Journal endorses Balderas Plan.

Ok, what the editors really said was, link;

"The 2009 Legislature needs to ... adequately fund the offices of Attorney General and Auditor so officials can thoroughly and expeditiously investigate and prosecute public corruption." (emphasis added)

It is a Namby Pamby wikilink, endorsement of the
Balderas Plan to audit the culture of corruption out of
existence. It is a call to action, with no call to action.

The editorial headline read;

"Can SF Hear Call for Ethics Reform Now?"

and misses the point entirely.

Unclear still; why will they not insist upon ethics reform?

Does anybody really suppose that SF can't hear, that they
haven't heard?

Does anybody really suppose that the real problem is that
they just don't know that the people want an end to the
culture of corruption?

Or is it that they know full well what the people demand
and are ignoring it, hiding from it, obfuscating it, delaying it,
...

When the right of the Journal to "press", was being protected
by the founding fathers, they were protecting the "newspapers"
of the day; whose headlines read;

Time to Depose Tyrants

Under their headlines, their authors were writing that the tyrants are unlikely to voluntarily surrender their control over the people's power and resources, even to give it back to the people.

They would be telling the people that it was time to pick up their torches and pitchforks, and to gather together on the steps of government, there to take back control over power and resources that are fundamentally their own.

Can the Journal hear the call for ethics reform, now?

Can they hear the call from those who made such incredible
sacrifices to protect their right to press, who would rather that
that privilege not be pissed away in clever headlines with
not the slightest hint of any call to action.