Today’s Globe editorial clearly makes the case that the ends do justify the means — process be damned. Yeah, we admit the whole thing stunk and it shouldn’t happen again, but live with it Gloucester, we really do know what’s best for you…. Glad to see that Reville was indeed correct in his email to Chester prior to this school’s approval — We all know this stuff happens, it’s just so shocking to see it as boldly flaunted as this whole case has been….
http://www.boston.com/bostongl…
Please share widely!
How can they possibly support the position that the process was broken but its outcome is valid? The school was recommended against by the Charter School Office evaluators and was pushed through by a political maneuver that the Globe admits was unfair. But the school stands why? Because Gloucester needs one, in the Globe’s opinion? Funny, the experts who are paid to independently determine that came to the opposite conclusion. Does the Globe have information they did not? Would the Globe care to share?
<
p>Do the people of Gloucester somehow not merit a fair process like the rest of the citizens in this republic?
<
p>What other areas would you show me a parallel to this logic? Medicine: The treatment has been deemed unlikely to work on your sick child by doctors, but she need sit…because the director of the hospital really thinks so…Ok?
<
p>Law: The judge concluded that the process was unfair, but you still go to jail because we really need someone to be convicted for this…
<
p>If I presented the same logic the Globe was using to my rhetoric professor in college he would have come into the class and slapped me on the head with a hardbound copy of Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason”. Hard.
There’s a logical, valuable discussion about charters to be had, but the Globe simply is uninterested in being part of it.