Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Sunday, May 13, 2012

HOW CAN THE DAILY TIMES SAY THAT?

In its recent editorial about the numerous e-mails between Martin O’Malley and the lawyer who represents Perdue, the Daily Times was quick to suggest that there is nothing sinister about their close relationship. Among other things it proclaimed to readers that in the e-mails “there's no smoking gun, no threats of retaliation or demands, no indication of capitulation on key issues.” The piece bears the subtitle “'Cozy relationship' lacks evidence of corruption”

Although the disclosed portion of the e-mails – there is some “redaction” of the text -- may not contain a “smoking gun” do you really think that two lawyers would place anything of that sort in e-mails that are subject to disclosure under the freedom of information process? Does it occur to the Daily Times that they have other means of communication, both directly and through others, that are virtually impossible for the public (and even a prosecutor) to obtain.

And some of the e-mails involve matters of concern to Perdue, such as the positions and performance of Maryland’s “Secretary of Agriculture” and the effort to clean up the Chesapeake Bay by limiting runoff of pollutants from chicken litter.

We agree with the editorial’s comment that the Perdue-O’Malley relationship “bears watching.” But that is an understatement and fails to address the significant questions: “how” and “by whom”. If that is its recommendation, why does the editorial conclude by bashing the watchdog group (Food and Water Watch) that brought the relationship to public attention by incorrectly suggesting that it had called the relationship corrupt? Apparently the Daily Times feels that it should not be so aggressive in trying to keep the public better informed that the readers of the Daily Times.

Until more is known about the relationship, no meaningful conclusion can be made. The Daily Times editorial is irresponsible journalism.


New Posts to fall below.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Notice that Slick Rick Pollitt is also quick to defend Perdue -- see his absurd statement in the Daily Times trying to persuade us that the poultry industry is not responsible for the sorry state of the Chesapeake Bay,

Pollit and Perdue want to point the finger at development and the City of Salisbury to divert attention from the runoff freom farms, which is the major "non-point source" of the pollution.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't O'Malley's brother work for that Baltimore law firm that represents Perdue?

Anonymous said...

The Daily Times never publishes anything bad about Perdue unless it is all over the media (like this one).

Anonymous said...

Yep brother Peter sure does work for Venable law firm. As I understand he just got hired there this year.

Anonymous said...

Joe:

This has legs -- please keep us informed, because the Daily Times won't.

Anonymous said...

Why would anyone ever give the Daily Times an ounce of belief about anything? Their reporters are incompetent and questionable. Their editors are biased about everything and disclose any of their own "special connections" like to the Board of Ed or Mike Dunn.

Anonymous said...

There's a simple answer to the question about the Daily Times.

Do you know Greg Bassett?

Anonymous said...

It takes more than one of those special easter eggs to get O'Malley's support.

Anonymous said...

Yea, our Governor works for all of us "folks". A man of the people.

All of his constitutents are equal, some more then others.

As George Carlin once said, "It's a big club, and you ain't in it!"

Anonymous said...

The Baltimore Washington metroplex polluted the bay 40 years ago...not eastern shore farmers

Anonymous said...

What's the fuss? Opinions essays by an editorial writer aren't journalism. And you ought to know - after all, you're the president of that club.

Anonymous said...

You really want the state to come down hard on Perdue? You got to pay to play. See what happens if Perdue moves to NC.

Anonymous said...

I don't get it. Perdue (and the chicken industry in general) keeps a lot -- and I mean A LOT -- of people employed in this area. Why would people want to tear down and destroy jobs, especially during a time when finding and keeping one is quite a task?

Protecting the environment is admirable, but keeping food on the table for those on Delmarva (and the surrounding areas touched by the chicken industry) seems exponentially more important to me.

Just keep in mind folks, the other other jobs around here are service industry jobs that pay next to nothing. what am I supposed to do once Perdue and the rest of the chicken companies just get sick of a hostile atmosphere of Maryland, and just decide to move jobs elsewhere?

I shudder at the thought of trying to support my family working at a pharmacy, bank,convenience store, or the local Wall-mart. Not that there's anything wrong with these jobs per say (all honest work is honorable in my eyes, but you'd be lucky to get even close to full time hours, and forget about benefits.

Is this what people really want? Chasing away jobs, and having even more people living hand-to-mouth because all the good paying manufacturing jobs already left, and there is little else to sustain ourselves on. Think about it.

Yes, I work in the chicken industry, and have no qualms about it. Most of us enjoy the products, and having a steady, decent paying job is quite an accomplishment these days.

Anonymous said...

6:46, Ask some of the poultry growers in VA what happened when Pilgrims Pride closed up shop in their neck of the woods.
It turned out to be a blessing.
Look up the Virginia Poultry Growers Cooperative.

Here's a quote taken directly from their website-
"The farmers that make up the cooperative have been growing turkeys for decades. Many of these farms have been passed down through generations. Today the only difference is they grow an even better turkey and the farmers keep the profits."

THE FARMERS KEEP THE PROFITS. And the poultry is real and not some genetically altered, hormone/antibiotic laced piece of flesh some call poultry.