Unlike the Helena IR’s editors, who could only bring themselves to say that some people were upset with Senator Burns’ inane remarks, the Missoulian editorial nails it:
Burns’ remarks were characteristic of the kind of know-nothing blather you sometimes hear from the local malcontent in a bar or coffee shop. In this case, Burns claimed to be voicing concerns expressed by some local ranchers. Landowners affected by the fire might be excused, amid stress and loss, for feeling frustration and not understanding why more couldn’t be done to corral a powerful force of nature. But for a U.S. senator to launch such an attack based on his own, sketchy impressions or the uninformed venting of self-appointed experts calls into question Burns’ judgment.
I think Montana can do better than a Senator who sounds like the local drunk pontificating about something he has no idea about. Of course, I do have to temper my praise for the Missoulian a bit. It seems like a reasonable person might have questioned Senator Burns’ judgment well before this. Wonkette offers another reason to question Burns, and a possible explanation for his actions.