There is no denying the political difficulty that now besets Charlie Crist, Florida’s liberal Republican governor. But if The New York Times had its druthers, his constituents would remain blithely unaware of policy stances that hew to the left. The lesson here is to be wary of any Republican that is described as a “moderate” in the NYT. After all, what is so moderate about cap and trade and other interventionist schemes?
With Gov. Charlie Crist preparing to drop out of the Republican primary for U.S. Senate and run as an independent, the race has come more unpredictable and chaotic. But the news coverage has not. The New York Time has been reliable cheerleader for Crist, branding him as a “moderate” despite his penchant for supporting left-of-center legislation.
The analysis included in this latest piece on the Florida race includes some helpful analysis and a good mix of sources. Unfortunately, it is also riddled with cheerleading that undermines what is an otherwise good piece.
“Simply by entering the race as a third-party candidate, Mr. Crist would change the game,” the report says. “The seat had been seen as safely Republican since Mel Martinez retired last year. But in a state where Democrats have a registration advantage, the race is now wide open.”
“Republicans have not been shy about showing their frustration,” The Times continues. “For weeks, high-profile leaders, including former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, have endorsed Mr. Rubio, criticized Mr. Crist’s wavering plans and pressured him to bow out. Now, he can expect simply to be attacked by his former comrades — and the barrage has already begun.”
In an effort to undermine Marco Rubio, the conservative upstart, the Times has sought to portray Crist as an enlightened moderate, under assault from the unhinged elements that fuel Tea Party activism. But one man’s moderate is another man’s liberal and Republican primary voters have good cause to balk at Crist’s voting record. In reality, the governor’s public policy stances were largely unknown until Rubio, a former speaker of the house in the state legislature, began highlighting his differences with the governor.
The reporting in The Times suggests that this is more an element of style and less a matter of substance. Readers are told the pugnacious Tea Party activists have no understanding or appreciation for the statesmanship that has distinguished Crist.
“In a matter of months, he has gone from a party favorite to a pariah for his moderate approach, while his opponent Marco Rubio is now a front-running magnet for both Tea Party activists and the Republican establishment,” an earlier report declares. “If he chooses to run as an independent, Mr. Crist would be betting that the prevailing political logic of the moment is wrong — that despite the Tea Party’s rise, the broader electorate still wants the pragmatic approach that propelled Barack Obama to victory here.”
A more detailed analysis of the separation that exists between Crist and his own Florida Republicans would add some much needed perspective. He has also expressed support on the national level for “cap and trade” legislation and for stimulus spending that is unpopular among not just Republicans but independents.
The reporting makes some occasional acknowledgement of the substantive differences that exist between Crist and most Florida Republicans. “…Mr. Crist angered Republican lawmakers by vetoing legislation that would have eliminated tenure for Florida public school teachers and tied their salaries and job security to student performance,” The Times observed in another recent piece.
A rare convergence of factors has come together to derail Crist’s political ambitions: A charismatic, articulate candidate more in tune with his party’s rank and file and a growing Tea Party movement that is revolting against overspending and unconstitutional federal intrusion.
If The New York Times had its druthers, most Republican voters would remain unaware of their governor’s leftward drift. Under the banner of “moderation,” big spenders are permitted to work against taxpayer interests by their allies in the liberal news media.
Popularity: 1% [?]
