For those who may have missed it the first go-round, be sure to check out Dan Schroeder's letter to the editor, which found its way to the Standard-Examiner hard-copy edition this morning:
• Editorial Board afraid of mayorThis is one of the most accurate and hard-hitting critiques of the Standard-Examiner that we've seen on the editorial pages in quite a long time; and we therefore believe it's well deserving of a reprise. We also believe that the Std-Ex editors are deserving of congratulations for making it available to its print readership. With luck, the Std-Ex editors will also write it down so they don't forget it.
This Std-EX Live! Edition letter has already generated a good number of comments from Standard-Examiner readers; but we see no reason to stop there. So in that connection, we encourage all WCF readers who haven't thrown in their own 2¢ to mosey on over there right now.
And in the course of that... don't forget about our own WCF comments section. Sometimes it gets a mite lonely around here on weekends.
7 comments:
All I can say (on conference weekend) is AMEN, Dan!
It is about time that the truth be told and only time will tell if they are as you describe them to be. For now, though, you are right on the money Dan with what you have said, and I applaud you. Thank you.
funny thing about the comments on the SE site: it starts with the Francis guy from the ch. 17 defending the debate, then it went back and forth about that and deteriorated from there. not much from anyone about dan's article - nor the attitude of the EB on the SE ...
no defense of the EB or agreement with dan about the EB ... funny thing ... just defense of the ch 17 (is ch 17 connected to the EB of the SE?)
just sayin
BB
BB: excellent point. I now almost wish I hadn't mentioned channel 17, because I distracted from the letter's main point. Anyhow, why not go over there and leave a comment about an editorial the SE should have written but didn't?
The head of channel 17, Bill Francis, is married to JaNae Francis of the S-E.
Just another ethically challenged Utah couple, sort of like the Bramharts of Utah County. (Come to think of it, that one is a couple of couples. Only in Utah.)
It's quite funny to browse the comment section. The tiny minds that factless fowers must be trying so desperately to reach.
Dan's accomplishments and contributions are well documented and quite numerous, what's to question.
Fowers on the other has been unable to list one claim accurately that he can attribute to the mayor.
Perhaps this could explain why Francis was called in to provide his diversion. These guys are obsessed with Dan and have no real counter to the content of the letter.
Returning to the topic, it wasn't long ago that the Editorial Board further propogated quite a false premice and in hind sight one might conclude that they are in cahoots with the lying little mayor. They accused the Council of hinding from and not communicating with the mayor. In the course of their opinion the said the mayor is a strong debater, I laughed so hard my gut hurt. I guess they must be impressed by his ability to repeat the same lie over and over, even when his lie has been exposed he never waivers, recall the blank piece of paper he held up in the debate with Mrs. Van Hooser, claiming debt wasn't debt, the geigers roared approval and apparently the editors of the Gondola Examiner recieved a lasting impression, one they still must be suffering the effects of.
If only he'd been right, BDO money would be flowing to something other than subsidizing Neilson and Boyer.
Comment bumped to front page
Post a Comment