Print This Post Print This Post

Jul

19

Plain D: Strickland, judicial panel face political conundrum w/Dann’s help


I don’t really understand these kinds of editorials. What impact is desired? Who is actually being addressed?

Is it like a letter from the media to the governor saying, we just want you to know our opinion, which is that if you pick this choice, be prepared to have an ironclad case for how she exceeds the others?

And if that’s the case, okay, so then what?

I don’t know.

Here’s the PD’s story on a judicial opening and Marc Dann’s recommendation. And, fyi, the PD seems to be the only paper that I could find that’s done a story on this matter.

I agree in general with the editorial’s sentiments: the panel needs to make a best choice recommendation and the governor should follow that and Marc Dann will have to live.

But still, the more basic question: why do editors write and publish an editorial that merely seems to say, we’re watching and if you choose this one particular choice, beware, with me inferring that the PD will then feel justified in crucifying the decision since the editorial already outlines why the editors believe that there are in fact choices better than Dann’s recommendation.

Thoughts?

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:03 pm July 19th, 2007 in Politics 

Comments

Leave a Reply




"));