Another reckless, careless and ill thought editorial in Wednesday’s print edition calls for a rush to action by incumbent commissioners. Obviously fearing that, so called development-friendly commissioners, Whitty and Stufflebean, will not be around much longer, the paper urges a quick vote on mineral leases and LNG pipelines. In the process they make some amazing unsubstantiated claims about the challengers while at the same time asking their readers to leave their fate in the hands of expected losers and sort of throwing those losers under the bus. (Remember John Griffith’s parting act in office).

Sometime soon, opponents of LNG and Chromite mining probably will argue for delaying both decisions until 2011, when November’s winners are sworn in. The ploy is clever politics because Jackson and fellow challenger Larry Van Elsberg are perceived as less development-friendly than Stufflebean and Whitty. Opponents of the projects will hope one or both will form an anti-development alliance with the third commissioner, Bob Main.

The World, of course, has no evidence whatsoever that anyone is anti-development. Worse, look at Whitty’s miserable ‘development-friendly’ track record. A $50M 12″ pipeline that was touted as bringing in 2900 jobs to Coos County, providing infrastructure for new business, a nice tax base to fund schools, libraries, public safety, yada, yada, yada,… instead has cost the county millions and unemployment has risen. Even Kevin Stufflebean called the pipeline a ‘fiasco’. To this day the ‘fiasco’ continues to cost the county thousands of dollars every month and every mile was ‘development-friendly’ Whitty’s precious baby.

Is it any wonder that reasonable observers of that $50M boondoggle, development scheme would exercise prudence? Hell no! Thank goodness their are cooler heads who know better than to fall ‘hook, line and sinker’ for every scheme promising jobs and prosperity that comes along. The World editorial staff are not among them, they would have us throw caution to the winds and leave everything up to ‘losers’ before winners can take office.

It is a sort of ‘hurry up before the electorate throw you out, do your dirty deeds before your previous bad judgment catches up with you’, argument. Very odd. What is in it for The World, I wonder?