The Shredder may not need to live up to the same journalistic standards as a traditional news reporter, but not one shred of evidence
supported the ad hominem attack on Third District Supervisor Adam Hill, which positively reeked of second-hand malice and sour grapes (“Change (back),” Feb. 4). The Shredder may have coyly phrased the accusations as “all being relayed to me second hand. Or would that be third hand?” to deflect responsibility, but that doesn’t absolve The Shredder from allowing her or his forum to be used by a few unnamed but not unknown ideologues who are livid the candidate they backed has actually lived up to his 2008 promises to be independent and avoid cronyism. Perhaps they believed “cronyism” only had to be avoided when the “other guys” were in power.
What The Shredder fails to say is that many of us who are equally committed to environmental causes applaud Hill’s willingness to approach each decision with an open mind and reach out to both sides
for solutions. Perhaps the sour-grapers don’t understand the supervisors are elected without party identification for exactly that reason, so (much like judges) they can make decisions based on the particulars of each case, for the benefit of the whole county. Those who demand our supervisors pass a litmus test of ideological purity, whether on the right or on the left, do nothing except promote divisiveness. The Shredder ought to know better.