more from that waste of a tree……

The Sun VS. The Washington Post; A Editorial Battle Of Differences
April 10th, 2006

CITY SCHOOLS MORATORIUM:The Washington Post:
“Baltimore’s Disgrace: Its public schools are an educational disaster area. Political squabbling won’t get them fixed.
….
That’s why the state’s effort to remove 11 schools from Baltimore’s control, including Douglass High, is long overdue. One can quibble over the process leading up to the state’s announcement as well as its timing. But the need for urgent, even dramatic action is clear.”

“Baltimore’s Disgrace: Its public schools are an educational disaster area. Political squabbling won’t get them fixed…..That’s why the state’s effort to remove 11 schools from Baltimore’s control, including Douglass High, is long overdue. One can quibble over the process leading up to the state’s announcement as well as its timing. But the need for urgent, even dramatic action is clear.”
The Baltimore Sun:

“FundamentallyWrong: State schools Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick’s audacious move to take over 11 Baltimore schools is more than a slap in the face to city school officials. It’s a risky - and unnecessary - escalation of the ongoing struggle between the state and the city over how best to fix a chronically ailing school system.”

VOTING BILLS:

The Washington Post:

“IN THE SANCTIFIED name of expanding the popular vote and widening access to the polls, Maryland Democrats have sacrificed fairness to partisan advantage. The Democrats, who dominate the state legislature in Annapolis, pushed through a bill allowing voting to take place for five days before Election Day — but mostly at polling stations in Democratic strongholds.”

The Baltimore Sun:
We note here that The Sun’s editorial board has refused to publish an editorial or position on this matter as of this time.

Different Versions Of AP Stories On Senate Override Of City Schools Veto
April 10th, 2006

The Sun and The Washington Post each ran Associated Press stories regarding the Senate’s override of Governor Ehrlich’s veto on city schools, but they were noticeably different AP versions. The Sun’s AP version included:

“City lawmakers and Mayor Martin O’Malley decried the move as an attempt to embarrass O’Malley, a Democrat running for governor. ”

The Washington Post’s version simply told you what the synopsis of the vote, vote count, and how it followed the house vote.

A New Name: ‘Republican Ehrlich’

“Veto overrides: The Democrat-controlled Assembly could vote on bills aimed at Republican Ehrlich that would require resubmission of Cabinet appointments and restrict fundraising by University of Maryland System regents.”

He’s gone from Mr. Ehrlich to ‘Republican Ehrlich’. We wonder why The Sun would change how he is referenced?

We also personally found the Washington Post coverage on the last day of session more thorough and better presented:

What You Won’t Find In Today’s The Sun
April 10th, 2006

The WSJ comes right out and says off the bat that etiquitte don’t apply to Steele and cite The Sun as an example.

The Sun Continues To Carry O’Malley Torch With City Schools Funding Article
April 10th, 2006

“The chairman of the Baltimore school board said last night that the school system is not taking away resources from successful schools to fund failing ones, and he contended that the system remains underfunded by the state.”
…
“The statement called a state claim that the system is adequately funded “unconscionable.”

Morris’ comments came as the state Senate prepares to vote today on whether to override Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.’s veto of a bill imposing a one-year moratorium on outside takeovers of 11 Baltimore schools.”

Now let’s compare the actual funding contribution increases from the state and the city over the last three years.

Contribution Increases Since 2003 (as described in Saturday’s entry)
State: $176 million (28% increase)
City: $571,000 (.33% increase)

Now let’s recall a previous The Sun commentary of Chairman Brian D. Morris from before (As noted in our April 2nd entry):

“This political [expletive] is eroding our ability to educate the children of our city,” said Chairman Brian D. Morris.”
…
“Morris is allied with O’Malley.” The Sun 4/02/2006

We must ask why The Sun failed to identify Morris’ political affiliations in this current article? Chairman Morris’s anti-state commentary could easily be explained by his political role, but The Sun selectively discloses these affiliations to readers.

There is also the question of why did The Sun fail to provide it’s readers with these funding increase statistics? This is the second time in the last week that The Sun has failed to disclose these important numbers and the only answer for non-disclosure that we can think of is to protect the Mayor.According to The Sun, Secretary Grasmick was unavailable for comment so the only quotes in the article came from Brian D. Morris. Was there really no one that could have at least provided the state’s reasoning? Will there be a follow-up article from the state’s perspective? Stay tuned.

the Sun Lies….

do you ever feel dirty after you read the Sun??