Regarding Rep. Earl Jones' efforts to get the N&R in hot water over a threatening comment made on the N&R's letters blog back in June... I believe he is right to pursue the threat, but the rest of it is a bunch of misplaced bluster in my opinion. 

First, here is the now-removed, and possibly criminal, comment made by "justoes" in response to this letter to the editor by Bob Carter that was highly critical of ongoing funding efforts for the International Civil Rights Museum published on June 18th of this year...

"This is the only case I have ever read about where I would welcome the Klan to come in and blow a civil rights building and 2 black leaders to smithereens."

According to this editorial-laden article at the Greensboro Times (which is owned by Rep. Jones), the SBI and local authorities are all over this overt threat, and rightly so:  "The source of the blog communication threatening violence has been identified and the investigation process is continuing."  And that is as it should be - let the authorities handle it and prosecute the commenter to the fullest if such action is warranted.  But in an editorial posted on September 19th, Jones let it be known that the lone threat by a sick individual is not all that his protesting is about.  He's got a big-ol' bone to pick with the N&R...

"Today, Jim Crow's son, Jim Crow, Jr. is racism that is subtle, disguised and institutionalized. It is clearly evident within the management hierarchy of the local News & Record newspaper, regarding their continued misleading and distorted coverage of the Civil Right Museum project."

Jones' editorial was apparently in response to N&R articles and editorials (none of which I have been able to find on Google, but I know they are there) which have investigated and questioned funding and expenditures for the long-in-coming project on Elm Street.  In what I see as a leap of logic, Jones feels that the communicated threat now under investigation was actually caused by the N&R, and opines that the paper's "...reckless and irresponsible distortion of the facts is doing a grave disservice to race relations in Greensboro by creating an atmosphere of contempt that breeds home grown terrorist threats."  And this: "...This venomous and hateful threat of terrorism is directly attributable to the irresponsible journalism of the News & Record."

That's a bit of a stretch.

Jones has a vested and very personal interest in the Civil Rights Museum.  The project was started by him and Commissioner Skip Alston, so his sensitivity to criticism is understandable.  But instead of righteously defending his baby in the court of public opinion and rationally refuting the reporting of the N&R in the very paper he operates - Jones reverts to tiresome and divisiveness-causing rhetoric: name calling and race-baiting.

How is calling the editor of the N&R "Jim Crow, Jr.", insinuating that the N&R is a racist institution, and accusing the paper of intentionally providing the public with "one fabrication after another" going to improve race relations in Greensboro?  The short answer is this: it won't.  To the contrary, such unfounded talk only serves to inflame people and send them deeper into their racial corners

Jones asserts that, "Three-piece suit wearing, Jim Crow, Jr. bigots feel threaten (sic) by strong righteous, honest African-American leadership committed to eliminating racial oppression in this city."  From my view , by throwing around such talk, Jones is doing a disservice to the very people he was elected to serve and those his paper is meant to inform.  This community recognizes and embraces "strong, righteous, honest leadership" that is committed to eliminating racial divisions, and everyone is eagerly anticipating from Rep. Jones the revealing of all the qualities that he currently, apparently, attributes to himself.

1:58:18 PM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

What were some of these people thinking?  Do those who decide to run for public office not know that their lives become an open book the minute they file as a candidate?  I'm not sure which is the worse lapse of judgement; is it their now-widely-publicized transgessions? ...or the fact that they decided to throw their hat in the ring thinking the voters wouldn't care about woman-beating, drunk driving, apparent univolvement in civic affairs and an unwillingness to pay taxes on time?

The N&R's obligatory look into the background of every candidate for City Council is always a compelling read, but this year reporter Matt Williams reveals to us a whole litany of serious offenses and instances of bad judgement on the part of those who would lead us.  The data in the report was uncovered by staff researcher David Bulgin.

Some of the things that Bulgin turned up on the named candidates are minor in nature and will probably be overlooked by the voters in the October 11th primary, but others... namely District 2 candidate Lewis Byers and At-large candidate Dave Howerton... well, they might as well forget about it.

And what about District 2 candidate Toni Henderson and District 5's Todd Schmidt?  Since the record shows they have NEVER voted in a Greensboro municipal election, it is evident to me that they simply woke up one morning and said to themselves, "...wouldn't it be cool to run for City Council... I wonder what they do?" 

I am not saying that even those who were shown to have the most dubious of backgrounds can't now be upstanding citizens who are striving to do good work, provide good ideas and make a difference in our community, because some are doing just that.  But, to be taken seriously, those who run for public office should know that an actual candidacy requires a whole different set of standards than being a community activist.  If they didn't fully understand this before they filed, I'm sure they do now, and are now wondering what they were thinking at the time.

10:42:13 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks

The N&R's investigative look into the world of state-provided economic incentives is an eye popping view at what even the most ardent supporters of the practice term "a necessary evil".  Come to find out, some of these incentives may not be necessary at all, but the evil part still stands.

From my read of reporter Taft Wireback's case study of the $400,000 granted to Volvo Trucks of North America, Wireback and his colleagues ought to get some sort of an award from us, the taxpayers of N.C.  They saved us that $400,000.

According to the expose', after looking into Volvo's claim that Allentown, PA was Greensboro's main competitive suitor for the company's $10M expansion of its headquarters, Wireback picked up the telephone and found Allentown's director of economic development Ed Pawlowski.  Pawlowski was surprised to find out about Volvo's claim that his state offered "generous incentives" to entice the company to place the expansion in his city.  "I don't think they ever contacted us, to be quite honest", he said.  At least Pawlowski is honest... Volvo wasn't... except, perhaps, for one instance.

In order to receive the $400k grant, "Volvo was required to swear it needed the money to go ahead with its project, first in an application for the grant and later in a formal contract".  Volvo executives apparently couldn't bring themselves to swear to their need and lie on the application, so they simply crossed that line out.  They may have later sworn in writing as to how much they needed the money when they signed the contract, but apparently we will never know.  Come to find out, Volvo never executed the contract and returned it to the state, even though an Assistant Commerce Department Secretary intially said they had.

The N&R's effort seems to have twarted this particular raiding of the state's cookie jar.  After all of this light-shining on the slipshod practices of our Department of Commerce and the questionable ethics of a major corporation, the article meekly reports a major victory for the taxpayers and a triumph for good reporting, "...10 days ago, state officials and their Volvo counterparts agreed the project was no longer eligible and the grant was discontinued."

Good job, N&R.

8:39:40 AM     comments to the above post so far, join in.   Trackbacks