Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Journal endorsement baseless?

This is not about whom the editors endorsed (or didn't) link.

It is about the basis of their endorsement.

I aver and allege, their entire endorsement is based on the responses candidates wrote to six questions asked by the Journal.  Candidates were given 50 words; the equivalent of 20 seconds, to answer.

The editors did not actually interview a single candidate.

They chose to not cover stories that would influence voters, including but not limited to;

  • The ethics, standards and accountability crisis and scandal in the leadership of the APS, or
  • the possibility of community member seats on school board committees.

The endorsed candidates whom they may well never have even met.

They endorsed a candidate who on page one they write, link;
they must sue in District Court in order to compel to tell the simple truth about her stewardship of the people's trust and treasure.

I will bow of course, as usual, to controverting evidence.

No comments: