virginians no reason to believe a Kilgore governorship would be anything beyond pedestrian. In the event of an economic downturn, he could leave Virginia as bereft of public funding, and flirting with fiscal disaster, as did the state's last Republican governor, James S. Gilmore III.
On the Lt. Governor race, the Post called it a ?choice...between polar opposites,? finally deciding to endorse Byrne for her stance ?on fiscal matters,? specifically her backing for Mark Warner's historic, bipartisan budget reform package last year.
Finally, on the Attorney General race, the Post calls Republican candidate Bob McDonnell ?an able, articulate legislator,? but worries ? as do many of us ? that ?he would bring a dogmatically conservative social agenda to the job.? In contrast, the Post describes Creigh Deeds as ?no liberal? and the one who would be ?the more pragmatic choice, and a better attorney general [than McDonnell].?
OK, OK, I know what you're all thinking: big surprise, the Washington Post endorsed a bunch of Democrats. What else is new, right? Well, maybe you should ask Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) what he thinks, since he's got the Post endorsement of HIM plastered on his website.
Or how about the Posts's enthusiastic endorsement back in June 2005 of Sean Connaughton for Lt. Governor (the Post called Bolling a ?hard-line ideologue?)?
Meanwhile, the Post was highly supportive of the Iraq War, has been a strong voice for fiscal conservativism, civil liberties, and "free trade" (support for CAFTA and ?fast track? trade authority, for instance). The Post also urged confirmation for John Roberts to the Supreme Court.
So how is this a ?liberal? newspaper exactly? Got me, but some right-wing Republicans will simply see a ?liberal bias? everywhere they look, no matter any evidence to the contrary. Ironically, many liberals on DailyKos and elsewhere view the Washington Post as a corporate, centrist, pro-war paper.
My personal view is that the Post is a middle-of-the-road, centrist, corporate paper that has a strong bias towards what it views as responsible, adult, serious candidates for political office. In this case, it has chosen Tim Kaine, Leslie Byrne and Creigh Deeds based mainly on perceived competence and pragmatism. In other words, par for the Washington Post's centrist course.