Houston Chronicle Fails HARD with Nonsensical Kubosh Endorsement Editorial
Houston’s largest newspaper prizes experienced hatemonger over reasonable replacement — Again.
In 2015, the Houston Chronicle endorsed Michael Kubosh for City Council in spite of his opposition to HERO and anti-trans rhetoric. They even admitted to being uncomfortable with his position on this issue.
Now, they’ve decided to make the same mistake twice by again endorsing him in 2019.
They start the new editorial backing Kubosh by trying to inoculate themselves from criticism by speaking directly to the issue:
“In the last municipal election cycle, this editorial board endorsed Michael Kubosh for City Council At-Large Position 3 with a significant caveat: His opposition to Houston’s equal rights amendment (HERO) and his use of fear-mongering rhetoric gave us pause.
“If HERO were the only issue on the agenda for City Council’s next term,” we wrote in 2015, “Kubosh’s actions would be reason enough to boot him from office.”
As reasons to look past his wrongheaded views on the gay and transgender community, we pointed to the political skills that helped him pass an amendment to the mayor’s budget, his success in getting the funds needed to fish abandoned cars from the city’s bayous in a joint project with Harris County and his knack for constituent services.”
They continue:
“Kubosh, 68, also described Drag Queen Storytime at the Houston Public Library as a showcase for “adult entertainment” that could potentially harm children. That mindset is troubling, especially for a council member who represents all Houstonians — including members of the gay and transgender community.”
Unfortunately, the editorial goes on to eventually endorse Kubosh anyway, saying:
“As we have done twice before, we recommend Kubosh for city council — with the hope that he will shed misconceptions and biases and work on behalf of all Houston residents.”
🤦
The Chronicle’s “acknowledgement” of their “concerns” about Kubosh are about as useful as Paul Ryan’s “non-endorsement, but support” of Trump. It is a mushy, contradictory position disguised as nuance and thoughtfulness. It plays into some of the worst aspects of the system and rings loudly of MLK’s white moderate; their genteel, troubled backing of a prejudiced bail bondsman shows they would prefer the trains run on time than that people are made whole. It lacks courage, reasonableness, or meaning. Kubosh is not going to “shed misconceptions and biases”; this is how he has governed for his entire tenure.
In the words of Maya Angelou, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
Just as bad, in the same article the piece writes off Janaeya Carmouche in a sentence, saying she and Marcel McClinton “lack the seasoning to be effective council members”. Janaeya is 38 years old. She has been an advocate for two decades. She’s led voter registration drives, worked in mass communications, and was a community relations director for Rodney Ellis, commissioner of a precinct that covered a quarter of Harris County. She knows city politics, had experienced political mentors, and knows how to navigate the system.
To not only downplay her experience but also in particular overrule that experience in favor of someone who spreads hateful, demagogic rhetoric reveals just how much the media filtration process has dulled the Chronicle into unwitting mouthpieces for wretched Establishment policies. It’s not just that Kubosh is the status quo or that he does irreparable harm to Houston, though he does plenty of both. It’s that positioning a technocratic “gets things done” narrative as reason to vote for him in spite of his prejudice against certain Houstonians based on lies and fakery and his profiting on the backs of the poor implicitly makes the case that these things are less important than Kubosh fishing cars out of water.
Every bad actor in the history of any government who had their seat for any significant amount of time can point to “constituent work” they’ve done to make a technocratic difference to their area of governance. That we should ignore their misdeeds to favor their technical work is an insult to Houstonians and the concept of political representation.
The Kubosh decision reinforces what the Chronicle has essentially shown people for years: It prefers to cater to the West University homeowner with a love of sports and a preference for civil, moderate, incrementalistic politics than analyze what would be good for Houstonians as a whole. The Chronicle has an extensive business section, often superficial coverage of city issues, and editorial positions that cater to either the dead center, contrarianism, or both. Funded by the Hearst Corporation and kept in business by revenue streams created by the company’s marketing firm, the Chronicle is all business, all the time, even when it endorses candidates…
No matter who it hurts.
