I think Rob Clemm's editorial for this week's paper is even dumber than usual. And it's about Howard Dean, so there's a bit of patriotism (home-statism, whatever) mixed up in my indignation. I want to do something about it, but I don't know what. The CT has this rule against CT staff (or maybe just editors) writing stuff commenting on things printed in the CT. (Come to think of it, I don't know off the top of my head why that rule even exists, but I'm not going to get it changed in the next two days, so forget it.)
So what can I do? I've already written something very caustic which points out the two or three bigger instances of stupidity in his editorial and calls him out on it, but it's not printable. The by-the-book option is to write an editorial for next week just taking the opposite position from what he wrote, only referring to his editorial tangentially if at all. But that's no fun. Other options are to write a letter to an editor under a pseudonym or to sign a friend's name to the thing I've already written or ask someone to write a similar piece, but those are all somewhat dishonest. I could also print and distribute copies of my critique myself, but almost no one would see them.
Maybe I should send a version of the thing I've written to the College Republicans. After all, the point I'm making is that Rob Clemm is stupid (stupid, inarticulate, unskilled in written communication, whatever) not that all of his ideas are. I've said before that conservatives need to choose better spokespeople. Maybe that's the way I should go with this.