In finding Chris Morris' Green Deal (sic) "oops-ed" to be disinformative, misinformative, objectionable and dismissive, our guest columnist is being charitable.

I had planned on writing a response of some sort to one of Chris Morris' worst ever News and Tribune opinion column outings: OPINION: Green Deal a little farfetched. Morris' column truly is abominable, but Randy Smith beat me to the critique. Here it is.

---

Keep Chris Away from the Children.

I'm a writer and have been a writer most of my life. I've also been a newspaper reporter and newspaper news and copy editor (over the course of two decades), a book editor, and a published author. I also wrote a nationally distributed column on topics of my choosing for a few years.

On Tuesday, I woke to find a Twitter referral to an opinion column by Chris Morris, an assistant editor of the Jeffersonville daily newspaper. Given that Morris is a member of that paper's editorial board, I don't know whether that particular piece would be called an op-ed, but in my view, it certainly qualifies as an "oops-ed."

I consider myself a fairly sophisticated reader of mainstream science and politics, so the error in the very first sentence was jarring to me.

Morris referred to something he calls the "New Green Deal." No one else has ever heard of it, though there is a dramatic proposal circulating about a "Green New Deal." That was either a glaring mistake by the writer or a disingenuous attempt to belittle by mis-terming something one opposes. In modern times, such mis-terming has been a primary tool for disinformation, popularized by former Speaker Newt Gingrich and his technocratic ally, Frank Luntz.

Nothing if not determined, the columnist continues to refer to his bugbear as the "Green Deal" throughout his editorial. Again, there is no such thing. There is a Green New Deal.

Morris at least acknowledges that the proposal, in its breadth and ambition, hearkens back to the second President Roosevelt's New Deal designed to address a nation in crisis.

The column's headline calls this new proposal "a little farfetched." In most dictionaries, it would be "far-fetched," but I'll postpone further criticism of what could have been a difference of opinion on orthography.

However, as an aside, Mr. Morris's newspaper is becoming known for its near-daily errors in facts, spelling, grammar, and word choices that are, to me, risible.

As a natural editor, I've made a pest of myself in pointing those out, sometimes privately but more often via social media. And sometimes, it is appreciated by the reporter, who tries to correct the errors in online editions. I'm sure others resent my suggestions.

I do this for historical reasons. I became a precocious and accomplished reader early in life because I read newspapers. My parents modeled this and I, being an eldest child, emulated their example. In short, I learned to read by reading newspapers. Over the years I developed a highly advanced ability to proofread, a skill that no longer offers remuneration.

A newspaper that has no standards when it comes to spelling, grammar, or word choice puts children (and adults) like me at risk of being "word dummies." Beyond that, for a certain class of individual, it diminishes greatly the reputation of the newspaper. We can ill afford that.

But back to Mr. Morris's opinion piece.

I'm generally inclined toward the ideas of the Green New Deal. I see them as ambitious but doable. Mr. Morris sees them as far-fetched.

And I'm certainly not the person within his readership who can best refute the disinformation and misinformation Morris relies on to form and express his opinion. But I'll bet I can express mine in a more credible way than he has done with his.

Mr Morris unintentionally "blows it" in his second graf, one in which he poo-poos recent reports of climate change scientists with incendiary intent. He exaggerates:

The basis behind the Green Deal (sic) is a recent climate change report which (sic) basically states if (sic) we don't change our ways, the Earth as we know it will cease to exist and be swallowed up by floods, out-of-control fires and will basically be inhabitable.

Inhabitable means capable of being inhabited. That is, those bad things (can we agree?) will make life on earth, "basically," livable. If the mischaracterization hadn't already undermined the editorial, the poor word choice essentially refutes the point Mr. Morris was (presumably) trying to make.

Later in the piece, Mr. Morris does it again. See if you can pinpoint the moment where he undercuts the credibility of his own piece.

I do believe many Americans, however, have absolutely no conscious when it comes to littering and being more environmentally friendly.

I am conscious of where Morris went wrong here. How about you? He may have meant to write "consciousness" here, but it's more likely he meant to say "conscience." These are different words with different spellings and meanings. One implies awareness. The other implies guilt and a need for correction.

Morris continues:

Do I believe in a lot of what this Green New Deal [ah-ha!] is pushing [you know, like a drug dealer]? It is way too left of center for me and unreasonable.

There are many places you can go to read more about current climate science. I believe we are already seeing the effects of anthropogenic global warming and the resultant extremes in temperature, precipitation, winds, captured oxygen, etc. It's plausible that we are very near a tipping point where we will be unable to reverse the effects of the gases we are injecting into our atmosphere.

I'm eager to see if we have politicians and policy makers who can come up with an American and a global solution.

I don't believe I've read an opinion from a masthead editor of a mainstream newspaper that used such pejorative and dismissive language. The piece does little to inform while hurling insults at broad swathes of Americans. Had I been in charge, it would never have been published.

I could critique it line-by-line, but as I said, there are others who can do that better than I can. Chris Morris, after all, is paid to inform and opine. I am not.

I am, however, willing to submit an invoice if his newspaper is willing to underwrite a well-researched op-ed column.

Let's leave it at this: Almost every paragraph is acid-tongued, deliberately insulting, objectionable, misinformative, or disinformative. That's not what I look for in a newspaper or from a man who represents the editorial board of his publication.

And far sooner than 11 years from now, Mr. Morris will disavow this contribution to the public discourse. If his is the view from the "center," God help us all.

A trio of shameless mob bosses attended yesterday's ribbon-cutting, because the Balkans have nothing on New Albany.

I'm so old I can remember all the way back to January of 2017, when Bob Caesar and Pat McLaughlin merrily conspired with Mayor Jeff Gahan to produce then-council counsel Matt Lorch's head on a platter for the approbation of swing voter Dan Coffey.

It's perfectly clear that the wheels are coming off what remains of the Floyd County Democratic Party. If we were to send a drone aloft to gaze at the respective checking accounts of local Democrats and Gahan's political action committee, we'd find a huge disparity. The mayor is hugely flush, and Dickey's oxcart tapped dry (ethically as well as financially).

Gahan surely is dictating Lorch decapitation terms. Dickey has no choice, and no backbone even if he did. Coffey gets back on the train, and Phipps isn't even bothered to rehearse his increasingly trite Hamlet routine. Caesar and McLaughlin both want to be mayor. Blair continues to be cast out by both parties, and a Republican likely will win the next mayoral contest in any event.

Do you have an alternative scenario? Let me know. The entertainment won't last forever, and it helps take our minds off the next Democratic central committee meeting:

Most folks who value a semblance of basic human decency would like to believe that Caesar's, McLaughlin's and Gahan's glad-handing appearance yesterday at the ribbon cutting for Lorch's law office had something to do with penance for their lingering guilt over the way they humiliated Lorch two years ago.

But that's not it. Rather, an election season is upon us, and Develop New Albany remains eager as ever to (a) claim responsibility for matters touching the arm-of-city-organization not one jot, and (b) to provide as many photo-ops as possible for the big fish inhabiting our small local pond, thus enabling yesterday's ludicrous scene.

On second thought, now I'm the one feeling guilty -- about comparing New Albany to the Balkans. That's plainly an insult to the Balkans, and I apologize profusely.

Pass the Scissors: Balkan Ribbon-Cutting, the Silly and Absurd, by Martin Dimitrov, Mladen Lakic, Anja Vladisavljevic, Die Morina, Filip Rudic (Balkan Insight)

From a shiny new elevator to a border-crossing toilet, Balkan politicians rarely pass up the chance to cut a red ribbon

In the Balkans, good news can sometimes be hard to find.

So why wouldn’t a deputy prime minister cut the ribbon at the unveiling of a toilet, or a cabinet minister christen an elevator?

They did, and they are not alone. The past few years have seen politicians in the Balkans plumb new depths in their search for a decent photo-op and a chance to take credit for the state’s largesse ...

Human rights commission? It's just a "vehicle" to stop criticism, says worst-mayor-ever Warren Nash.

"I felt like the city was being maligned back then and I thought this would be a vehicle to stop that criticism. The complaints against the city were all unfounded."
-- Warren Nash

Chris Morris has done us a great service by capturing this breathtaking quote, which reveals the politically-motivated, self-serving conniving that has characterized Warren Nash's whole career as a self-appointed mover/shaker in New Albany.

Plainly, the human rights commission means nothing to Nash in any sense of furthering the cause of human rights.

Rather, it's just a vehicle -- a purely cynical propaganda jalopy -- to thwart criticism, which at the time of Nash's single term as mayor almost 50 years ago (he was mercilessly crushed seeking a second term and never won another race) was criticism directed against Nash's own incompetence as the worst mayor this city has ever endured ... until Jeff Gahan, Nash's eager pupil, who subverted the current human rights commission and now has doubled down on the damage by appointing his unspeakably dull Svengali to serve on it, so as to perpetuate the do-nothing fix for a new generation, one that deserves far better than either Nash or Gahan allowed anywhere close to a decision-making post.

But it's plenty good for Gahan's campaign war chest, isn't it? In New Gahania, money has more rights than humans. Maybe we need a Campaign Finance Rights Commission.

Thanks, Chris.

The city needed to see exactly what Warren Nash is, and how he operates. In 2019, we can retire Nash by firing Gahan, and in the process, free ourselves from the reign of vendor cash and the stifling yoke of the C-Minus Clique.

New Albany's Human Rights Commission looking for fifth member (Tom May Escalator Duplex)

NEW ALBANY — For a commission that hasn't met in two years, there are going to be a few bumps along the way once that group reconvenes.

The rust was evident during the first 15 minutes of New Albany's Human Rights Commission meeting Tuesday night, the group's first meeting of 2018 ...

Ring me, baby (we can't make these things up).

As I noted a short time back ...

New Albany’s bicentennial program template seems firmly established as we approach Year Zero, and that’s unfortunate.

Apart from the solitary tangible gain of a laughably over-priced, wrongly situated and generically designed public area, variously known as Somnolent Estates, Rent Boy Park and Caesar’s Folly, we’ll have a carpetbagger’s coffee table book to remember the rare old times, as well as a whole slate of events priced primarily to recoup the book’s lamentable costs, wherein the local Romney demographic wears period costumes, dances the minuet, and recites the enumerated hagiography of the historic preservation code.

It’s all safe, white-bread and conservative, and fully appropriate for the buck-a-day extras at yet another Lewis & Clark expedition commemorative film, but it remains that the problem with making our bicentennial entirely about the city’s past, and not at least in part about our future, is that doing so begs a rather embarrassing question.

Why were our urban forefathers adept at city building, but their modern-day ancestors able to muster little more in terms of achievement than decay management?

You might react defensively.

Haven’t we come a long way during the past few years?

(We have. But what about the three decades before that?)

Downtown is revitalizing, isn’t it?

(If eating and drinking’s your thing, yes it is. If retail gains, residential enhancement or complete streets interest you, then welcome to our default condition of stasis)

But Roger, don’t I look great dressed up as a Scribner?

(You needn’t ask me. I’ll be sober in the morning, but we’ll collectively experience this bicentennial hangover for the rest of our lives. You might inquire of that child over there, assuming he’ll relinquish his iPhone)

And so, the travesty wrought by the Coup d’Geriatrique is upon us. An empty liquor bottle meets pavement, and River View plans are recycled as Bazooka Joe bubble gum cartoons.

Somewhere in the city, a dog barks.

Now we get bells, too.

New Albany churches asked to ring their bells to welcome bicentennial year, by Daniel Suddeath (News and Tribune)

NEW ALBANY — New Albany will begin celebrating its 200th birthday on Tuesday, and the city’s Bicentennial Commission is looking for some help to literally ring-in the New Year.

Commission member David Barksdale recently sent out requests to city churches asking for their involvement. At the stroke of midnight Tuesday, the commission is asking churches to ring their bells, play their carillons or utilize any other sort of musical instrument they have to usher-in the bicentennial year.