I would have no problem barring convicted felons from running for office, but once you've paid for your crime, you should be able to vote
I thought they passed a law a couple years ago that felons couldn't run and thats why Kwame couldn't ever become the mayor again.
I seem to recall that both papers backed KK twice and also backed Bing. I say they have a poor track record.
We need to avoid false equivalency, though...
What other candidates have news stories as compelling as Duggan's right now? Should they run a story about Benny doing dandy, just to "keep the news balanced?" Duggan is actually involved in the type of news the press typically covers. Unless the other candidates are involved in something "newsworthy" then they won't be discussed very much.
With that said, Duggan is getting lots of press. And I even agree that some of it comes off as "look at how Duggan got screwed." But considering that he was, by many accounts, the front-runner with the most balanced support [[Detroit citizens, business community, suburban interests) I can somewhat understand why so many were upset because he was removed from the ballot on a technicality.
Not into Barrow either, but wasn't he exonerated. Be fair, he is a whiney toad but not a felon.
Can't really see that the press supports Duggan. He is news worthy but so are many others.
I seem to recall Barrow getting plenty of positive press back in the day when he was running against Coleman.
I'm still considering sitting out this election. None of the candidates impress me. I simply got a bad gut feeling about Duggan.
of all the things that affect [[newsreaders/talking heads take note - this is what you mean to say instead of "impact." i know your tiny little brains have this whole effect/affect problem, so there you have it) an election, newspaper endorsements are way down the list of the impact [[here is where you would use "impact" correctly)they have on a race.
Your point is well taken. However, since I first started posting on DetroitYes, I have consistently criticized the local media for lazy & biased coverage & uniformly anti-Detroit leadership editorial positions. This is not a new position for me by any means. My commentary on Mr. Barrow's press release focused in on a newsworthy mayoral candidate who is publicly criticizing the same papers I criticize and for a similar reason as myself.You could have made your point without linking to, and giving attention to, Barrow. The fact that a felon running for mayor is not getting favorable press, as should be the case, has nothing to do with local media slant in other cases where it shouldn't be the case, which I agree can happen.
From the press release...
"Detroit Mayoral candidate Tom Barrow today informed both the Detroit News and Detroit Free Press Editorial Boards that he will not participate in their endorsement process due to their "demonstrated bias and advocacy to overturn the rule of law in favor of their own already selected candidate...
...When the Michigan Court of Appeals rejected Duggan's candidacy, the Free Press's instant editorial offered an insulting description of the legal decision's affect on their chosen hero calling him "...[A] victim of a jealous mayoral rival and appellate judges bent on subordinating the rights of voters to a literal and absurd interpretation of the law."
I am still very freshly offended by both papers insisting over and over the last few years that the Clerk, judges, Governor, Detroit Mayor, City Council, etc. ignore the rule of law to accommodate and expedite the interests & wishes of some. Mr. Barrow's press release pointed out a recent example of this. That's all. And his position generally aligns with my opinion of the newspapers' coverage of local matters. I was and still am giving a thumbs up to a public figure acknowledging the same media bias I believe exists.
Me thinks some posters' bias against Mr. Barrow led them to showing their true colors. Its ok if you Duggan supporters want to support Mr. Duggan, but don't try to characterize me as advocating for a particular candidate. This was a commentary on the media, not the candidates.
I didn't begin this thread to argue a point that required me to justify my opinion with examples as some poster suggested was necessary. I was just posting an interesting tidbit for discussion. No need for the ad hominem attacks.
My "dismissal" had absolutely nothing to do with an opposing viewpoint and everything to do with my observation that a poster saw words in my post that WERE NOT THERE & even used quotation marks which implied s/he was quoting me. That's all.
Well said.But it's diversionary. In rhetoric, you have to examine the argument, not the person making it. The argument is that the daily newspapers have been ejaculating themselves with excitement over Duggan's run. The press is free [[in theory) in this country because it represents the public's interest. Instead of being fair, though, it's clearly favoring one over the field. [[No, one doesn't have to defend Barrow to make this argument. Sorry.)
I am voting for Duggan. For 36 years I have voted black, Muslim, Hispanic, feel no reason why I can't vote for a white man. He is clearly the best option.
Since I am on a political rave, so heads up to RASHIDA What an amazing woman, politician and community leader. Can we clone her!
Maybe we should Jack this thread. Rashida is amazing. Do we have other political people we support. I support Duggan, as for council, feel bad Kenny won't run again. Rarely agreed with Kwame Kenyata [[sp) but did respect him. Jenkins touches a few good nerves but not sure about her overall politics. The rest can take a long vacation with Pugh.
Orr doesn't piss me off, though not elected.
Forgot to mention our governor. Totally non understandable.
Barrow, your mouth is getting you into to trouble! Quit the election, quit bullying Duggan and other candidates and move on with your life before someone uses your dirty little secrets against you. The Detroit Free Press will be the first to know.
|
Bookmarks