Way off target
I don't want to keep blogging a dead horse, but JT and the Athens Banner-Herald editorial crew are way off when it comes to the flap between state and local officials.
I'm not saying I'm excusing Keith Heard, but let's give the man the benefit of the doubt here. He's a Democrat representing a very liberal town in a state legislature that is controlled from top-to-bottom by Republicans who share very different views on the role of government in the fight against poverty. Heard could propose some sort of poverty initiative at the state level, but it ain't gonna do squat. So it's completely foolish and more than a tad silly to lay the blame at the feet of Heard ... especially when you have a commission which has so blatantly and brazenly ignored poverty in this town for the longest time.
Plus, the editorial's patting-on-the-back of Heidi Davison for her challenge to Heard is horrifically misguided. They're blaming the acts of the Republican legislature on Heard, when in fact Heard has consistently spoken out and voted for increases in spending on public education and transportation.
And then, in this drama of the absurd, the ABH then says 'well ... Heard wasn't too keen on that whole sales-tax-for-education-thing.' What? An inherently regressive tax which wrests control of public education away from the local government and places it in the hands of state officials, leaving the funding dependant on the ebbs and flows of the economy is a good measure to fight poverty?
Please.
I thought the endorsement of Bush last year was the oddest thing I had seen this paper's editorial staff do, but this may take the cake right here.
The editorial makes a feable attempt to capture the higher ground by - rightfully - chastising those who heckle and offer no coherent plan of action. But then it marches right on with its absurdity by bashing Heard, calling his speech 'a cheap political stunt.' This leaves me scratching my head ... it's 'OK' that the local government either has no plan or an inadequate one (and, once again, stiffed some of the poor with these assanine 'artsy' bus shelters) but it's wrong of Heard to call them out on it because he's in the political minority in a legislature obsessed with things like illegal immigration and redistricting?
And what's with the ridiculous football metaphors at the end? "Snap on a chinstrap and get in the game?" This whole thing is high comedy at its finest.
I'm not saying I'm excusing Keith Heard, but let's give the man the benefit of the doubt here. He's a Democrat representing a very liberal town in a state legislature that is controlled from top-to-bottom by Republicans who share very different views on the role of government in the fight against poverty. Heard could propose some sort of poverty initiative at the state level, but it ain't gonna do squat. So it's completely foolish and more than a tad silly to lay the blame at the feet of Heard ... especially when you have a commission which has so blatantly and brazenly ignored poverty in this town for the longest time.
Plus, the editorial's patting-on-the-back of Heidi Davison for her challenge to Heard is horrifically misguided. They're blaming the acts of the Republican legislature on Heard, when in fact Heard has consistently spoken out and voted for increases in spending on public education and transportation.
And then, in this drama of the absurd, the ABH then says 'well ... Heard wasn't too keen on that whole sales-tax-for-education-thing.' What? An inherently regressive tax which wrests control of public education away from the local government and places it in the hands of state officials, leaving the funding dependant on the ebbs and flows of the economy is a good measure to fight poverty?
Please.
I thought the endorsement of Bush last year was the oddest thing I had seen this paper's editorial staff do, but this may take the cake right here.
The editorial makes a feable attempt to capture the higher ground by - rightfully - chastising those who heckle and offer no coherent plan of action. But then it marches right on with its absurdity by bashing Heard, calling his speech 'a cheap political stunt.' This leaves me scratching my head ... it's 'OK' that the local government either has no plan or an inadequate one (and, once again, stiffed some of the poor with these assanine 'artsy' bus shelters) but it's wrong of Heard to call them out on it because he's in the political minority in a legislature obsessed with things like illegal immigration and redistricting?
And what's with the ridiculous football metaphors at the end? "Snap on a chinstrap and get in the game?" This whole thing is high comedy at its finest.
posted by Jmac at 8:48 AM
3 Comments:
I almost never agree with the ABH editorial writers but it sounds like they figured out that Heard was not trying to "spotlight an important local issue" so much as he was just trying to change the subject of the meeting.
I also note that they correctly pointed out that Heard does not get a pass because the Republicans are now in the majority because he's been there for 12(?) years! Poverty is not a new issue.
Heard on the streets - pun intended.
Keith has totally sold out to the Chamber of Commerce and their favorite local token black Republicans, Charlie Maddox and Tom Wyatt.
Here's hoping that he does not run for another term or that somebody with an ounce of integrity will run against him.
in the too-many-years that Keith has been in Atlanta pretending to be a Democrat and pretending to be from Athens, the only thing he has produced is carbon dioxide and water vapor. Check the records.
Where hath JMac gone?
Post a Comment
<< Home