Letter: Questions editorialThe “Poor judgment by Madison judge” editorial (‘Our View’—Hudson Star Observer, March 15, 2012) left this reader confused in several ways, not just because the editorial was so poorly written and contradictory in several instances.
By: Richard Timmerman, River Falls, Hudson Star-Observer
The “Poor judgment by Madison judge” editorial (‘Our View’—Hudson Star Observer, March 15, 2012) left this reader confused in several ways, not just because the editorial was so poorly written and contradictory in several instances. The latter was especially true when the writer(s) called upon the judiciary to be impartial (which I agree with), but without offering any real evidence or convincing argument that Circuit Judge David Flanagan is not impartial.
I find this especially interesting since the HSO editorial staff has never chosen to chastise Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman for findings by the Wisconsin Judicial Committee that he knowingly engaged in unethical campaign practices while running for the seat he now holds. Nor have I read word one in any of your editorials any questioning of David Prosser’s physical actions and conduct against another Wisconsin Supreme Court justice this past summer. Again, the Wisconsin Judicial Commission has filed a complaint, asking that Prosser be disciplined. Is there political bias in how the HSO staff writes and/or approves materials for its editorials? I continue to believe there is, based on the newspaper’s ownership and the current editor.
It is also interesting that the HSO editor, Doug Stohlberg, recently reviewed in print all of the rules and guidelines for letters to the editor submitted to this paper. I, for example, must supply my name, address and phone number, as well as agree to editing by the HSO staff. Writers of letters to the editor lay it all out (and you say this is what you want), but why, then, is it not also appropriate that HSO editorials be attributed to the person(s) who writes them? It would be interesting to have this question answered.
As a final point, any person who thinks that our elections of judges to state judicial positions are, in fact, non-partisan, lives in a fantasy world. Any editorial comment on that?