This week’s dust-up with Boston mayoral candidate John Connolly receiving the endorsement from Stand for Children, along with the group’s initial intent to put funding behind that endorsement, has predictably brought out the hypocrisy of several prominent players.
I am happy that Stand for Children has recognized Connolly’s commitment to improving Boston schools and his willingness to take real steps to do so. I am also happy that he has declined the financial commitment that was offered (“Connolly rejects outside funding,” Page A1, Aug. 22).
Suffolk District Attorney Daniel Conley, another candidate for mayor, was quick to denounce the $500,000 pledge to Connolly from Stand for Children, ignoring the size of his campaign war chest and the fact that it has been amassed largely from the legal community. If the district attorney wants to stand up for campaign purity, perhaps he would view donations from lawyers as a potential conflict of interest.
And then there is Boston Teachers Union president Richard Stutman, who receives assistance from his national union to take a local teachers survey, and uses his position to take further shots at changes that could improve our schools (“Union poll shows voters favor like-minded mayoral hopefuls,” Metro, Aug. 21).
Perhaps the Globe’s headline on the survey should have read, “Only about one-third of teachers rate Boston schools as good.”