Editorials by the Numbers

I'm starting to wonder if we couldn't create a template for our local daily's editorials on the legislature. Urge an action. Throw in a few facts that may or may not be relevant, or that may or may not tell the whole story. Blame the problem on the Republicans. Then, with either a knowing or snide tone, urge the action again.

For example, today's editorial urges the Montana House to pass the pending budget bill. They go on to argue that the House has worked hard to get the budget "within hailing distance" of the spending cap. (It's still illegal, but so what, it's close!) And they cut some off of the budget, gosh.

They refer to the cap as "arcane," which means "known or understood by only a few." Geez, anyone who reads the Tribune must know about the cap, so that's at least several thousand. I guess they mean only a few understand it. I'm hoping everyone in the legislature understands it (they sure talk like they do). So, maybe they just called the budget cap "arcane" thinking the word arcane itself is arcane and it would sound good and no one would understand it. Hmmmm.

Back to the budget. It is within $4,000,000.00 of being legal, they say, so it should be passed. And it should be passed in a smiling room filled with daisies, like the Dems and GOP were talking on Friday.

But then on Saturday, the Republicans were "mean-spirited." (Daddy, he's bein' meeeean!) What does that really mean, to say that comments are "mean-spirited?" Does it mean we didn't disagree nicely enough? This whole "mean" thing these days is so lame. Have you seen the bumper sticker that high school kids put on their cars: "Mean People Suck?" Does our local editorial board think like adolescent girls? And how about the Tribune's "The Edge" column. Isn't that pretty "mean-spirited?"

So, back to the budget. It's illegal, but the parties worked hard on it. The Republicans are mean. So pass it.

Well, I'm convinced. I'm calling my Republican Representative, and I'm telling him to PASS THIS BUDGET BILL...but nicely.