Egad, Al, you must really enjoy poking that nest of hornets. Didn't you learn your lesson last time?
Seriously, it occurred to me that we'll never see a piece like this on the Religion page, where it really belongs. Pity.
In which the editor repackages yesterday's story, adds one sentence to the head and one to the tail, and calls it an editorial. Whew, I hope he was able to get some rest afterward.
I'll bet it went over real well among the good 'ol boys down at the Lone Spur.
Today's lead letter from Beverly Jolliffe expresses shock, fear and anger that the Courier would provide a platform for the vicious, scary horribleness of a bunch of hick gangsta wannabees doing Presbyterian rap. I'm not sure which is funnier.
The second, from Michelle Harrington of the Center for Biological Diversity, attempts to spank the City Council for not stepping up to the adult table on Verde watershed issues. Hate to tell you, Michelle, but Council doesn't care. Her missive does add some accidental context to Cindy Barks' Monday rundown of the Council agenda though. Anybody else notice how much alike the names of the water groups are? Makes it sorta confusing for the casual reader. Coincidence?
Finally we have another standard out-of-town brown-peril rant, made slightly more amusing by Tom Steele's comment, in which he attempts to spell a common three-syllable word.
Doug Cook gives us a tour of the volunteer effort to clean up the creek and the park, but I've got an unanswered question: Why does it take a massive effort by students and nonprofits to get this done? Is it the City's policy to let the creeks go until some civic-minded volunteers show up? From the looks of things there was a huge amount of trash in just this small area -- granted, a flood basin that catches a lot of floating crap when the rains swell the creek, but right next to what should be our premiere recreation park and along the trail that's supposed to be a primary crosstown walking and biking route. Does the City make any effort at all?
Joanne Twaddell visited with the folks at The Honeyman and talked about bees, squishing a national agricultural crisis down into a nice human-interest story. It's a pity it didn't include some expert references on just how widespread, severe and sudden this crisis has been to put it in context and make the reader smarter about the big picture here.
Today the Courier runs a column that I expect the editors believe is leftist at almost full length, doing a little trimming here and there for space and style, all perfectly appropriate. Except if you're going to do this, you really have to pay some modicum of attention. Take a look at the final graph, for example, in which the editor exercises the Courier dictat that the passive voice is a tool of Satan. The result is gibberish.
Ignatius, "Rice on The Right Tracks":
"Rice's past diplomatic efforts have been limited by the Bush administration's tendency to moralize foreign policy issues and to refuse the very process of dialogue with adversaries that might resolve problems."
"The Bush administration's tendency to moralize foreign policy issues have limited Rice's past efforts, and to refuse the very process of dialogue with adversaries that might resolve problems."
Another cookie for Cindy Barks for good craft on a dull subject that voters should understand.
Joanna Dodder gives us what feels like a pretty complete rundown on the bankruptcy filing and related background of developer Elise Townsend. There was a lot of criticism of Townsend during her candidacy for rough business practices that this story confirms, not least the abuse of friends and employees that belies the righteous evangelical-Christian image she tried to build for herself. There was also heartburn about her staying in the primary race too long, which left her name on the ballot and buggered things up a bit for the other candidates.
Am I remembering correctly that the Courier endorsed Townsend for the Senate?
The unnamed Courier editor makes a salad of Rep Rick Renzi's trouble with the law, starting with a little iceberg lettuce on the actual allegations, colored with the supposed strength of the "Democratic spin machine" (presumably including the Justice Department and FBI), tossed with the old reliable "everybody does it" house dressing, and topped it with a Courier favorite, the term-limit cherry tomato. (Or is it a rubber clown nose?)
I rather doubt that Rep Renzi will appreciate the Courier placing him in the same bad-apple bin with William ("Mr Freezer") Jefferson, but maybe the editor is hoping to one day be admitted to that Democratic spin machine, where we all know the real money is.
Meanwhile there's some real journalism going on over at that great bastion of the Democratic spin machine, the Wall Street Journal (via AZ Congress Watch). Check it out.
Here's the expected AP story from yesterday with a couple of embellishments by Joanna Dodder, in the right place at the top of A1. Pity that no one seems to be answering the phone to speak for Rep Renzi, but I'm not surprised. I'll look forward to the Courier editorial on this.
It's been interesting to watch Renzi's voting record change before and after the 2006 election. By my unreliable finger-in-the-air reckoning he's been voting with the Dems and against the rest of the remaining AZ elephants about 60% of the time, and sending DM to independents polishing his green cred. What I draw from this is that he at least believes that priorities are shifting substantially among AZ1 voters.
The unnamed Courier editor does a repackage of Mirsada Buric and thanks the citizens who did all the work except the actual arrests. Meanwhile, over on the blog page, John Kamin provides the useful thinking and reportage that should have run in this space, and wins the cookie.
In another theme edition of Our Readers Speak, several people (half from out of state) exhort our public officials to employ illegal measures to address a non-problem. Mark my words, folks: if you get what you think you want -- and you may -- you'll come to regret it.
For the Courier: Whatever the political stripe of the letter-writer, people uniformly expect you to refrain from manipulating their words. Editing them or arranging them in time violates this trust. Strive to err on the side of the integrity of these gifts from your readers.
Uh-huh. Too many cowboy movies, Mike.
If you're keeping score: the original, "Gun Laws Kill," is 727 words; the Courier version: 715.
Update, 10:10am: John K provides the smackdown here.
I'll be leaving fairly early for our gig at the Chandler Jazz Festival, so if you don't get a reply to your comment, it's not that I don't love you, I'm working and I'll get to it tomorrow. Have a great Friday!
The Courier prides itself in the political balance it displays on the editorial page. We report, you decide.
Today we have a love-letter to a wannabe Presidential candidate from religio-fascist nutbar Cal Thomas, originally titled "Run, Fred, Run," carried verbatim at 701 words.
Also today we have a view from Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson on the credibility or lack thereof of some of our public servants, originally titled "Are They Serious?," minus 417 of its 766 words. Now, as a topic this is a pretty easy target, but the Courier's elisions eviscerate Robinson's arguments and obscure his craft.
I'm sure these cuts were made to fit the available space, no question. But why cut one by more than half and the other by not one word?
Given the proper treatment of yesterday's column by Robinson, I'm beginning to think that at least in some cases this frequent abuse of syndicated columns is somewhat less political than it seems. Rather, the Courier page editor thinks of non-rightwing columns as filler, and treats them as such.
The unnamed Courier editor damns the City with faint praise for not doing enough to sweep those untidy brown people off our streets. Presumably the editor has a proposal for how the City should go about it, one that takes into account that the City has no legal authority over immigration violations. I'd love to see that proposal, but so far all I've read is hectoring complaints and political posturing.
Another story by Cindy Barks gives us some meat among the page-one filler. This is the sort of dry, totally non-sexy story you really need to read and absorb to be an informed voter, and should be central to the mission of any local paper.
I'd just like to hear more detail on how we're gonna pay for this. I see a little on water/sewer rates. How about some numeric projections and proposals?
Props to the editors for giving Cindy Barks' story some prominence. We learn that the public "overwhelmingly" supports an extensive fixed-route bus system connecting our communities and workplaces. In the past the Courier has officially poo-poohed mass transit, but that resistance seems to be softening of late. Let's hope our elected officials can see the writing on the wall as well.
