Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

Last night, while watching the news, my wife said something very profound. “I don’t think newspapers should be allowed to endorse a candidate.” Now, she isn’t interested in politics at all, although she gets pissed when someone degrades President Bush. So hearing her say something like that took me a bit by surprise.

I hadn’t thought about it before because newspapers have always been in the endorsement business in this country. From our beginning, Freedom of the Press has given them that right.

But I think she has a point, especially today when the established media get upset about anyone who is “too patriotic”. I would think that journalistic integrity, if there ever was such a thing, would dictate that a newspaper not take sides. Don’t they claim that all the time?

Good papers are able to separate their editorial section from their news section. But I don’t think the New York Times can sincerely make that claim. And if a news organization purports to present the news in an unbiased fashion, shouldn’t they keep their endorsements to themselves?

No, no, no, I’m not advocating any kind of legal fix to this. I’m a big believer that what Madison and his buds put into our Constitution is just what they meant. And I believe they were far better educated in the history and philosophy of government than anyone we now have in government. What they built has stood longer than any similar government in history. I just think all of us should look at an endorsement as nothing more than a reflection of the organization. Which means, we should read their “news” through the same prism.

I saw a report on Kerry’s campaign. He hit California, and met with grocery workers who have been on strike for months. He said something like “Bush helps businessmen and ignores workers.” This plays well with unions. It’s BS, and he knows it.

This is a line of logic I cannot follow. The union where I work gets an hour during orientation to try and convince all new employees to join. They actually said, “You are on probation for a year, and management will do everything they can to find a reason to fire you.”

I disagreed, asked a few pointed questions they couldn’t answer, and was escorted outside for individual counseling.

I’ve hired and fired people. Neither is an enjoyable experience. To hire someone you go through all the trouble to write a position description for an ad, collect and review dozens (if not hundreds) of resumes, interview several you think fit best, offer the position to one of them, negotiate a salary, walk them through their first few days, and train them in your own procedures. Whew!

Now, after doing all that, why in the world would anyone try to fire someone they just hired?

If you need to fire someone, it is a big decision. It not only affects you emotionally, but makes you wonder about your skill in judging talent. And you then are short-handed until you complete the process all over again. Trust me, when you hire someone, you want them to succeed.

A business and its workers are a partnership. Both depend on the other to succeed. If a business doesn’t take care of its workers, they leave for somewhere that does. They don’t think anything about the problems of their leaving. A good business knows this, and works to keep good employees.

But unions look at their role as one of confrontation rather than partnership. I hear it almost every day. Management did this. Management plays favorites. Management did that. I always tell them that when I was in management, I played favorites. My favorites were the people who did the best job. And I made sure everyone knew who my favorites were, and why they were my favorites. It is called rewarding merit.

And that is anathema to unions. Unions are based on seniority, not competence. In fact, unions want everyone to produce equally. That way, nobody looks bad. When that happens, a business has to hire more workers. It can then pay them less, have fewer benefits, or go out of business.

If businesses have it so good, the thing for these folks to do is start their own.

Making statements as Kerry did simply makes me revile him more than I already did.