This article from Sunday's Plain Dealer cites one Nathan Estruth who is supposedly an undecided voter:
Estruth, a father of four who typically votes Republican, milled in the back of a partisan crowd of about 100, one of just a handful of people not wearing a shirt promoting a Democratic candidate. At the urging of a friend, he came to give the Democrats, who have been out of power in Ohio for more than a decade, a chance to win his vote.
What a great Ohioan. Family man. Works hard. Not partisan. Fair-minded. Just like you and me, isn't he?
Guess again. Turns out Mr. Estruth is firmly entrenched in a number of neocon groups, including being a lawyer for the GOP. He basically let the cat out of the bag with his "impression" of the event which was an obvious, regurgitated GOP talking point:
After the 40-minute rally, Estruth said he was not ready to vote Democratic. He was put off, he said, by their harsh rhetoric.
"I wanted to see if he was an executive with clear plans for fixing the state," he said about Strickland. "What I got was partisan talk. He confirmed my worst fears."
He wants clear plans for fixing the state, huh? Maybe he should ask Ken Blackwell why 50% of his website is anti-gay rhetoric (somebody actually calculated the percentage a while back). I guess what I call "Bible-thumping homophobia" is what Mr. Estruth calls "clear plans for fixing the state".
I won't even address the "partisan talk" comment. Only a Republican could say that with a straight face.
By the way... how interesting is it that of all the people at this event, the Plain Dealer selected Mr. Estruth? Anybody care to explain that? Mr. Naymik, perhaps...?
1 comment:
I just found your blog and as a Cutter Street irregular, am hugely pleased to be here.
It's not just that newspapers are biased. Reporters are lazy. Very, very lazy
Post a Comment