2011 was full of the ironic and the hypocritical.
It could be seen as ironic, if not hypocritical how a newspaper editorial board used its op-ed pages to create confusion and conflict to attack disfavored elected officials, then it claimed its created confusion and conflict made them unfit to govern.
It could be seen as ironic, if not hypocritical how a newspaper editorial board engaged in questionable standards of journalism, while it selectively questioned the ethics of elected officials.
It could be seen as ironic, if not hypocritical how a newspaper editorial board opined and reported on recall efforts of certain elected officials appeared related to its political endorsement.
In contrast to its lack of coverage of the recall efforts of former mayors Anthony Williams and Adrian M. Fenty by disgruntled District residents, The Washington Post appears ready to lead public recall efforts against the current mayor, chairman of the council, and a ward councilman.
It could be seen as ironic, if not hypocritical how a newspaper editorial board asserted all of the Mayor and Council of the District of Columbia’s interactions should be open, transparent, and available for public review except when it uses anonymous sources and confidential leaks.
It could be seen as ironic, if not hypocritical how a newspaper editorial board sought to magnify as sky-falling scandals missteps or other actions of elected District officials it theoretically hoped would not succeed, as it ignores the scandals in its own house. The idea the Republican Party with leaders like House Speaker John Boehner, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Representatives Eric Cantor, Michelle Bachman, and Ron Paul is the icon in political ethics is ridiculous and outrageous.
In former Mayor Fenty, The Washington Post [and its allies in the media] had what former Mayor Williams is reported to have stated “an adoration and love affair with Mr. Fenty”. According to Mr. Williams,“…if I had done some of the things Adrian did, I would have been run out of town. Adrian never had to explain himself.” The Washington Post looked away and gave a journalism free pass to the transgressions of Mr. Fenty, who it supported.
In a devilish self-serving twist, ignoring the principle of fairness, The Washington Post seeks public redemption for its ethical lapses of responsible journalism by relentlessly attacking Mayor Vincent C. Gray, Chairman Kwame Brown, and Councilman Harry Thomas.
While there are people in the District of Columbia community in strong support Mayor Gray’s vision and mission for the District of Columbia, The Washington Post refused to give them quotes or column space in its pages. To believe in the principles of justice, fairness, and due process is not to be blind to the nobility of ethical government and journalism.
The Washington Post, having seeded the political climate for recall, it seems now ready and eager to plow the field and harvest. The Washington Post editorial board is itself a WMD – weapon of mass deception.
According one definition, a “…scandal is a widely publicized allegation or set of allegations that damages (or tries to damage) the reputation of an institution, individual or creed. A scandal may be based on true or false allegations or a mixture of both.”
District residents should be very careful at the manipulative journalism by The Washington Post. The Washington Post cannot or should not get away with throwing mud on the pool and later complain about the pool being too dirty for swimmers.
The Washington Post and other reporters substitute their one-sided judgments and cryptically call for “scandal” investigations of District elected officials by government inspector generals and congressional oversight committees, yet when final reports come out not to their predilection, they are called useless.
The alleged coziness of The Washington Post with former Mayor Fenty and former DC Public School Chancellor Michelle Rhee which seems imply Mr. Fenty and Ms. Rhee cleared their official decisions with The Washington Post editorial board makes quicksand of the grounds around The Washington Post’s stand of moral righteousness.
The Washington Post editorial board is intellectually dishonest and unfair, on purpose. The Washington Post is quick and bold to throw its weight to be harshly critical of Mayor Gray and others. However, The Washington Post slams the door to community critics who are equally passionate in their disdain of The Washington Post’s editorials.
All through 2011, The Washington Post has been attempting to speak with the tongues of men; unfortunately its voice had become just a sounding brass. Since the election of Mayor Gray, Council Chairman Brown, and the Council of the District of Columbia – for the 19th Legislative Period, The Washington Post has been hoping its editorials had the gift of prophecy and the understanding of all mysteries, but in reality it had nothing. And with its vast use of ink, paper, and the internet, The Washington Post editorial board thought it had the power to make great the political wickedness of men and women for its own interest and profit.
The Washington Post in 2011 wrote largely with cruelty so as purposely to hurt, rather than with charity to inform with fairness. It stained its reputation, credibility, and integrity. Accordingly, The Washington Post ends 2011 as a loser.
However, as with each New Year, the year 2012 offers renewed hope and new opportunities for all District of Columbia elected officials and The Washington Post editorial board.
E-mail contact information: email@example.com