The Des Moines Register's endorsement of Mitt Romney is so poorly conceived, inelegantly constructed and laughably substantiated, it (nearly) leaves me speechless.
[T]he nation’s single most important challenge: pulling the economy out of the doldrums, getting more Americans back in the workforce in meaningful jobs with promising futures, and getting the federal government on a track to balance the budget in a bipartisan manner that the country demands....
[On all this] Mitt Romney emerges the stronger candidate.... He was an accomplished governor in a liberal state. He founded and ran a successful business that turned around failing companies. He successfully managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.
The economy is pulling out of the doldrums, Americans are going back to work, and anybody who believes that Romney's grotesque, $5 trillion giveaway at the poor's expense will somehow get us on a bipartisan "track" to a balanced budget is either weirdly hallucinatory or just plain drunk.
An "accomplished governor," which, in the Register's opinion, means effectively bipartisan? The NY Times: "He vetoed scores of legislative initiatives and excised budget line items a remarkable 844 times" and left office with a dismal approval rating (in the mid-30s). Romney was a "successful" businessman who "turned around failing companies"? Rolling Stone: "Mitt Romney actually made his fortune ... by borrowing vast sums of money that other people were forced to pay back." Romney "successfully managed" the 2002 Olympics? Mother Jones, quoting Sports Illustrated, from 2001: "The $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars that Congress is pouring into Utah is 1.5 times the amount spent by lawmakers to support all seven Olympic Games held in the U.S. since 1904—combined."
OK, having said that, now I'm speechless.