How low have Senator Barbara “Don’t Call Me Ma’am” Boxer’s fortunes sunk to these days? Low enough that the three-term liberal Democrat doesn’t poll better than 43% against any of her three possible Republican challengers.
Low enough that her primary challenger, liberal journalist and blogger extraordinaire Robert “Mickey” Kaus, the former Newsweek writer and “Kausfiles” architect at Slate, is to her right.
Low enough that not even the failing Los Angeles Times‘ editors could bring themselves to endorse her.
But is their non-endorsement a ringing seal of approval–for Kaus?
Kaus has little name recognition, no money and no Times endorsement. But, Boxer’s so bad–the Times‘ editors generously referred to her lack of intellectual firepower“– that even a usually-reliable Democrat mouthpiece like the Times won’t endorse her. As Glenn Reynolds puts it: “Feel the Mickey-mentum building!”
So that’s a plus for Kaus.
It’s also a sign of the Times that California, long the butt of jokes about falling into the ocean, has seriously fallen into an ocean of unmanageable debt. Everything and everyone in the state has already been taxed; everyone who has taxable income and the means has either moved or is in the process of moving.
California is a basket case of high debt, high taxes, suffocating regulations–and that’s before the tyranny of public employee unions and their apocalyptic pensions are factored into the equation. As the state has steadily turned from Red to Blue, it’s just as steadily turned from Golden to Tin, from Free to Nanny.
Here’s a sample of the twisted, convoluted writing that passes for editorial thought at the Times these days: Choosing not to choose. The subhead is hilarious, “In both parties, the races for governor and Senate have been undermined by politics and money.” Undermined? Races for California governor and the U.S. Senate are about nothing but politics and money.
On the Democratic side, we find that we’re no fans of incumbent Barbara Boxer. She displays less intellectual firepower or leadership than she could. We appreciate the challenge brought by Robert “Mickey” Kaus, even though he’s not a realistic contender, because he asks pertinent questions about Boxer’s “lockstep liberalism” on labor, immigration and other matters. But we can’t endorse him, because he gives no indication that he would step up to the job and away from his Democratic-gadfly persona.
The fast-growing population of California voters who no longer affiliate with a party are seeking a dynamic and creative representative to help direct national policy. But the substantive debate about whether Boxer or the Republican nominee is the best person must wait until after the primary. Then, we hope, it will be possible to endorse a candidate.
Go out on a limb and take a brave stand? Not the Times! If a candidate is an incumbent and running as a Democrat, the worst that can happen is that the Times will remain neutral.
Perhaps, Kaus would have less of a “Democratic-gadfly persona” if the California Democrat Party had allowed him to speak at their convention. It did not, only allowing the incumbent Boxer to address its adoring masses, composed mostly of those who suck at the teat of an exhausted state government.
After the Times‘ disgraceful, unprofessional coverage of the 2008 election–particularly their muzzling of their own bloggers over any mention of the John Edwards scandal after Edwards was caught at the Beverly Hilton with mistress Rielle Hunter and their love child–it may be that an endorsement by the Times is a kiss of death.
Kaus can only hope so.
Unless–and until–Kaus pulls an upset and the Times then bestows its normal sloppy kiss on the Dem nominee, Mickey will have to soldier on without its endorsement — in which case, by sheer coincidence, for once in our lives, we’ll agree with the Times.
At any rate, Kaus has thrown his hat into the ring to challenge Boxer. If readers like the thought of an underdog taking out the elite’s choice, they can donate to his surprisingly resilient campaign here.