From the endorsement interviews: Picking neither of the above

Rep. Bill Sali wrapped up his meeting with the Statesman editorial board — and challenger Matt Salisbury — with a quip for his opponent.

"Don't worry," Sali told Salisbury, "they're going to endorse you."

Turns out we couldn't endorse either candidate in the 1st Congressional District race (click here for this morning's editorial).

Some readers will think we copped out. I see it a little bit differently.

We did not endorse Sali in the 2006 Republican primary or the general election, and frankly, our board didn't see much in the past 16 months to change our mind. In Salisbuury, we saw a newcomer who just doesn't seem ready for the challenges of filling one of Idaho's two seats in the House of Representatives.

We were left to choose between an incumbent with whom we frequently disagree, or a challenger who just doesn't seem ready for the job. Given the choices, I think a non-endorsement is more honest with readers.

A footnote: Sali spokesman Wayne Hoffman took issue with a phrase in this morning's editorial. In describing an appropriations bill, containing money for highway projects in the 1st District, I said that Sali had neglected to mention his no vote on the bill.

Sali mentioned the no vote in the last paragraph of a press release touting the highway projects; the press release's headline reads: "HOUSE APPROVES CONGRESSMAN SALI’S FUNDING FOR U.S. 95 WIDENING." Click here to read the release.

"Lying by omission" once again

Nothing new but I like how KR try’s to blow it off as a debate over "a phrase".

What the Mistakesman did was intentionally misrepresent Rep. Sali.

Now hailing a bill that you voted against is an odd strategy for sure but it is very clear the non-endorsement was a clear cheap shot at Sali.

I also think that dismissing Salisbury's experience defending our country (an Iraq war combat veteran) as "just doesn't seem ready for the job" is a slap in the face of all Idaho vets who have sacrificed much (and some all) to defend KR's right to write his agenda driven editorial page.

The prerequisites for good statesmanship...

are significantly higher than the prerequisites for good soldiering. That is not to say I think Sali is a good statesman. Let's see how the democrat does.


A former soldier.

What has being a soldier got to do with any guarantees at all?

It's a nice ideas whose premise may be leaky as a rusty water tower. There's a lot more to it than that.

Very few soldiers atttain a higher leadership position period. E3 or E4 so to speak. Likewise some high graduates with important degrees may never have a clue while Joe Dirt Sponge of Sunnybrook Fruit Farm changes Idaho life and times.

Sight is being lost quickly as we move along.

BSali is all about representing Idaho gun owners.

All over the ATF about their leatherman tools with the foreclosure yada. The things this republican does to secure a vote. If there is any one thing that'll get a vote in Idaho, it's bashing anti gun laws or government agencies restricting guns. Nobody is protecting your gun rights. When the time comes, republicans will join in to take them away.

The people in Idaho aren't going to need their guns before long anyway. Not after the land give away where ranchers end up with all the best hunting lands & then sell to out of state contributors. The rich will build lodges for their private clubs with air strips. How is the average Idahoan going to afford a $5,000 a year membership to a club so as to hunt on land that used to be public, on $8 an hour jobs? Conservative?

Keep going for that republican spin, you'll catch on. BSali shouldn't be refered to as an incumbent, incompetent is a better fit.