I’m very disappointed. Every Wednesday and Friday I get an Optimist and read it; I enjoy it and learn about the campus through it. As the elections drew nearer I assumed the Optimist would, as most papers do, endorse a candidate the editorial board feels would best serve Texas. I was not surprised about seeing the endorsements, but rather the endorsements themselves. In the Nov. 1 issue the editorial featured endorsements of Rep. Charlie Stenholm for the House of Representatives and Attorney General John Cornyn for Senate. I didn’t like the way Cornyn was endorsed, if that’s what it was called.

The writer initially presented Mr. Cornyn as his choice for Senate; he was not mentioned again until the end of the editorial. I don’t like that an endorsement of Mr. Cornyn is considered to be a tongue-lashing of Ron Kirk. Throughout the “endorsement,” the writer presents how Ron Kirk is essentially a black Bill Clinton that, if elected, would crush West Texas into the dust that already swirls around on windy days.

Kirk is attacked as leaving the Dallas Independent School System in shambles; I’m not from Dallas but I do know that DISD was pretty messed up long before Kirk left and continues to struggle under the city’s new leadership. The mayor of Dallas is not directly responsible for how the school district is run; that’s left to what we like to call a Board of Trustees. It’s job is to run the school district along with the superintendent, and the mayor does not play an integral part in the process.

The editorial goes on to criticize Kirk for his less-than-conservative ideas and his supposed neglect of West Texas. I’m not bothered by this criticism; in fact, I feel it’s great because it allows people to see the point of view being presented them.

However, if you are going to endorse a candidate, it’s more appropriate to actually explain why you think the candidate is better than the others. This was done in the section endorsing Stenholm and the argument of not choosing Rick Perry or Tony Sanchez was, in my opinion, made. But I’m still wondering why John Cornyn is just so great that I should vote for him to be my Senator for the next six years. I feel that in this instance the Optimist has not done a proper job informing the audience of why this candidate is better than any other.

Johnathan Eaves