I had the time to read the already-notorious Des Moines Register endorsement of Romney today. It’s not fit to put fish ‘n’ chips on, if you ask my opinion. So much of it is a combination about whining about how Obama doesn’t provide them with that tingly feeling anymore (though they do admit the obstruction is the Republicans’ fault, not that that gets him off the hook), and a hefty dose of “Moderate Mitt” horsedung that you’d figure tough, cynical reporters ought to be able to see through in a second. Not so much:

Romney should not squander an opportunity to build consensus in Washington by wasting time on issues that animate many in his party. We cannot rewind the clock on progress for minorities, women, gays and lesbians. We must make it easier for immigrants to come here to live and work legally and stop making criminals of those who are living here lawfully, paying taxes and raising families. The federal government must continue to insist on clean air and water and encourage clean and renewable energy.

Is there any doubt that Romney would, if elected, rewind the clock on progress for minorities, women, gays and lesbians (not to mention seniors, the infirm, and peace)? Admittedly, Romney not be able to accomplish all this, particularly if the Senate remains in Democratic hands. But he could do a fair amount with only the White House, and it’s crazy to think that a Republican House majority that has passed over thirty antiabortion bills this Congress even though they had no hope of passing would just kind of shrug and move on come January. Right? Even were Mitt inclined to be a moderate wise Burkean of David Brooks’s deepest longings, it simply wouldn’t matter. Under this umbrella lies many of the right’s most cherished crusades, and President Romney would isolate himself by trying to shut those things down. Has Romney ever shown a willingness to stake out a lonely position on a matter of principle? The interest groups of the Republican Party are what they are, and no amount of careful rhetoric will change that. The only way of changing it would be to disempower those groups, ideally by having them remain out of power long enough so that they are forced to change their ideas. A Romney victory would be devastating to every one of the aforementioned groups because Republican interests have become more radical over the past few years. And why in the hell would the man who boasts about how much he likes coal suddenly start advocating clean energy, anyway?

I like how this is considered fresh thinking, if “fresh” means “what they propose every damn time”:

Throughout the campaign, he has expressed faith in the private sector to fuel a more robust economic recovery if it has more confidence that the federal government will not be an obstacle. Romney has a strategy for job growth through tax and regulatory relief for small businesses, encouraging all forms of domestic energy production, education that prepares graduates with job skills, expanding foreign trade and reducing the burden of federal deficits.

It’s pretty clear what happened here. Both candidates were interviewed for this endorsement. Romney, as is his single talent, was able to tell his audience exactly what they wanted to hear, and flattered their received conventional wisdom to a sufficient degree to win the endorsement, while Obama tried to keep what he said off the record and presumably didn’t flatter them all that much. What’s interesting is that the feeling used to be that the press was a cynical, tough, no-bullshit, call-a-horse-a-horse institution. For a time, it might even have been that. What the Register shows is that, ultimately, they seem to reach decisions in a way no different from the way that low-information voters do–well, how does he seem? Is he a good man? Does he say he’s going to be independent and bipartisan? Eh, whatever. I don’t want a president independent of his (or, eventually, her) party, the only guys ever to do that were Jimmy Carter and John Tyler, two of the biggest disasters in American presidential history in no small part because of that fact. I do want people whose jobs involves some familiarity with newsworthy events to actually have a command of them. And the notion that Romney, whose campaign has been characterized by some of the most obnoxious partisanship in the history of America, is a secret bipartisan moderate because he said so a few days ago is the sort of ignorance you have to work at. Congratulations, Des Moines Register ed board, you have fewer critical thinking skills than the average voter. Iowans would be better off getting their political news from Saturday Night Live than you.

P.S. While I was writing this piece I read an equally good but different take by Ed Kilgore. You owe it to yourself.