NAVIGATION
|
NEWS TIPS!RightMichigan.com
Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?Tweets about "#RightMi, -YoungLibertyMI, -dennislennox,"
|
Brian Dickerson and feminismBy MollyB, Section News
Freep columnist Brian Dickerson defends the Governor's right to be ineffective all on her own ... without a man's help!
You know, sometimes you can't make this stuff up. Free Press columnist Brian Dickerson, whose aversion to -- nope, make that hatred of -- all things Republican is evident from his columns, writes about whether First Gentleman Dan Mulhern carries undue weight in the Governor's decision-making: "Does first spouse have last word?"
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070608/COL04/706080332/1085
A key passage from the column: "....Detroit News Editorial Page Editor Nolan Finley cited the mid-May collapse of a 2007 budget agreement between Granholm and state Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop as a recent example of the Mulhern Effect.
Dickerson's central premise seems to be that, by golly, critics in the state Legislature and elsewhere just aren't giving the Governor her due, by portraying her as her husband's puppet. What sexism, he cries, to suppose that a woman can't make stupid decisions on her own: Now, this is an astonishing column for all sorts of reasons. But let's take a couple of the most obvious: Dickerson wrote an entire column to make the point that the Governor's stupid decisions and lack of leadership are her own fault, not Mulhern's. The real problem is not with the Governor, he implies, but with the sexist jerks who don't take her seriously. Brian, did you ever suppose that the reason she's not taken seriously is that the Governor is just not effective? And that the supposition which you find so offensive -- that her husband or someone else close to her is calling the shots behind the scenes -- is far less important than the fact that the state is going down the tubes under her leadership?
But no. Dickerson's not concerned with genuine leadership, as evidenced by this column in yesterday's Freep:
At least Dickerson shoots down the Governor's pretense that she is obligated to fill open judicial seats, needed or not. But his main beef seems to be that he hasn't found anyone, except Court of Appeals Chief Judge William Whitbeck, to come up with a more plausible reason for retaining the judicial status quo: Dickerson's position, in this and a previous column, is that Chief Justice is advocating not filling unneeded judgeships out of pure politics. Um, do you suppose it could have anything to do with the money? Granted, the Chief Justice is up for re-election next year. He'd have to be a damn fool, or a saint, not to factor in the voters' likely reaction to a candidate who's trying to cut the cost of government. But sainthood isn't a requirement of candidacy, last time I checked. I'm not particularly interested in whether the Chief Justice thinks his position will play well with the voters. I'm just interested in whether he's right about some judgeships being unnecessary. And, if he turns out to be right, in whether our elected representatives have the guts to reduce our tax burden. In short, in effective leadership.
Brian Dickerson and feminism | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
Brian Dickerson and feminism | 22 comments (22 topical, 0 hidden)
|