Record's editorial on City's longstanding Spanish Sunshine violations should have been much stronger

Part of the problem with being friends with all of the City officials is that you can't write tough editorials. See below. Better to bring in a 25-year-old editorial writer or someone else without 40 years of friendships here.

The editorial should have called the trip what it is -- the latest in a long-running series of Sunshine violations by City officials, involving out-of-state meetings, and annual trips to Spain involving two or more Commissioners dating back to the 20th century.

When Richard D. Smyser was editor of the Oak Ridger in Tennessee, my friend James Nelson Ramsey, District Attorney, called Smyser's editorials "namby-pambies," or "not withouts." Smyser didn't write many editorials that did not use the phrase "not without."

Editorials should be strong. Editorials should inspire.

Editorials should not kiss up to the rich and powerful (or their works and pomps).

Reading Margo Pope's editorials (below) on the Spain trip and the Foundation, one wonders, whose side is she on? And why on Earth did she say that Pedro Menendez de Aviles was a "patron saint" (sic) of our City when he was a sinner like everyone else, having order the murder of a Gay French interpreter in 1566?

And why did Margo Pope reprint a homophobic editorial from the right-wing Chattanooga Free-Press on the Gay marriage decision, which used hostile pejoratives without quoting the decision or its inexorable logic?

Does the Record support reactionary bigotry and Sunshine violations?

Does the Record not wish to put its best foot forward with literate, informed editorials, instead of "namby-pambies" and "not withouts?"

Could the Record actually do research before writing editorials, instead of letting Mayor Boles and John Regan whisper sweet nothings in its ear in meetings of the all-white St. Augustine Record editorial board?

What do you reckon?