Orlando Sentinel’s endorsement of Mitt Romney shows their continued hypocrisy.

Tonight, we see that the Orlando Sentinel continues along the path of odd endorsements as they have now endorsed Mitt Romney for President.

It seems that the Orlando Sentinel is supporting Romney because they feel that both the US House and Senate are going to be controlled by Republicans. Even in their endorsement, the Sentinel claims that Romney isn’t their ideal candidate for President. Still, when it comes to the reasons why they endorse Romney, their comments are about as hollow as Mitt Romney’s platform.

Of course, the Sentinel basically gives general reasons why they want Romney. First of all, they say he has “leadership”. Yes, so did General Custer, but did that help him. But they claim that his experience at Bain Capital gives him the “leadership” to turn around this country. In addition, they talk about how he “turned around the Olympics in Salt Lake City”. As someone that actually attended the University of Utah at the time, it wasn’t all Romney that made that happen. A lot of that money was provided by the governments both locally and federally.

Still, even with that being said, the Sentinel talks about Romney’s “five-point plan”. Of course, President Obama has been asking Mr. Romney to elaborate on this so-called plan in the last two debates, and not just bring up bullet points. But Mr. Romney still talks in general terms and never explains the details. He also doesn’t explain how he is going to pay for his $7 trillion tax cut and increased spending in government.

This is where the hypocrisy of the Orlando Sentinel comes into play. Over the last few years, the Sentinel has been complaining about the state government in Tallahassee and their lack of fiscal understanding. In addition, they talk about how the GOP in both the Florida House and Senate are more concerned about social extremism instead of the fiscal issues facing the state. Of course, they have a legitimate argument. But in the case of Mitt Romney, he comes up with a plan where he doesn’t explain how to pay for anything, and also increases spending, and the Orlando Sentinel is fine with that. Pot meet kettle?

On the other hand, this is what the Sentinel says about Obama:

We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don’t think he’s a business-hating socialist. We don’t think he’s intent on weakening the American military. We don’t think he’s unpatriotic. And, no, we don’t think he was born outside the United States.

Even with that said, they identify that the economy is bad. They talked about how other presidents have had the same issue and have been able to pull us out of the economic fire. The Sentinel sites Bill Clinton’s recovery as their “it is possible” example. First, Obama doesn’t have a “tech boom” to help us out. Second, the recession under Clinton wasn’t as bad as the one left by Bush 43. That is just a pure fact. Rome wasn’t built in a day. I guess according to the Orlando Sentinel, Franklin Roosevelt shouldn’t have been given a second term in 1936 because unemployment was at 16% and the economy wasn’t exactly progressing fast enough. Thank God that didn’t happen. Oh, and just in case you were wondering, the Orlando Sentinel endorsed Bush in 1992 and Dole in 1996. Therefore, they never endorsed Bill Clinton, yet they praise him in this endorsement of Romney.

The  Orlando Sentinel hardly mentions what Mr. Romney did in Massachusetts. Usually, if someone is running for president, there might be some mention of their previous political positions and what they stood for while in that position. But nope, the Orlando Sentinel just side-steps that one. They covered their ears, closed their eyes and didn’t want anything to do with those issues. So, how can an endorsement be taken seriously when there is only one sentence about his time as Massachusetts governor?

Maybe there is a reason that candidates are refusing to be part of any Orlando Sentinel interviews. It almost seems that the Sentinel has their mind made up before they even conduct the interviews. Therefore, why should anyone attend. If someone is an incumbent that hasn’t rocked the boat too much, or is in a leadership position, the Sentinel will more than likely endorse them. The only time where their endorsements come in handy is when they make decisions in races that nobody knows either candidate running for office.

With this endorsement of Romney, the Orlando Sentinel truly has to ask themselves if they want to be taken seriously. For some reason, they apply different standards to different candidates. As mentioned previously, if they were to apply the same standards to the presidential race as they do Florida legislative races, then they would easily endorse President Obama. But their thinking seems to be highly skewed.

Two years ago, I wrote a post about the Orlando Sentinel. In that article, I stated that I think the Orlando Sentinel just picks who they think is going to win the State of Florida. In this case, I think they are doing the same thing. Their endorsement of Romney is very weak and doesn’t give the readers any ideas about what they, the Sentinel, feel Romney will do for the country.

The Orlando Sentinel is finally on the verge of becoming Central Florida’s tabloid newspaper. It seems as if the Orlando Sentinel has “selective hearing” when it comes to this endorsement. They like to talk about how Obama does nothing, yet they fail to stress that he has had to deal with a filibuster in the US Senate throughout his entire term. While the Orlando Sentinel slams candidates for “not having a firm grasp on the issues”, I think the same thing can be said about the Orlando Sentinel’s Editorial Board.

Yep, Orlando Sentinel, you have just lost all credibility.

9 thoughts on “Orlando Sentinel’s endorsement of Mitt Romney shows their continued hypocrisy.”

  1. After I read the astonishing OP-ED on why the Sentinel endorsed Romney I was so stunned by their bizarre reasoning that I went looking for some rational discussion on the issue, what I found of course were Conservative blogs crowing on how the “left leaning” Sentinel went for Mitt. You have basically elucidated everything I found distorted and odd about their endorsement, including how after 4 years without immediate results (this after 8 disastrous years of Bush policies) that we should “kick the bum out” which includes Romney if he doesn’t produce. One thing you didn’t mention in your discussion of Clinton is that he didn’t have to deal with a Congress who resolutely decided on the day he was elected to block every piece of legislation introduced by his administration. I also find it curious that a major newspaper keeps spreading the lie that Obama had a super-majority for a significant amount of time in Congress–he had, in fact, only a few months to get his major legislative accomplishment, the ACA, passed.

  2. Nice post. Also, apparently they did not fact check any of Romney’s repeated lies and misleading statements, after all that’s what a free press is supposed to do. I guess they had to endorse him before Obama destroys him completely in the next debate.

  3. Jerry, do you know if El Sentinel does endorsements? And if they do, do you know if they do them separately of the Orlando Sentinel?

  4. Apparently the Sentinel really didn’t do their homework…..based on those comments……It just seems that lying is so fashionable.

    The Salt Lake Tribune, the paper of record in Salt Lake City — which is also the city with the largest Mormon population in the country — has just gone and endorsed Barack Obama rather than fellow Mormon Mitt Romney.

    The Tampa Bay Times endorsed Obama……what will the rest do!

  5. ct, The Salt Lake Tribune is a pretty liberal paper. They are also very anti-Mormon (or as much as they can be without being called out on it). In fact, The Salt Lake Tribune been anti-Mormon since the 1870s and was pretty much used as the on-record opposition to the Church since then.

    Therefore, the Trib endorsing Obama is not a surprise at all. The Orlando Sentinel picking Romney is way more of a surprise.

    Source: Me – former National Committeeman for the Utah Young Democrats and educated at the University of Utah 🙂

  6. Pingback: How not to endorse: Fairly deconstructing the Orlando Sentinel’s endorsement of Mitt Romney. « The Political Hurricane – Florida Political Blog.

  7. According to the article in The Salt Lake Tribune, Romney was warmly
    welcomed, with his head for business and the bottom line, and with
    the admiration and hope of the largely Mormon, Republican business
    -friendly state……along with the praises, they realized that they didn’t
    know the Romney running for President and who refused to share
    specifics of his plans…..It may be (as you stated) a Liberal aper…..but, maybe they just couldn’t get pass all those inconsistencies……As for the Orlando Sentinel, their article just didn’t have any meat…..they are willing to try Romney and if it doesn’t work out, they will get behind someone else in 2016….but BELIEVE the president was born in The United States……Apparently they didn’t call the Tampa Bay Times on their fact check process…or perhaps it’s something else….whether liberal or conservative….JUST THE FACTS PLEASE ……I think the Salt Lake Tribune did that….

  8. Yes they did. What is even more funny is that the other large Salt Lake City paper, The Deseret News, cannot make any endorsements because they are owned by the Church lol. If they do make an endorsement, that will be a violation of their tax-exempt status and they would lose it.