Update: Additional material on the Freeploid which, just like the Herald/Times Argus, endorsed Doug Hoffer in 2010. New stuff is in bold italic print below and at the end of my piece.

Okay, so the two biggest newspaper organizations in Vermont have endorsed Vince Illuzzi for Auditor: the Freeploid on Oct. 25, and the Herald/Times Argus on the 30th.

In reality, the endorsements will sway a handful of voters at most. But they are so completely illogical that they deserve some deconstruction.

Both are excellent examples of reaching a conclusion and then cobbling together an argument to support it. In both cases, the logic is torturous and the writers ignore inconvenient truths. And in both cases, the newspapers have reversed themselves, having heartily endorsed Doug Hoffer for Auditor in 2010.

First, I take you back to October 27, 2010, and the editorial pages of the Herald and Times Argus:

Hoffer offers an impressive resume of work done for the state on numerous complex issues related to jobs and economic development. Professionalism at a remove from partisan politics is what the auditor’s office needs, and that is what Doug Hoffer promises to deliver.

Yep, the Herald and Times Argus endorsed Doug Hoffer over four-year incumbent Tom Salmon. The editors said Hoffer “has exhibited a high degree of expertise and professionalism during his campaign,” and would bring to the job “years of experience monitoring state finances and the economy,” and “His analysis of the numbers always appears incisive and independent of special interests.”

And it quoted a certain State Senator, Vince Illuzzi, calling Hoffer “an invaluable resource.”

This year, however, expertise and professionalism and independence and inciseiveness and an impressive resume seem to have become less pertinent.

Illuzzi is not a traditional “numbers guy” by profession. His background is as a lawyer. Slipping into the state auditor’s role will require a learning curve, and perhaps some whiplash in having to keep tabs on the office’s constitutional duties that have been outsourced in recent years.

Oh. Ah. (Cough.) I see.

This year, the Mitchell Family Organ is happy to jettison expertise and professionalism in favor of a guy who’ll need on-the-job training and might even suffer a case of “whiplash.” Well, that’s a novel way of looking at things. (They also ignore Illuzzi’s intention to continue as Essex County State’s Attorney for an indefinite period of time, which will definitely slow his learning curve.) What else does Illuzzi bring to the job?

Illuzzi has had to be part of the action, whether it was throwing support behind projects for his constituents in the Northeast Kingdom, or around Windsor County, in greater Rutland or across central Vermont.

So he brings home the bacon for his constituents. Does the term “pork barrel” ring a bell?

He is a political machine, and he remains a publicity hound.

Oh, come on now. I think you’re just playing with us. Are you honestly trying to elect this guy? I guess so, but I don’t really understand why. Can you give me a reason, O Mighty H/TA?

But now, in the face of ever-tightening state budgets, we believe it is time to let Illuzzi loose to see what he can do to make a more efficient, streamlined government.

What the hell, give ol’ Vince a shot, see what happens. Yeah, I’d rather do that than elect someone with professionalism and expertise and integrity and two decades of directly relevant experience.

Uh, excuse me, Editorial Board, but you’re not convincing me. And it doesn’t help that you acknowledge the ethics violations on Illuzzi’s record; those might be considered pertinent in a campaign for a position that could be characterized as Chief Financial Ethicist. Do you really want a “political machine” with questionable ethics as your Auditor?

Really?

You know, Doug Hoffer could make a hell of a campaign ad for himself by quoting this endorsement. That is, he could if he was interested in negative campaigning, which he isn’t.

Let’s not forget something that goes unmentioned in this editorial: Vince Illuzzi didn’t plan to run for Auditor; he wanted to run for Attorney General. He switched to Auditor only because it was an easier path to a statewide office with a full-time salary. This endorsement seems to rely on the real unspoken argument of the Vince Illuzzi campaign: He’s been around for a long time, we all know the guy, so let’s give him a gold watch.

And one more bit of rhetorical legerdemain: While the endorsement does not refer to Hoffer’s party affiliation (Democrat and Progressive), it manages to call Illuzzi “The Democrat-Republican from Newport.” And while it’s technically true that Illuzzi has run for State Senate as both Republican and Democrat, he is first and foremost a Republican, and he is the GOP’s nominee for Auditor. Calling him “Democrat-Republican” in this context while omitting Hoffer’s party affiliation is deliberately misleading.  

Okay, let’s turn our attention to the Freeploid’s endorsement, which is oddly brief — only three paragraphs. Less than two hundred words. Or, in professional writers’ terms, “awfully damn short.”

The editorial begins by recounting his lengthy service in the Legislature — but not his checkered career as a lawyer, including a close shave with disbarment — and then says “It’s time to give this long-serving legislator a shot at a different challenge.”

Good God. Just like the Herald/TA. Let’s give ol’ Vince a shot, see what he can do.

And here’s the second of the three paragraphs, in its entirety. How do you like this logic?

Illuzzi has made many friends and acquaintances from all areas of the political arena in his time as a state senator, but he has been one to always speak his mind. Meanwhile, he has always kept his finger in the air to check the shifting winds.

Whaaaaaat? Your idea of a good Auditor is a glad-hander with friends in high places who’s always mindful of “the shifting winds”? What about independence and relevant experience? Integrity? Professionalism? I guess not:

People know Vince Illuzzi as an insider. For 32 years he has strolled the halls of the capitol building. But they also know him as a capable deal maker, someone who is quite clever and can get things done.

Oh, that’s even better. An insider, a deal maker. And somehow, after that description of the ultimate old pol, the Freeploid concludes that “Vince Illuzzi will be an effective watchdog.”

Huh?

“Lapdog,” I can see. That’s exactly what the Freeploid just spent two paragraphs describing. Where they get “effective watchdog” from that, I have no f’in idea.

One thing you won’t see in the Freeploid’s endorsement: the name “Doug Hoffer.” Not one single time do they mention him by name. Which is one reason why the ‘Loid’s endorsement is so brief: I guess the comparison would have been too embarrassing to mention.

It’s kind of an impressive rhetorical feat: both editorials are full of criticisms and backhanded compliments for Illuzzi, to the point where you’re expecting the papers to opt for Hoffer. And somehow they manage to endorse Illuzzi. Impressive, in a “WTF” sort of way.

The Freeploid took exactly the opposite tack two years ago, endorsing Hoffer on October 22, 2010 as the candidate “who would bring deep knowledge of how government works and a record of tracking down inefficiencies in Montpelier to the office of state auditor.” It also praised Doug’s “capable air and sharp focus.”

But the real topper, considering the Freeploid’s endorsement of the ultimate insider Vince Illuzzi this year:

As a Statehouse outsider, Hoffer brings a degree of skepticism about officialdom necessary for a watchdog. As a long-time policy analyst, he is familiar with the nooks and crannies where government information can hide.

Hoffer brings the right combination of experience and attitude to serve as auditor.  

Okay, Freeploid Editorial Board, I’ll bite — what about Doug Hoffer changed in the last two years? And what changed in the Auditor’s job description that you now prefer the insider to the outsider?

That would be nothing, and nothing. The Freeploid’s 180-degree spinaroonie MAKES NO SENSE.