The WSJ gives Ron Johnson a "do-over" on his Great Lakes oil drilling mis-statement so as to be able to characterize commercials from both Johnson and Feingold as "mud-slinging." Chris Walker at Dane 101.com puts the whole mess in context:
The characterization of Feingold as a mudslinger is unfair, if you define slinging mud as being a baseless attack on another candidate. Feingold's accusations against Johnson are definitely merited, given the fact that Johnson said he would support drilling for oil where the oil is (alongside the fact that Johnson has strong economic ties to BP and believes the oil giant is being treated unfairly).
The Wisconsin State Journal is wrongly labeling Feingold a mudslinger for bringing up facts that are...well, facts. And those facts couldn't be any clearer: Ron Johnson supports drilling where the oil is, even when asked if that includes the Great Lakes region. It's not slinging mud when it's the truth, and the Wisconsin State Journal should appreciate that fact, not deride Feingold for bringing it to the voters' attention.
Waxing America called the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel out on this same issue:
Question: When does "yeah" at one point mean "no" subsequently?
Answer: When Ron Johnson, the Republican Party's anointed primary candidate for US Senate, says "yeah" in a response to a WisPolitics question about whether he supported drilling for oil in the Great Lakes, and then issues press releases and TV ads saying he's against it. See Xoff here, here, and here.
Question: How does Johnson get away with it?
Answer: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial page helpfully ignores the "yeah" and selectively quotes Johnson to make his position(s) less contradictory, and then blames both Johnson and Feingold for slinging mud.
Answer: Johnson's campaign must be supported for its entertainment value (and its unlimited advertising budget).
- Barry Orton