Feeling a "Distraction"
Their arguments seem to be on the notion that this is a frivolous lawsuit and we should just leave the charter schools to do their thing.
Another tissue I found is that some of these editorials so closely mirror each other (down the the use of the word "distraction" in two headlines) that you would think someone faxed out talking points. The Times uses the word four times.
Still another issue is that some of them are saying it's the teachers union and"a coalition of groups." Why wouldn't they acknowledge who is in that group which includes parents and solid citizen, non-union groups like League of Women Voters and El Centro de la Raza? Why? Because they know it would not serve their viewpoint to be honest on who stood up to put their names on the lawsuit.
It's also of interest that some editorials leave out that there appear to be a couple of constitutional issues and instead, tell their readers it's about"thwarting the will of the voters." The Times goes so far as to say it's an"intimidation tactic."
It's a sad day when trying to stand up for the constitution is considered a bad Seattle Schools Community Forum: Feeling a "Distraction":
