Holy shit you guys, did you see the slams of Anthony Brown in the
Sun today? Usually the
Sun's opinions are hedged, bridled and given a shot of go-go juice before they go onstage, but their
critiques of Brown have been heating up,* then yesterday someone replaced some editor's Preparation-H with Tiger Balm and today they're as are sore as a Tennessee horse.
David Zurawik's takedown of Brown* is the hardest-hitting pan I've seen in a legitimate media source since
Pete Wells went to Guy's American Kitchen and Bar, and the paper printed his answer to the
health-care exchange question verbatim.*
I've been a reporter, believe it or not, and the only reason you ever transcribe and print someone verbatim without prettying it up (and the only reason your editor would ever let you do that) is because you and your paper are thoroughly done with said someone. Because basically almost everyone sounds like a mutard verbatim, and no one will ever talk to you again if you print them full mutard. If you don't believe me, record yourself opining on any topic and transcribe it, you'll sound like Mr. Ed with a fishhook in your lip.
For what it's worth the
Sun hasn't been softballing Gansler either, calling out his
"sleek, well-fed look of upper-middle-class suburban privilege," a barb well-earned since he sent his kid to
George Huguely IV*'s alma mater, a
$34,1601-a-year school for
aspiring date-rapists in a district so safe their schools don't even have recurring trash can fires or
race riots
. And they didn't gloss over the fact that Gansler dug himself deeper trying to explain that Bethany beach-house underaged ass-grinding teen-drinking party as being more acceptable
because his progeny was a penis- toting American,* or that as Attorney General he doesn't need to take responsibility for other people's children (which would explain his continual employment of
Carl Snowden, yet not why he keeps trotting out that poor
11-year-old sexually-molested girl every time he opens his beerhole. Isn't using some stock-photo model in public ads as "sexually molested girl" kind of molest-y in itself? Imagine her parents' surprise. "Oh look, a residual check! I wonder what Video Blocks used that adorable footage of Ashleigh playing that with that dinosaur for? OH MY GOD!!")
Wait, what was my point?
Could it be that
Sun reporters and editors are
just like us, tired of these entitled legacy candidates thinking they can roll in and that one beer and a beach house is enough for us to let them grind on our butts? Could the
Sun really endorse Mizeur? Could she really win?
Conventional wisdom (aka my Dad) says she has no chance. The
Sun will never endorse her because the Tribune Corp would never allow it happen, she's
not the establishment's person. Our rural jurors will never vote for her because she's a
pro-pot lesbian. Dudebros and self-loathing ladies will hesitate to vote for any female candidate because deep down they've already concluded she's either too weak or too pushy. This is the
Sun's last whinny before backing establishment candidate A or B.
What do you think?
(1).jpg)
