NOTE TO READERS
On Wednesday, the Star Tribune reprinted a column by David Brooks of the New York Times. I didn't choose it for publication, but had I been making selections that day, I surely would have. It was exquisite satire -- mocking media and opposition stereotypes about Mitt Romney by audaciously mimicking them, while implicitly conceding that stereotypes are formed from a kernel of truth.
The responses were numerous and impassioned: Either Brooks (and the Star Tribune by extension) had bashed the Republican nominee in a totally lame and unprofessional manner, or he (and we) had finally seen the light -- thus demonstrating that satire is a delicate art that usually doesn't translate in the newspaper venue, even though we try now and then.
The other topic dominating the letters has been the convention, and we're turning the rest of today's package over to it. It's imbalanced, but it accurately reflects the tilt of the letters we've received in the last 48 hours, from a community of correspondents that's generally more liberal than conservative and that is responding to the news of the day.
DAVID BANKS, ASSISTANT COMMENTARY EDITOR
* * *
PAUL RYAN
Star Tribune lionizes him, despite falsehoods
In his speech at the Republican convention on Wednesday, Paul Ryan did not honestly portray President Obama's views on Medicare, or his own. He played very loosely with facts and numbers regarding the deficit and debt. And he blamed the president for the closing of an auto plant in Janesville, Wis., that happened to close a month before the president took office.
The Romney campaign continues to endorse commercials suggesting that the president has done away with any work provision attached to the welfare laws, a commercial that has been panned by a number of independent fact-checkers as blatantly false.
Yet, despite all this, the Star Tribune hails Ryan as a candidate who "vows to seize [the] calling of a generation." Very heroic words, based on a very dubious narrative. I do wish that news organizations would call out candidates (on both sides of the aisle) for blatant falsehoods and distortions, rather than serving as their cheerleaders and waterboys. It would serve the public well to hear some truth mixed in with their partisanship for a change.