The News & Record's Monday edition contains a "Summary Judgement" feature of the previous week's events on the editorial pages.  The editors of the paper use a "thumbs up... thumbs down" icon to represent their opinions on whether a particular development was "good or bad" according to the paper's agenda with some terse text next to the icons.

Today FedEx Opponents recieved a big thumbs down with this accompanying text: "Though they fought them over air, though they fought them over streams, FedEx's detractors suffered another blow last week when the state determined that the cargo hub planned for PTI would not pollute surrounding water sources"

I know some of the folks who have spent countless hours tirelessly pursuing what they believe is the right thing.  In trying to alert the public to the negative environmental impact that FedEx will bring , a different community - at a different time - would hail them as heroes... instead the N&R labels them "detractors". Couldn't  the paper just as easily label them as "people with concerns about how the hub might pollute our environment"? ... or simply "concerned citizens"?

What is it about Greensboro that causes our public policy directors to feel they must attach a negative label to folks who are in opposition to the main stream agenda?

Also, when the editorial staff states that "PTI (will) not pollute surrounding water sources" they are contradicting their own previous reporting of the State's cryptic approval of the water quality permit.  The last paragraph of the Sept. 4th article states: "State officials, in issuing their permit Tuesday, conceded that the hub would create more pollution but said it would not be much greater than what is projected to occur from other growth around the airport if the hub were not built."

Which is it Allen J.?

4:19:33 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

I am encountering more discussion of my candidacy and Greensboro issues on Ed Cone's weblog than my own.

COME ON GREENSBORO!  Over 140 people read my blog today according to my super-secret page read counter that is reset every morning.   Do none of you besides Cone, Bill the legal type, Greensboro Supporter, and the mysterious but well informed Mr. Sun have anything to say?

1:55:13 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

The Rhino gives the Reverend King a little slack in how much Project Homestead should actually share, or re-share, with City and HUD auditors. 

My feeling is that Project Homestead is on very shaky ground and stonewalling the very people who gave him the money may prove to be his undoing.  If he had said in response to opening his books, "of course, here they are... and if I've done anything wrong I will correct it", it would be easier to forgive any discrepencies that may or may not surface.  But by insisting that he is under no further obligation to let auditors do their work, any discrepencies found will be met with a collective "A ha!, I knew he was hiding something" from taxpayers.

There is no doubt that the Reverend has undertaken some great works over the years but these tax dollars must have unfettered accountability.

1:10:27 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks