Earlier this week, a prominent New Albanian Republican finally, formally announced his mayoral bid. Here’s an excerpt from the Tribune’s coverage.
Former Floyd County Sheriff Randy Hubbard entered the New Albany mayoral race Wednesday, saying he’d been coaxed by residents “disillusioned with current and past administrations” …
… Asked what his goals would be if elected, Hubbard replied, “At this point, I just need to talk to people in the community” to find out what issues are important to them.
I’ve no interest in disputing the prevailing local wisdom holding that Mr. Hubbard is a man of exacting professional integrity, primarily because I’ve no reason to doubt it unless proven otherwise. To me, it’s a given.
Rather, might we briefly glance past the testimonials and acknowledge the hair-pulling, maddening incongruity of a high-ranking community figure’s weeks-long courting of citizen disillusionment, his certain deliberation and careful planning leading to Wednesday’s well-crafted announcement, and then a bizarre, vacuous comment to the effect that after all this thought and consideration, he still has no personal recognition of pertinent issues, but must ask community members to provide him with some?
That’s simply incredible, but in the open air museum of congenital dysfunction known as New Albany, somehow we’re the ones regarded as crazed and dangerous for discussing numerous issues on a daily basis for months -- years -- and expecting those seeking our votes to approach the table with a platform in their hands.
See: Mr./Mrs./Ms. Candidate: Just in time for the filing period, here are my modified rules of voting engagement.
Why insist? Without a coherent system of policy ideas -- without a platform -- the phrase “disillusioned with current and past administrations” has no substantive meaning apart from “my clan – your clan,” and we’ve seen where that particular “policy platform” has taken the city over long decades of decay.
With all due respect – and I want to be fair to him – how is it possible that Mr. Hubbard cannot think of a single issue beyond funding sources when so many pressing items currently crowd the city’s collective agenda? To be sure, integrity’s a promising start, but Mr. Hubbard and his fellow aspirants must do better than that.
Gratifyingly, someone already has done better.
Randy Smith, owner of Destinations Booksellers and a former contributor to this blog, is writing a series of guest columns for the Tribune. All the columns are archived together on-line.
SMITH: Walk this plank, candidates
By earning it, I mean that (city council nominees) will have campaigned on a platform of ideas. I believe that any candidate who does will benefit from a sharp increase in turnout that this city has seldom seen.
While no candidate will embrace all of these proposals (in fact, they’d probably be crazy to do so), I offer them up as a menu for action, free of charge, to any candidate bold enough to articulate them further. Some are tougher than others. Some will be controversial. But I believe in them all.
By local standards of antebellum ward-heeling and foot-dragging, it’s an audacious and ambitious notion to offer a unified system of ideas, and not unexpectedly, Randy’s already under attack for trespassing against New Albany’s long and sad history of anti-intellectual underachievement.
(Who in the hey do you think you are? This is our neighborhood, too. Do you even live downtown? BS.)
Note that the preceding comment refers not to genetic engineering or the advocacy of teenage sex, but to Randy’s suggestion that the city’s downtown streets be given bicycle lanes. If something as wholesome and healthy as biking prompts such gasbag Limbaughesque vitriol, just imagine how the remainder of his impeccably rational pleas for New Albany to gingerly consider joining the 21st century (soon, please) are going to be received down at the Luddite Bar & Grill.
Go here and read about policies and principles, and next time you drop in to Destinations to pay homage to the power of the written word – to the realm of ideas – say thanks to the proprietor for not being a coward.
Given the New Albany political climate in 2007, thinking publicly qualifies as an alternative lifestyle, and the open advocacy of thinking is a revolutionary act -- and we need as many of these revolutionary acts, and as quickly, as we possibly can find them.
---
Link: Candidate filings (updated daily)
26 legitimately debatable, issue-based, publicly stated policy points. That's how it's supposed to work.
ReplyDeleteThe 80% percent of the electorate not currently bamboozled by the unsubstantiated emotional nonsense of preexisting election machines deserves a response. The other 20% need one.
Who's first?
I was happily reading Randy’s platform article in the Tribune and thinking “Wow – finally - ideas and proposals for the coming elections = just what we’ ve been waiting for.” A substantive debate about our future, and more importantly, how to get there. Cool I’m thinking… then I flipped over to Yvonnes’s blog and was completely whipped around by her response to Randy’s article.
ReplyDeleteSo I have to wade into the fray…Yvonne – how can you read that article and react to it so personally? I don’t get it. If you come before a council with ideas or information, would you appreciate the people listening, boo you down as a “power-monger”?
This episode says something about the culture here and for my money why this place is 20 years behind the rest of the country. Petty tribal war-mongering! He said, she said… ugh. Lighten up people. Ideas are not the enemy.
Sorry, Gina. Maybe if I didn't know him, experienced his actions personally -- couldn't help it.
ReplyDeleteAnd to be truthful, I don't even know those were his ideas...I think there is more to it than that.
I simply disagree, and have someone else who will respond (probably nicer than I did)...but there are reasons why we feel the way we do. Too much history is being overlooked and a lack of knowledge of our problems was all omitted. Let's get the League of Women Voters back up and running and force the Councilmembers into a debate, rather than their 5 minute snippet on the New Albany High School channel.
When he stated the part about a "Councilmember" and his wife going to Indy to help keep us informed on all House bills (HB's) and all Senate bills (SB's); when the Councilmember and his wife pay their own hotel expenses and all they ask in return is their gas mileage...
They do not seem to be aware that NO ONE else on the Council ever goes to Indy for these meetings; and one Councilmember in particular has been trying everything in their power to cut all funding for their time and efforts -- it's just not an accurate reflection of what the in-fighting on Council is about.
No, I won't name the Councilmember who has tried for years to stop these people from taking their time and efforts to keep us informed. I simply know none of the rest of them have any desire; or maybe the time; whatever their reasons are.
Tomorrow, someone who knows about everything he wrote about will respond on my blog, and explain a little more about why we found this article to be, say ignorant, in it's "facts".
We didn't take the points as helpful; but then again -- it probably makes no difference at all. That bad taste in my mouth goes all the way back to when they first hung certain Councilmembers' effigies out on a line in front of the building before Council, before they even knew the parties they were hanging.
It's personal, I'll admit it. Thanks.
Yvonne, if it's personal, then respond in a personal way. You're attacking Ideas as if they were themselves your enemy. I look forward to your more thoughtful rebuttal. I as well will work up a "platform" on my blog...everyone needs to do this and keep the momentum up until we have local politicans who stand for something, and or will do something.
ReplyDeletePerhaps I had been walking through an imaginary dreamscape somewhere, but it had seemed for the longest time that even those who were of opposing "camps" in the blogsphere had at least pitched there tents in the same area.
ReplyDeleteAs more and more electorial hopefuls issue their war plans for the up coming primary, we as a community of voters have got to stay focused on the real issues at hand, the cleaning of house in the city/county building.
We simply can not afford for conection we have made to be burned to the ground over the politicians platforms. If a candidates platform does not fit, we need to all let them know that, en masse. If we have personal problems with a candidate, it is our responsibility to personally put those emotions aside, and take a good honest look at what thta person can offer the community, not as the person we know and may dislike personally, but as an elected official.
But more importantly we do not need to let them build the rifts in our solidarity that many candidates will be counting on.
For the record, it wasn't "certain Councilmembers' effigies" that were hung. There were nine shirts on that clothesline, equaling the nine total Council Members. The shirts were handcuffed together.
ReplyDeleteDemonstration organizers also specifically told the press that it wasn't aimed at any particular group.
I'd witnessed Council dysfunction firsthand when I began adapting a Cuban artist's idea for the NA street corner, so I knew what I was "hanging".
What the installation meant, however, was left totally up to the interpretation of viewers.
Those interpretations differed amongst the people that stopped by and/or participated in the demonstration and served as conversation starters, as was the intent.
Yvonne's account is misleading. It was not at all a demonstration against certain people.
CM Larry Kochert, current Council president, commented to the Courier-Journal at the time that he'd seen activism before and that it usually fades. In our case, that hasn't happened.
The oft mentioned big mystery surrounding Mr. Smith's asking people if they'd leave a meeting has also been mischaracterized.
At the time, New Albany was waiting to hear back from the state about its budget. Since the state seemed to be dragging its feet, the Council asked if someone would come speak to them about it in a work session.
The official that came agreed to participate thinking it was a private meeting. When he arrived to find a public meeting, he was taken aback, fearing that any comments he made would be construed as official public communication from the state and that he'd be reprimanded by his superiors for making those statements about an issue that hadn't yet been resolved.
He was threatening to leave without speaking to the Council at all.
Upon hearing of it, Randy asked if the official would speak to the Council if the public left. He said he would. Randy then agreed to leave so the Council could try to get information and asked others present if they'd do the same.
For attempting to help the Council get information, he was demonized. The question wasn't "Why would we want to leave?" but "Who the hell do you think you are?"
It's just another example of the ridiculous fill-in-the-blanks conspiracy theory that passes for "concern" around here.
Meanwhile, we've all been told repeatedly for at least the past couple of years that some group of citizens was just on the verge of bringing forth documentation to the public that would expose all the corruption once and for all. And we're still waiting.
Gina said: This episode says something about the culture here and for my money why this place is 20 years behind the rest of the country.
That's exactly it.
CSD: Your point is well taken. However, the rifts are most often created by an unbelievable willingness to simply make things up when it's convenient and a gang mentality that treats such creativity as worthy of support.
As the New Albanian has repeated often, people are entitled to their own opinions. They're not entitled to their own facts. Until there's agreement that facts actually do matter in rational debate, there's no foundation for meaningful conversation.
Well, if my statements are misleading, I apologize. I only counted four. At 52, maybe the memory is failing, but my being appalled certainly hasn't failed me.
ReplyDeleteThe Council bashing drives me crazy. Certain past Councils, and some of them are still sitting on same, have helped a lot of neighborhoods out. The Preservation Commission was passed by the Council. The Council has helped in a lot of situations...but I do not feel some get the credit they should get.
Division of certain groups would be my last intention, certainly not meant.
Maybe my interpretation of Mr. Smith's "ideas", just to me, are really Mayor Garner's actions behind the scenes move. If certain citizens had not observed Mr. Smith coming out of the Mayor's office right before Council (several times), maybe we wouldn't feel the way we feel.
Again, please accept my apologies for any offense taken...and Gina, I will take your advice and ponder on same with nothing but good intentions, promise. Thanks.
Unable to locate sufficient data for her bias in the reality-based world, a Democrat in Floyd County gave a mighty heave to the random truth generator and spluttered this:
ReplyDeleteMaybe my interpretation of Mr. Smith's "ideas", just to me, are really Mayor Garner's actions behind the scenes move. If certain citizens had not observed Mr. Smith coming out of the Mayor's office right before Council (several times), maybe we wouldn't feel the way we feel.
Maybe, just to me, this serves as the very pinnacle of flawed and feeble argumentation, and not just because I know it by experience (although not from Yvonne herself).
After all, for almost two years I've been waiting for “concern taxpayer” to apologize to me for openly and shamelessly lying when he/she/it supposedly “saw” me emerge from the mayor’s office, when in fact I’d never been inside it at the time (I’ve been exactly one time since, and both photographed and blogged my visit to avoid any appearance of doubt).
It’s amazing how often we’re breathlessly reminded of how vital certain selective facts are when it comes to the speaker’s pet obsessions (sewers, investigations, the thrilling wonders of numerology), yet find that any coherent commitment to “facts” in the broader sense (i.e., those lying outside one’s personal comfort zone) isn’t important at all, and can be dispensed when the need arises.
We already have a President who views the world that way ...
When a person lacks the intrinsic sense of respect and fairness to credit the conceptual legitimacy of ideas even when those ideas differ from one’s own, we see the level of discussion soon deteriorate to that of inaccuracies, insinuations and attacks, ones usually deriving from personal animus.
Apparently Yvonne is trying to argue that (a) it would be impossible for an educated human to formulate opinions of his or her own without prompting from a political entity, and (b) the closer one is to a political entity in the sense of physical proximity, the less weight any political opinions carry.
That’s absolute nonsense. If I were to observe Yvonne speaking with Steve Price before a council meeting, and subsequently said that her comments were invalid because Price was the one who put her up to it, she would be apoplectic – and rightly so, but with no apparent sense of irony, she commits precisely the same fallacy with regard to Randy Smith's published policy points – and wants us to believe that her groundless accusation is a fact, and not what it really is: An invention out of thin air. It’s breathtaking, and Gina’s right to observe that it’s indicative of what keeps us back.
No one says Yvonne must like Randy, but if she doesn't, that's enough. She needn't confuse the veracity of ideas with her own dislikes, although she does.
I’m glad that Bluegill set the record straight about the hangings in effigy – another so-called fact that turned out to be conjured from the ether.
I apologize to all of Blog land for miscounting the number of shirts hanging on the lines out front. Thank you, and if you think there was any malice towards me miscounting, again I apologize. Anyone who knows me knows I intend no malice.
ReplyDeleteAnother deft and disingenuous sidestep, although all the while it remains quite obvious that while the miscount of shirts may well have been unintentional, it was not malicious in and of itself compared to your intended target.
ReplyDeleteMalice is what motivated your attack -- and while it may have seemed to be directed at Randy personally (that pesky animus again), it really was aimed at the notion (as Bluegill phrased it) of "26 legitimately debatable, issue-based, publicly stated policy points."
That's lamentable, and Gina's absolutely right.
And, please allow me to again nicely disagree. It is the "Sanitation Contract" statement that said it all for me.
ReplyDeleteBut, all of New Albany will soon see our trucks (stripped and all) soon...coming to you via the $2 million in the hole sanitation report.
The rest of my story is on my blog. I do not wish to anger your readers with my words anymore. Twist and turn them how you feel; it truly is nothing person, just business. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
And, I guess you would have to call this a debate; whether you consider it worthy or not.