Once again, the V.I. Source readers' poll has produced an unequivocal result, this time concerning the controversial hiring of Mario Moorhead by Sens. Adelbert Bryan and Alicia "Chucky" Hansen. By what can only be called the astonishing ratio of more than 16-to-1, more readers rejected the hiring than approved of it outright.
A little less than 1 in 10 readers didn't disapprove of Moorhead's hiring but felt that different perspectives should also be aired.
Granted, there are various ways to interpret this overwhelming response: Readers may have felt that $30,000 a year in taxpayers' money could have been better spent elsewhere, especially since Senate proceedings are already broadcast on WIUJ-FM. Or that the selective nature of Moorhead's proposed broadcasts (of all committee and public meetings conducted by Bryan and Hansen plus "all sessions of the Legislature") would not adequately serve all members of the V.I. community.
Or readers may simply have been turned off by Moorhead himself, whose vitriolic attack on "good-for-nothing, lily-white St. Thomas journalists" was the centerpiece of his Feb. 16 press conference with Bryan.
Sen. Adlah "Foncie" Donastorg called the episode "an ugly racial and political war of words at the taxpayers' expense." A conspicuous majority of those who read the Source apparently agreed and want none of it.
The numbers follow:
Should $30,000 a year in public funds be used by senators to hire activist and radio personality Mario Moorhead to broadcast selected legislative proceedings and offer commentary?
1. Yes.
STT (11) STX (17) STJ (0); Total (28), 5.4 percent of all respondents.
2. Yes, but equal time should be provided to those with different views than Moorhead's.
STT (23) STX (14) STJ (0); Total (37), 7.1 percent of all respondents.
3. No.
STT (259) STX (186) STJ (5); Total (450), 87.4 percent of all respondents.
