Thursday , November 08, 2012 - 3:31 PM
Concerning the Nov. 8 editorial "A re-election but not much more," President Obama did not spend hundreds of billions of dollars on negative campaign ads. A simple fact check would have shown the editors that the cost of the entire election, counting both sides, never came close to one hundred billion, let alone several hundred billions.
But to claim, as the editorial would suggest, that this was the sole reason Obama was re-elected goes way beyond the point of being fair and impartial.
I realize that Utah’s favorite son Mitt, lost a close one, but I can’t help but wonder, what the editorial would have been like if Mitt had won.
An excellent editorial right below the "Our view" was another entitled, "Why Mitt lost." All of the reasons why President Obama won reelection are shown with far less bias and slant than the Standard’s.
I will continue to subscribe to and read the Standard-Examiner because I feel it is a great newspaper but as for the "Our view" editorials, well time will tell.
I can say that this opinion and mine will remain just that opinion, but I most certainly do not place the same value on "Our view" as I once did.
Seems like divided and division remain the words of the week.
Clark H. Taylor
Sign up for e-mail news updates.