Mark Hemingway is upset because the NY Times suggests that more GOP governors favor the stimulus than actually do. Fine, fair enough. Perhaps the Times suggests that all or most GOP governors support the stimulus, when really only five (Rell, Gibbons, Schwarzenegger, Crist, Douglas) do so explicitly.
But this is curious: Hemingway says that the “small minority” of supportive govs is explained “by the fact that they are presiding over financial catastrophes in their respective states.” First, I doubt those five are the only Republican governors dealing with budgetary difficulties, so Hemingway seems to imply that some non-supportive GOP govs are not acting in their states’ best interests. Second, is it me, or did he just admit that the stimulus might help cash-strapped states?
Maybe it’s not me: Hemingway also says that the Times‘ dichotomy between “pragmatic governors and an ideological congress” is a phony one, because, you see, there just aren’t that many pragmatic governors. So…Hemingway is upset that the Times overstates the pragmatism of Republican governors, while acknowledging that those who support the stimulus are “simply acting in the interest of their constituents.”
Basically, he doesn’t appreciate the Times giving Republicans more credit than they deserve. I’m right there with him.
