Apparently the Editorial Boards of each of these newspapers prefer the victims of government corruption/abuse take the law into their own hands. God forbid these victims can look to their elected officials and rely upon them to exercise their fiduciary duty to “protect individual rights”. Or, if necessary, to be able to seek “redress” for their harms through a fair judicial system. If these ‘civil actions’ no longer work, then the people are no longer in control of our government and our only defenses are revolt, rebellion, or violence.
Scheidler’s candidacy is all about “CIVIL” remedies to solve disputes that address government misconduct. But “civil” is not a word newspapers relish. It is revolt, rebellion and violence that make the news. The greater the misery, means, for these newspapers, the higher their revenue. After all, who buys a newspaper to read a story about another day of law and order? No one! It is stories about increasing homelessness, drug abuse, crime, taxes, sex trafficking, declining education … that sell newspapers. In other words, the New’s Tribune and the Kitsap Sun are vested in the ‘status quo’. Their bottom-line prohibits endorsing a man who sees many of these social wrongs as a symptom of a failing government that is infested with cowards and criminals who ‘turn a blind eye’.
The Tacoma News Tribune’s editorial board characterizes Scheidler’s candidacy for state senate as “a conspiracy-minded crusade against alleged government corruption”. The Kitsap Sun’s says, while admitting it “chose not to interview him”, Scheidler’s campaign is “little more than a personal grudge with the state’s judicial system.”
If the Tacoma News Tribune and the Kitsap Sun’s editorial board “ACTUALLY” interviewed Scheidler, or at least read all that he does for himself and those others who ask for his help, as published here, they could never write what they did.
Scheidler is proud of what he does and has many letters from individuals across the United States who have read of his work, talked with him about their experiences, actually interviewed him, and thanked him for all he does because it is “important work”. But these are just “the People” who know him, not the “editors” who choose not to interview him and then write as if they actually know all about Bill Scheidler.