Pinocchio and Gingrinch (stet)

The A Section of the Washington Post on December 14, 2011 was incredible, i.e., it was full of things that were unbelievable, and there was lots of intelligent commentary thereon.  Most, maybe all of the bombs were thrown by Republican candidates, and I was moved to write the Post again for reasons stated in the letter:

Put Pinocchios on the Front Page

I’m retired and can spend a lot of time with the Washington Post almost every morning.  This morning I was intrigued by how many articles and op-ed pieces picked up on politicians’ half-truths and untruths.  It was Pinocchio running wild.  I don’t know if the rise of Newt Gingrich in the polls is the cause, but he certainly seems to be a serial offender.  I’m not the first to suggest that the Post put something on page 1 to direct readers to stories about how politicians have stretched the truth or worse.  Perhaps a box directing readers to the Fact Checker and other stories would do it or a lead story on the subject with references to other articles along the same line.  The fact that what Gingrich had to say about New York Times reviews of Ronald Reagan’s movies was totally wrong isn’t important.  The fact that he said it is.  Next time what he or another politician says about a real issue could be what causes someone to vote against his or her own interests next fall.  These things are too important to let slip by the attention of busy people who don’t have time to sift through the whole A Section.

I didn't get published, of course.