YESTERDAY in his victory speech, George W. Bush asked the support of those who voted for John Kerry. And he fatuously promised to "serve all Americans."

Well, that smug liar can kiss my liberal, Democrat-voting behind.

I'm one of the pissed-off, 55.2 million Americans who, these past four years, has found Bush's leadership so repugnant that I tried desperately to vote him out of office on Tuesday.

The above sounds like an irate letter letter to the editor from a disappointed John Kerry supporter. But it is not.

Ronnie Polaneczky, a staff writer for the Daily News wrote those words as the beginning of her defiant editorial bemoaning the victory of President Bush over her candidate, John Kerry. After long and emotional political campaigns one can easily be sympathetic to supporters the losing side and at the same time hope for some magnanamous behavior by the victors heady with success.

If Polaneczky were a letter writer, the offense would be minimal taking into account frustration, probable lack of education, and the luxury of not being in a responsible position. But does Polaneczky fit any of those categories other than perhaps some frustration? I don't think so. She obviously is an educated woman but seems unable to find words to effectively express herself. Equally shabby is the editorial board that allows language like that to masquerade as editorial opinion.

I do not expect much from the Daily News, as it has always been a rather low-brow publication, but this editorial is truly sad-sack journalism and Miss Polaneczky might do better in another profession, perhaps writing user manuals for toothbrush manufacturers.

The full text of that editorial follows if you care to read it.

Posted on Thu, Nov. 04, 2004

Ronnie Polaneczky | BUSH'S 'UNITY' PLEA: BALONEY!


YESTERDAY in his victory speech, George W. Bush asked the support of those who voted for John Kerry. And he fatuously promised to "serve all Americans."

Well, that smug liar can kiss my liberal, Democrat-voting behind.

I'm one of the pissed-off, 55.2 million Americans who, these past four years, has found Bush's leadership so repugnant that I tried desperately to vote him out of office on Tuesday.

How cynical, how blatantly hypocritical, is it for this president to ask for unity, while ignoring the fact that, during his presidency, we have ceased being the United States?

Instead, we've become the Divided Ones - separated into the reds and the blues, so radically different in our belief about what it is to be an American that neither side can be expected to support the other's chosen leader.

In the red states, being an American now means being the swaggering, bloated bully who sees what he wants and takes it, stomping over the little guy and sharing the spoils with his rich friends. He's the biggest guy on the block, the sun is always shining and he's always right.

Because the Bible tells him so.

In the blue states, being an American is now pretty much defined as the opposite of all that. With a patina of snobbery.

And sure, in Bush's America you can be a red-stater in blue territory, but you always know where you really belong.

You tell me: How can both sides find common ground under this guy's leadership?

This president operates under a with-me-or-against-the-USA credo, and trust me, his "unity" actually means buy into his view of America.

He and his handlers fanned our divisiveness, and then pronounced Bush the savior who can heal us. Well, as Teresa would say, shove it.

If I didn't support the president's definition of America on Election Day, there's no way I'll support it now.

Instead, I'm going to make myself a lapel pin, a big bright-blue one, with the number 55.2 on it - to symbolize the 55.2 million voters whose identity as Americans is very different from the one the president is promoting.

It'll tell the world in shorthand that, while Bush is my president, he doesn't define me.

And I'm going to wear it for four years. And whenever a Bush voter complains that he got pink-slipped, his son is still in Iraq and he can't afford gas to get to his gay-shunning evangelical church, I'll point to it.

Because 55.2 million voters can't all be wrong.

I agree with the person that wrote the letter/editorial. I do not think for one moment that George Bush will do the things he needs to in order to unite the country. He divided it. He and Rove came up with this wedge issue driven campaign and it work perfect for them.

I am as angry now about Bush as I was before the election. I do not like or support any of his policies and I don't feel he will change any of them enough to show me/us he is truely interested in serving all Americans. He clearly isn't. He refuses to address people with opposing views and goes out of his way to make it difficult for them.

The election is over. The bitter part is not. She is angry and she stated the way many of us in the 48% that did not vote for Bush feel.

You can say it has no place in newspaper, but i have a feeling that more people that read the daily news agree with her.

You don't like her work, don't read it. but saying she doesn't deserve her job because of it is typical of conservatives, if it goes against your opinion and your belief it shouldn't be allowed to exsist.

A bit of pedantry here. Polaneczky wrote as a columnist. I don't think she's on the editorial board, but regardless that was not an editorial per se.

__________________
Cheers,
Jayfar
--
“I am indeed well aware of the history of Conventional (sic) Hall, both globally and locally, and can assure you that we are carefully exploring avenues for its future.” -- Penn President Amy Gutmann 5 days before demolition began.

The style is in keeping with the general style of the DN - it's a tabloid, a bit rougher around the edges and more in the everyday Philly vernacular (they are, after all, the "people paper") as opposed to the Inky's stuffier, more traditional newspaperese.

You seem to miss the point, Fergie. Miss Polaneczky is an educated woman, yet is writing like an ignoramus. If she were in a debate she would have defeated herself by her own shrillness. Can she find no other words to express her disappointment? And the same is true for the Daily News. Coarseness is a poor substitute for well reasoned argument.

The debate part is over, a lot of us are angry, she isn't making an argument, she is venting her anger, frustation, and displeasure in our country.

Sure maybe she could pharse it as "gee by golly I am unhappy" but her tone is colorful and full of life and passion.

It may be the unpopular thing to say, but many people on the left aren't looking forward to working together with the right. Rove and Bush have drawn the lines. You stand on your side and we will stand on ours.

Well, it's not a bad style - she's being more truthfull than if she were writing in a cool analytic style.

"The vanity of others offends our taste only when it offends our vanity"
Nietzsche

Under all the layers of lovey, dovey people linking hands and singing "cumbaya"
- this isn't about the issues, this about political power.

There's something very base, very primal, about wanting to be the lead dog, the alpha male, alpha female, and politics is a "wolf pack" sport.
If you're not the lead dog, the view while you're pulling the dogsled never changes.


Hal
"It is not their love of humanity, but the impotence of their love of humanity which hinders the Liberals of today from defeating their opponents."
paraphrase Nietzsche

Actually - it's rather well written.

You may not like her message . . . and you may not agree with everything she says but for the most part, it's good, strong language.

I'm guessing you are upset by her use of "pissed off" or her quoting Theresa's "shove it."

Get over it. In a coarsening world, this is a pretty good column.

I hear worse on TV all the time.

__________________
“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” - Jane Jacobs

I do care to read it. Actually the DN 's rough and tumble tabloid style is one of the things I really enjoy about this town. This is a column anyway, not a regular piece. The Inky far too often comes across as a bland truly cookie cutter Knight Ridder rag, exactly like very other Knight Ridder rag in every other city in the country. The DN's giant sports section, passion about urban issues, politics on its sleeve and occasionally sensationalist style make it truly stand out among all the increasingly homogonous Knight Ridder chain as a refreshing bit of local, Philly-only color.

Ah, went back and looked at talkradiobug's earlier posts (that's fair game). Turns out she/he thinks DN's Polaneczky is course and ignorant:

I do not expect much from the Daily News, as it has always been a rather low-brow publication, but this editorial is truly sad-sack journalism and Miss Polaneczky might do better in another profession, perhaps writing user manuals for toothbrush manufacturers.

But, he posts quotes from The Drudge Report - so we know what she/he's reading when she/he isn't here. :rolling_:

__________________
“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” - Jane Jacobs