A4 The Emery County Review, Tuesday, July 29, 2008 VIEWPOINT Opinion and Letters to the Editor Established January 2, 2007 James L. Davis, Publisher & Editor w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w Colleen A. Davis, Co-Publisher, Office & Advertising Manager Josie Luke, Assistant Editor Lyndsay Reid, Advertising Design Charlotte Williams, Advertising Sales Kathy P. Ockey, Staff Journalist Casey Wood, Webmaster Our Vision To be a valued member of the communities we serve and to be trusted as an honest, truthful and reliable source of news. w w w Our Mission To inform, entertain and provide a public forum for the discussion of events impacting the people of the Emery County area and to inform with news and features relevant to those who call the Castle Valley area home w w w Our Principles We will be ethical in all of our efforts to provide information to the public. We will be unbiased in our reporting and will report the facts as we see them and do our best to focus on the good news of the county, its people, history and way of life. We will be strong and active members of the community and assist in any way that we are able. We will strive to provide the best quality product possible to our readers and advertisers...always. We will verify the details of news we are reporting and if a mistake is made on our part we will correct it immediately. We will always listen to suggestions on how to do our job better. Editorial Submission Guidelines The Emery County Review welcomes and invites letters to the editor and guest opinion articles on public policy or current events. We welcome letters of thanks to individuals who have helped make our community a better place to live, work and play. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit all submissions for space constraints, clarity and errors in fact. Submissions must include author’s name and contact information. Contact information will not be published. Letter’s and opinion articles can be sent to jldavis@theemerycountyreview.com, mailed to The Emery County Review, P.O. Box 487, Orangeville, UT. 84537 or faxed to 435-748-2543. ‘Outsourcing’ Brings Conflicting Emotions Josie Luke Imagine this: Two areas, one across the border from the other. One has a large population, some of whom are willing to, or have to work for lower wages. The other is a group that can use the more populated area’s lower wage earning workers to fill positions in service jobs. Because of this, jobs and resulting tax income are outsourced to the other. With outsourcing currently being such a hot button issue, and therefore the most obvious conclusion being that the description was referring to the United States and Mexico, for many who read the previous description, anger rises to the surface. But, if one rereads the description, replacing the populations with Carbon and Emery counties, and the low-wage earning workers with the hundreds of college students at the College of Eastern Utah, the reaction is decidedly different. When jobs are outsourced across national borders or overseas, there is an outcry, but when according to a recent study, Carbon County is pulling in 140 percent of its expected business and Emery County is only managing 80 percent, people are much less upset, even saying that the two counties “need” each other. I admit, there are some differences between the two examples, but to me, the differences are not dramatic enough-- unless it can be explained by prejudice-- to justify the differences in the reactions. But before anyone perceives me as someone who believes she is better than others in this regard, I must explain that although I have less of a problem with the international situation, I incongruously have more of a problem with the local issue, so I am as bad as anyone else. So, when I began writing a commentary about the reasons people should do their shopping locally, I had to take some time to consider the hypocrisy of my opinions. Why do I use one type of reasoning in one situation, and another in the second situation? Why does it seem, to me, mean for people to be so angry about people crossing a national border to get jobs, or about companies who outsource jobs to people-- who I view as deserving a job as much as I deserve it-- when it makes me upset that people would drive over a border to get what they see as lower prices, when local businesses offer the same services? Why? I’m not sure, but I plan to spend some time figuring it out and I invite anyone with the same conflicting opinion, or the alternative, still conflicting opinion, to do the same. McCain Versus ‘Destiny’ of Obama L. Brent Bozell III John McCain has figured out that one way to build enthusiasm among conservatives is to confront his former best friends in the liberal media. As the media glorify Barack Obama the “statesman” on his trip abroad, with the three network anchors lining up for interviews like a gaggle of smitten fan-club presidents, the McCain campaign suddenly acquired a surprising “Annoy The Media” flavor. Like many Obama-loving press outlets, Newsweek has reported that McCain’s campaign is struggling against an Obama crusade that seems “blessed by destiny.” This spin is maddening. The Obama campaign has been blessed by a media that arrogantly aspires to be the manufacturers of our destiny, and make history by beating the electorate senseless with glowing Obama coverage. McCain is learning that the best way to fight the “destiny” makers is to take them on directly. The Drudge Report revealed that after The New York Times published an op-ed by Obama on July 14 laying out his thoughts on Iraq, McCain submitted an op-ed in reply. But the Times rejected it. David Shipley, the deputy editorial page editor, suggested that McCain’s article wasn’t constructive enough to publish. “It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece,” Shipley wrote. “To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq. It would also have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory — with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate.” Republicans and conservatives quickly smelled that Shipley -- a former Clinton aide and New Republic executive editor -- wanted McCain to resubmit an article that “mirrored” Obama’s views. But what the Times really refused to tolerate was any criticism of their precious prince Obama. Announce your own plan for Iraq, fine, but don’t try to grace our pages by saying Obama “mangled the evidence” and has “learned nothing from recent history,” as McCain’s rejected op-ed stated. McCain’s piece would be rejected for prose disparaging Obama’s position: “In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been.” But Shipley had no problem publishing Obama’s article, which bashed McCain for bad judgment in voting for the “grave mistake” of war in Iraq, and claiming that McCain wanted permanent bases in Iraq, like our presence in South Korea. While Shipley demanded McCain recommend a timetable for withdrawal, McCain was clear in his rejected article that he thought a rigid timetable was unwise, even dangerous. The New York Times is out of control. On a regular basis, the news department makes headlines for outrageously biased non-news, such as the incredibly scummy story in February alleging that McCain had a sexual relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman despite the paper’s utter lack of proof. Even their advertising department has gotten into the act. Recall how they made a sweetheart deal with MoveOn.org to slam Gen. David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.” Now it’s the op-ed department, refusing to give McCain the opportunity to respond to Obama because they don’t like the response, period. Meanwhile, over in TV land, the network anchors lined up for their chance to boost Obama’s adventures. In the first days of the trip, it led all the network newscasts, and they praised him aggressively, down to the jump shots he made playing basketball in Kuwait. Now compare that to their coverage of McCain when he went abroad. On a trip in March, the networks amassed four stories in the entire week. CBS gave McCain’s trip ... 10 seconds, 31 words. When McCain went to Colombia and Mexico a couple of weeks ago, ABC beat him up. Five times over the course of two segments on July 2, various “Good Morning America” hosts, reporters and analysts emphasized that McCain’s trip might result in voters thinking he didn’t care about the domestic economic situation. Robin Roberts began her interview: “So, why is Senator McCain abroad when Americans are focused on the economy here at home and losing jobs, more and more jobs?” McCain said the drug trade in Colombia is a serious issue for Americans. But Roberts just plowed ahead, and asked again why on Earth he would go to South America. ABC didn’t want an answer. ABC wanted people to resent McCain for leaving the country. McCain’s campaign is now running Internet ads mocking Chris Matthews for his “thrill up the leg” comments about Obama and other assorted media goo, complete with Frankie Valli crooning “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You” in the background. It’s quite clear that the media are hypersensitive about any mockery of Obama. So mocking his pitter-patter valentines in the media may be the best hardball he can throw. (L. Brent Bozell III is the president of the Media Research Center. Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.)