Bysiewicz follow up...

As noted yesterday, a Superior Court judge has ruled that Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz does meet the state requirment of having 10 years of active legal practice to qualify her to run for the dffice of attorney general. Republican State Party Chairman Chris Healy, although disappointed -- a mil way of saying that -- said he has not yet decided to appeal.

So.,..at this point, the legal question has been answered, it's time to move on. Democratic delegates to the state convention will now decide whether they wish to have Bysiewicz as their endorsed candidate, a primary will determine the eventual party nominee...and voters wil ultimately decide who will be attorney general.

Personally, there are other questions that I think still need to be answered.

1. Why did she drop out of the governor's race? I understand Tom Foley dropping out of the Senate race to run for governor -- he was a distant third in the polls and being outspent. But Bysiewicz was leading in he polls, and I'm not convinced at this point that the attorney general's position is really that more attractive than being governor....so why?

2. Why pledge to abide by the state's public financing rules while running for governor, and then suddenly switch and declare you won't participate in the public financing program while making a run for attorney general? There are millionaires running for governor....none running for attorney general. Why the switch?

Personally, I find these questions to be more important than the legal question. But that's just me.