From 2009: "Hot Hofstadter, cold Cappuccino," or a treatise on Nawbanian anti-intellectualism.

This was one of my guest columns for the pre-merger Tribune, appearing there on December 12, 2009. 

Many of the columns didn't appear at the blog in their entirety until later, if at all, seeing as the Tribune's understandable directive at the time was that I could link to them and drive traffic to the newspaper's web site (which NAC did consistently for 16 years, and I'm still awaiting a thank you card, ingrates), but not publish the columns myself. 

When the merger rendered me redundant, I assumed all previous agreements went out the window. If not, I'm sure current management is as oblivious as ever.

Consequently, as an introduction to this column's blog link in 2009, I wrote this.

Code enforcement alert: Today's column knowingly and indiscriminately violates the city of New Albany's ban on words of four syllables or more. I'm at home this morning and available to be cited and/or arrested.

No one ever knocked. If there is any consistent pattern to governance in Nawbany, it's that our betters don't read. Especially since 2012.

---

BEER MONEY: Hot Hofstadter, cold Cappuccino.

On Monday evening, I overheard a New Albany city councilman explaining to a bystander how much more he knows about drainage issues than any number of trained experts in the field, and that our problems with stormwater primarily result from virulent conspiracies between city planners and a veritable mafia of builders.

I reached for my steaming wand, and thought immediately of Bayard R. Hall.

"(We) always preferred an ignorant bad man to a talented one, and hence attempts were usually made to ruin the moral character of a smart candidate; since unhappily, smartness and wickedness were supposed to be generally coupled, and incompetence and goodness."

Even though Hall might have written it yesterday, speaking perhaps as a resident of New Albany’s 3rd council district, or as a bemused observer of contemporary America’s penchant for creationist museums, masturbatory tea-party circles and Palin for Dogcatcher campaigns, all competing for the attention of a benumbed populace forever mistaking spasm for thought, his words actually date all the way back to 1843.

Hall penned them in reference to the political scene in frontier Indiana, thereby illustrating that anti-intellectualism was a cankerous sore on the American body politic long before George W. Bush took office.

“Anti-intellectualism is a term that in one sense describes a hostility towards, or mistrust of, those who call themselves intellectuals, and intellectual pursuits. This may be expressed in various ways, such as an attack on the merits of science, education or literature.”
--Wikipedia

From Hall, my thoughts raced to Richard Hofstadter. Those voters who have somehow managed to progress beyond the literary realm of “Left Behind” and the attractions of “Dancing with the Stars” might eventually come into contact with the work of the historian Hofstadter, whose 1964 book, “Anti-Intellectualism in American Life,” charted the American cultural habit of loudly detesting the quality that separates humans from other mammals.

“The common strain that binds together the attitudes and ideas which I call anti-intellectual is a resentment and suspicion of the life of the mind and of those who are considered to represent it; and a disposition constantly to farm-near-me/">minimize the value of that life.”

Hofstadter devoted his all too brief career to advancing the primacy of ideas, and exploring the ways that behavior (primarily in the political sense, but also in related pursuits) is related to the way people use, or refuse, their minds.

Ariel Dorfman, a writer, paraphrases Hofstadter’s findings:

“Anti-intellectualism had its origins … in American traits that anteceded the nation's founding: the mistrust of secular modernization, the preference for practical and commercial solutions to problems and, above all, to the devastating influence of Protestant evangelism in everyday lives.”

Like the councilman spouting in the corridor, New Albany’s most renowned practitioners of the anti-intellectual craft tend somewhat bizarrely to be registered as Democrats, although it is difficult to imagine any of them voting for their party’s standard bearer, Barack Obama, in 2008. As such, they’re little more than political poseurs, and with each passing day, we find better ways to sidestep their obstructionist defaults.

Does their destructive anti-intellectualism really matter?

It does, because it emits a catastrophic message to the community, mimicking Pink Floyd: “We don’t need no education – only ward heeling.”

It cynically condemns our children to the very same poisoned atmosphere of unaccountability and low common denominators that shaped New Albany’s malignant past and brought us to a state of apathetic degradation.

It furthers an atmosphere of congenital political underachievement. How many elected community “leaders” can you identify with support for the proposition that life’s difficulties are best confronted “with an intelligence of which no human should ever be ashamed,” as Dorfman phrases it.

Not many.

Rather, they persistently demand that we be ashamed, frightened and uncooperative. They denounce a pantheon of imaginary enemies, of shifty, phantom withholders of vital information, of smarty-pants book-learning engineers, of those who read, of those who write … of anyone who can “do” as they haven’t ever done, and cannot ever do.

Hence the purely imaginary cabal of zoning officials and contractors, plotting by candlelight to pump sewage into area basements.

In the same year as Hofstadter’s treatise on anti-intellectualism, his essay entitled “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” was published in Harper’s Magazine. It is a compendium of American political paranoia, as directed against a cornucopia of enemies – free masonry, the international gold ring, the Illuminati, Catholics and Communists, among others.

Hofstadter offers that “American politics has often been an arena for angry minds,” behind which is a “paranoid style” of thought.

“I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind.”

Hofstadter died many years ago, and yet his words chillingly describe the prevailing New Albanian political “culture.”

Consider the incessant talk of malicious City Hall plots directed against selfless public servants on the council. Survey the chronic knee-jerking when these same public servants are asked for corroborating evidence to support their nonsensical conspiratorial claims. Chuckle at the recurring expressions of anti-intellectual rage when they’re presented with alternative, contemporary visions of the world and asked if they’ve heard of life outside the Open Air Museum.

Looking for the best place to begin rejecting the politics of anti-intellectualism and paranoia on the council, and for isolating their practitioners? It’s the council president’s chair – and the time for change is mercifully close at hand.

Roger believes that there are no big or little words, just the right ones. For daily commentary, visit the NA Confidential blog: www.cityofnewalbany.blogspot.com

SHANE'S EXCELLENT NEW WORDS: Is a blog the same as a newspaper?

The NA Confidential blog (that's short for "weblog") turned 15 years of age on October 22, 2019.

Did you know that NAC never once has been used to line a birdcage or drain the grease from fish and chips? That's because it's an internet blog, not a newspaper.

But what's the difference between an internet blog and an online newspaper?

Bizarrely, all these years later it's a question still not widely grasped. Scott Clavenna, CEO of Greentech Media, Inc., answered this query at the Quora website on April 20, 2011.

A blog can be anything - the voice of one writer or many, who is not strictly held to any codes of professional journalism, but could certainly be as good and reliable as one. An online newspaper typically assumes the writers adhere to journalistic standards - double-sourcing critical assertions in an article, allowing people or companies an opportunity to respond to assertions, adhering to a code of ethics in reporting, such as the Society of Professional Journalists's code. A blog may voluntarily adhere to all of the above, but typically calling a publication a newspaper implies they are focused on "news" and therefore should assume the standards of reporting.

Of course, historically newspapers were printed on paper and priced with the objective of making a profit. Most still are, although this business model is evolving in ways both good and bad.

Tell me more: "Bail Out Journalists. Let Newspaper Chains Die."

Since October 22, 2004, the NA Confidential blog has enjoyed only one source of investment: my time, precious or otherwise.

For fifteen and a half years, NAC has been forever pro bono and resolutely profit-free.

Not a single advertisement has been sold, ever. Not one.

Given the sea of booze I've had to consume in order to document the perpetually underachieving history of New Albany -- the Open Air Museum of Ignorance, Superstition and Backwardness -- you might say I've actually lost a great deal of money over the years blogging.

Oh, and something else: the outside world has resisted every effort to transform NA Confidential into an anthology of good writing with multiple contributors, which was one of my goals at the outset.

I suppose there are numerous reasons for this, including the ludicrous inefficiency of the free Blogger platform, my disinterest in spending money on something that's free, the writing and reading habits of the vicinity, and the tendency since the late Noughts for people to post everything long or short on social media.

Since 2004, there have been almost 15,000 posts here, and all but a few hundred of them -- probably somewhere around 5% of the total -- have been authored by me. The offer remains open, as it always has: Join me in writing for zero remuneration, see the world and be threatened with reprisals by City Hall.

None of this should be mistaken for the concession that as a blogger, I'm any less skilled in terms of writing as (for example) a guest columnist for a local chain newspaper.

Been there, done that (2009 - 2011). I had to relinquish my column to run for office in the primary. I was told I'd get it back if I lost, which I did -- then I didn't.

Rather, the overall point is simply this: blogs and newspapers are apples and oranges, and do not viable comparisons make. Let's ask this word column's legal bagel namesake for a closing point of view.

Q. Shane, are blogs and newspapers the same?

A: Ha ha. When's the last time we purchased thousands of dollars in advertising from a stupid blog?

Previously:

Hanson's Folly: There remains a complete absence of diversity among regular News and Tribune columnists.

Nick Vaughn: "A Historian’s Perspective on Confederate Statues."

I first met Nick Vaughn in 2015 when he was younger than he is now (oddly, I haven't aged) and was running for city council in the Republican primary. Nick lost a very close race, then graduated from high school, began his studies at Hanover College, breezed through university in what seemed like a few months, and ran for office again, this time for a county council seat. Unfortunately Nick lost another  tighterthanthis primary contest, but he's plowing forward with plans for the resurrection of The Aggregate (stay tuned) ... and found time to submit this guest column.   

---

A Historian’s Perspective on Confederate Statues

I do not like to tout my credentials because I was taught to always be humble, however I feel it is necessary to explain my educational background for clarification. Firstly, on May 1st I graduated from Hanover College with a Bachelor of Arts in History. I did not have an official focus and I took classes on many topics including The Reformation, American Revolution and early republic, and a class specifically dedicated to Abraham Lincoln’s life, legacy, and how he has been portrayed by historians and popular media throughout the years. Additionally, I wrote my required Senior Thesis on Abraham Lincoln’s sole term in Congress.

While I tried to keep a diverse schedule of classes, I always gravitated towards the classes covering the time period from 1815 to the end of Reconstruction. Of course, the Civil War lay in-between the start and end date of the period of American History I find most interesting.

Before truly diving into the subject at hand, I also want to highlight my experience as a Republican college student. Many faux-conservative, incendiary personalities would have you think that Republicans are under constant chastisement, harassment, and belittlement on a college campus. Some also would have you believe that college campuses are hollowed liberal grounds where only the Democrats, Socialists, and Communists are able to freely share thoughts and ideas.

Friends, while I cannot speak for all college campuses, this was not my experience at Hanover College. You know those faux-conservatives I mentioned? I’m sure they have a rough time at colleges like Hanover. In fact, I know some who did. This is not because of their ideology, instead it is because of their inability to craft a coherent, fact-based argument. Additionally, some were poor students. I have had plenty of disagreements with professors who hold different political beliefs than I do, however I was never punished, chastised, harassed, or belittled for being a Republican. At Hanover, you don’t survive based on your ideology, but instead on the laurels and merits of your argument.

To suggest Hanover College is a very liberal school in an attempt to discredit what we have learned and the hard work it took is dishonest and extremely disrespectful to the thousands of people who have graduated from the college.

As someone who loves history and possesses a degree in the subject, the past couple of weeks with protests across the country advocating for police reform seemed like an unlikely place I would find myself. Of course, many are pointing out the shades of similarities this year has had to the 1920s due to a pandemic, or the year 1968 due to heightened racial tensions brought on by long standing and systemic injustices.

Recently, scars from the American Civil War have begun to be reopened as protesters advocating for racial equality have (rightly) begun advocating for the removal of Confederate statues and symbols from publicly owned land. As someone who has studied the Civil War, the Union, the Confederacy, and the historiography, this seems appropriate to me. Why do we have statues and symbols dedicated to traitors who attempted to break the Union because they wanted to enslave people?

To my initial surprise, many do not agree with this sentiment. However, after remembering back to my “Readings on the American Civil War” class, a class dedicated to the study of Civil War Historiography (what historians and scholars have written about the Civil War), I recall a couple weeks where we discussed Southern Revisionism and the Lost Cause ideology.

As someone who has read Jefferson Davis’ The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, which, like nearly all former Confederate traitors, attempted to rationalize the reason for the South’s attempted secession as being due to states’ rights (and as being honorable), I can tell you this distorted reality is very far from the truth.

So why do people think that tearing down Confederate statues and symbols is “tearing down history?” Well, I suppose those monuments dedicated to traitors are historical in the sense that they represent a historical event, although from a perverted point of view. The argument, to me, is not whether they are historical or not, it is why do statues of traitors exist in the first place and why are people so irrationally attached to them?

There are three points I want to make in attempting to answer those questions: first, Southern Revisionism, the coming of the Second Ku Klux Klan, and groups such as the United Daughters of the Confederacy have spread lies so successfully about the American Civil War, that many schools across America still incorrectly teach the subject. Second, history is much more complicated and nuanced than Twitter or Facebook allow historical events to be conveyed. Third, racial undertones have turned into overtones regarding the subject as the removal of statues have been used as rallying points for the alt-right, neo-Nazis, and other traitorous and dangerous organizations.

In regards to Southern Revisionism as it relates to the KKK an infamous black and white film by D.W. Griffith (a Southern Revisionist who made propaganda films in support of the Lost Cause, white supremacy, and the KKK), The Birth of a Nation highlights the disgusting and disingenuous imagery and language used by Southern Revisionists. David W. Blights points out in his book Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory that “Dixon's [Dixon wrote the book Griffith’s film was based on] vicious version of the idea that blacks had caused the Civil War by their very presence, and that Northern radicalism during Reconstruction failed to understand that freedom had ushered blacks as a race into barbarism, neatly framed the story of the rise of heroic vigilantism in the South. Reluctantly, Klansmen—white men—had to take the law into their own hands in order to save Southern white womanhood from the sexual brutality of black men. Dixon's vision captured the attitude of thousands and forged in story form a collective memory of how the war may have been lost but Reconstruction was won—by the South and a reconciled nation. Riding as masked cavalry, the Klan stopped corrupt government, prevented the anarchy of 'Negro rule' and most of all, saved white supremacy.”

Today, you see similar disingenuous remarks made on Twitter regarding the cause of the Civil War. One tweet that made my blood boil is shown here.

The supposed quote from Robert E. Lee is fake, however he has written similar things as a way to play into and prop up the Lost Cause ideology. The quote, which is one sentence in a much longer statement from Abraham Lincoln attempts to portray Lincoln as never truly being opposed to slavery and instead was focused on the preservation of the Union. The full quote, from 1862, is “If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”

The main goal of the war, in Lincoln’s mind, was certainly the preservation of the Union, however it should be noted that Lincoln was opposed to slavery ever since he saw the boats carrying slaves on the Ohio River between Indiana and Kentucky. During his time in Congress, he introduced a resolution to end the practice in Washington D.C. The issue of slavery and Lincoln is, as I stated earlier, much too complex for a Twitter or Facebook post. Hell, it’s even too complex for this article. If you’d like to learn more about Lincoln and the issue of slavery, I recommend starting by reading my thesis (linked above) and then using the bibliography to find further reading. Additionally, the movie Lincoln is a good starting point as well.

In the AP’s article on the disparity between where someone lives and how the Civil War is taught, they point out that “Confederate sympathizers have long promoted the “Lost Cause” theory that the Southern side was heroic against impossible odds, and that slavery was not the driving force behind the war. Edward Countryman, a history professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, said he learned that idea growing up in New York State in the 1950s.”

I want to especially point your attention to the “growing up ... in the 1950s” part of that quote. I would be being dishonest if I did not point out the obvious generational differences in the understanding of the Civil War. Not to be overly general, but the vast majority of people I know who post on Facebook about Lost Cause ideology and are opposed to the removal of Confederate statues and symbols are of a certain, older age group typically labeled “Baby Boomers.” This is because during the 50s and 60s, in response to the Civil Rights Movement, the Lost Cause ideology saw a resurgence and began to be taught in white schools again (or even more vigorously if not previously ended).

To be fair, both people vastly older and vastly younger have fallen victim to the Lost Cause myth, and it makes sense that more people will as Facebook and Twitter refuse to label falsehoods as such.

If there is anything you should take away from this article, I hope it is this: if you think that tearing down Confederate statues and symbols, memorials to traitors who enslaved people, is tearing down history, you might want to turn off the phone and computer, and pick up a book written by a reputable historian, take a trip to a museum, watch the movie Lincoln (not Gone With the Wind), or give me a call, because I am sick and tired of the ignorance.

A good reading list on the topic:

David W. Blight, Race and Reunion
David Donald, Lincoln
Kenneth Winkle, The Young Eagle: The Rise of Abraham Lincoln
Kenneth Stampp, The Causes of the Civil War
William Davis, Look Away
Gary Gallagher, The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History

SHANE'S EXCELLENT NEW WORDS: Normalcy or normality? I've made up my mind.

There's damage out there some place
You got to step aside
Where are you going that decision is made
That's how it started
Too hot and dirty inside
Contain your feelings when there's nowhere to go

After years and years of dithering, I've chosen normality over normalcy. English speakers have come to use these words interchangeably, and that's fine, but damn it, each of needs to make a choice NOW.

Normality gets my vote, and I'm sticking with it.

Whether you prefer normality or normalcy, one thing's for certain: we won't be having any of it for a very long time to come. Our favorite Doctor Councilman Al Knable explains the social aspect of normalcy/normality in a time of COVID-19 in this excellent op-ed piece contributed to the local chain newspaper.

KNABLE COLUMN: The road back to normalcy

There is an old yarn that tells of a weary traveler who, in the days before GPS and navigation apps, found himself far from home, hopelessly lost in the country. Indeed he was “off the map.”

Minutes passed as hours. Miles rolled beneath him, carrying him no closer to home, the gas gauge approaching “empty.” Desperate for assistance, the lost soul finally came across a seedy gas station, which to him appeared like an oasis in the desert.

Honking his horn with joy, a sleepy gas jockey at length appeared. The driver, overcome with relief exclaimed, “Fill ‘er up! And can you please tell me how to get back to the highway?”

The attendant puzzled a long moment, carefully studied the map and then answered sheepishly, “Mister, I’m afraid you can’t get there from here.”

This is our predicament. We are the traveler, the highway for lack of a better word is “normalcy” and we are off the map with no one who can tell us exactly how to handle this coronavirus outbreak.

People are afraid — more so even than after 9/11. No doubt some of this anxiety comes from facing an enemy even more unseen and insidious than Al-Qaeda. The uncertainty of just how bad things might get, our loss of freedom of movement add fuel to our concerns. There is perhaps so much information emanating from so many sources without rest that no one entity is deemed as the authority. Thus information mingles with misinformation breeding rumor and fear.

So how do we return to normalcy?

As for my personal decision to opt for normality, there's a good explanation here.

Normality and Normalcy, by Maeve Maddox (Daily Writing Tips)

Both nouns derive from the adjective normal.

normal: conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.

The adverb is normally.

According to some speakers, normalcy is an abominable neologism to be avoided at all costs. This attitude is illustrated by this comment praising a writer for preferring normality over normalcy:

A Nobel in Literature to you for writing “return to normality” instead of the ugly neologism “normalcy,” first popularized by Warren G. Harding.

Actually, according to the OED, this particular “neologism” was around as early as 1857, nearly half a century before Harding used it in his campaign in 1920 when he promised “a return to normalcy.”

(snip)

Normalcy is not interchangeable with normality in some contexts. For example, in comparing an untypical condition to a typical condition, one would want to pair abnormality with normality and not normalcy. Although the form “abnormalcy” is showing up on the web and even in some dictionaries, it’s not in the OED, and it is not standard in American speech.

Bottom line: Normalcy is well established and acceptable in standard American speech, although it is not interchangeable with normality in some contexts. Normality, on the other hand, suits every context in which the sense “the state or condition of being normal” is intended.

It's Sunday, and the "Jeffersonville Good News and Proselytizing Tribune" has lots of content addressing the publisher's narrow version of Christianity.

When we first began exposing the pewspaper's propensity for weekly down home camp meetings (just imagine the Jehovah's Witness heading for your door but tripping on the rolled-up copy of Tom's and Nancy's sermon) one of the staffers replied on Twitter that since some readers are Christian, it's perfectly acceptable to offer two weekly Sunday evangelism columns.

But of course. Other readers are atheists, pagans or Zoroastrians; some ride motorcycles, savor S&M or birdwatch; there are square dancers, vintage automobile fetishists and stamp collectors.

None of THEM get a single column, much less two, but when it comes to advocating for the one true religion, Bill Hanson pulls the strings and employees who know better have little choice except cringing.

Millenarian sects wait patiently for a reign of holiness that never seems to arrive. Me? I just keep waiting for the newspaper to devote as much space to local Democratic Party corruption as it does to scratching the publisher's nonsensical itch.

Jeffersonville News and Tribune hits rock bottom as evangelism columnist Tom May argues for theocratic fascism, Pence-style.

Jeffersonville News and Tribune hits rock bottom as evangelism columnist Tom May argues for theocratic fascism, Pence-style.

Sheer drivel from Bill Hanson’s pastor. 

Does Tom May still rank a second "general interest" column in addition to the Sunday sermon?

When will free thinkers and non-theists get equal time, not with piecemeal "guest column" replies to the newspaper's two resident evangelists, but via a weekly counterpoint of our own?

COLUMN: Freedom, faith and our future by Tom May in the Jeffersonville Hansonian Devotional, soon to be renamed the Tom May Content Aggregation Mechanism

 ... Is there a way that a person of faith can be patriotic today? Across our country, people of the United States are encouraged to show their patriotism – their love for their country and the freedom that it represents – on this special time of the year, but is there a place for my faith to fit it to the celebrations?

Ominously, May continues.

When it comes to the general public, the majority of Americans affirm the belief of this definition. “True religious freedom means that all citizens must have freedom of conscience, which means being able to believe and practice the core commitments and values of your faith.” A slight majority of 55 percent held to this opinion. This definition is down from almost 70 percent in a similar survey in 2012. It appears that while most still agree, Americans are feeling less certain about the definition.

You just know what's coming.

We are not sure about what faith means in our culture. We are even less sure of how to live that faith each day. Perhaps it is because we are not doing as clear a job teaching our faith, handing the mantel to the next generation.

What should a person of faith do? Foremost the person of faith should not be silent. Tom Minnery, in his book, “Why You Can’t Stay Silent: A Biblical Mandate to Shape Our Culture,” writes, “Being salt and light in this age means contending responsibly for godly standards. There is no escaping the mixture of religion and politics, because nearly every law is the result of somebody’s judgment about what is good and what is bad.”

Famous evangelist Billy Graham’s son Franklin writes on his father’s website, “While followers of the Lord Jesus Christ should never resort to violence, we must do all we can to resist evil. As Mr. Pence has said, we are not to remain silent when moral anarchists are attempting to extinguish any influence of Biblical morality in our government, schools and businesses.”

May then relates a tired Red Skelton anecdote about the Pledge of Allegiance -- no, seriously.

But don't take this pagan's word for it. There was an impeccably faith-based reply at the pews-paper web site, and it's a powerful rejoinder.

As a pastor in town I'm very cautious in writing to the newspaper to share my opinions on religion. I use extreme caution so as not to offend people. I firmly believe in everyone's freedom of religion and their opinions.

I read Tom May pretty much every week. Our religious and theological traditions are very different and I find myself often disagreeing with him. Having said that, he is entitled to his perspective and I applaud his willingness to share his faith with others. He seems like a fine person and while I often disagree with him, it's just a simply different perspective.

His most recent article, however, crosses a line. Faith, freedom, and culture are, of course, worthy of conversation. In his observation on freedom of religion, I would agree that we are free to practice our religion without interference from the government. Yes. Absolutely. I would also say that religious freedom also accommodates people who are not people of faith. People of faith are free to practice their faith; people who are not people of faith have a right to not practice faith. The United States does not have an official religion and that is, I believe, a good thing. I don't know if we are in agreement to the right of people not to practice faith but we certainly agree that people should have the freedom to practice their faith as they so choose.

All of my education has been in seminaries----I entered the seminary at age 18. I am a person of faith and have always been. My entire adult life has been focused on different aspects of ministry. My faith is something I take seriously. Mr. May included this passage in his article that was very irritating. He wrote:

"Famous evangelist Billy Graham’s son Franklin writes on his father’s website, 'While followers of the Lord Jesus Christ should never resort to violence, we must do all we can to resist evil. As Mr. Pence has said, we are not to remain silent when moral anarchists are attempting to extinguish any influence of Biblical morality in our government, schools and businesses.' "

First, Mr. Pence is a politician. He is not a religious leader. He is not a person who has expressed a great deal of support for religious freedom. His verbiage 'any influence of Biblical morality,' is exclusive terminology. By Bible is he referring to both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament? If his concept includes the New Testament, he's leaving out people who are Jewish. Is he including the Koran? The Book of Mormon? Buddhism? Hinduism? When Mr. Pence was the Governor of Indiana his religious freedom bill was not about allowing people freedom of religion, but allowing religious people the right to discriminate against people whose lifestyles he found morally wrong. He was called out for it and had to backtrack. Having said all of this, Mr. Pence is a politician. As a minister I have found many politician's religious convictions to be as plentiful and reliable as $9 shoes. He shouldn't be cited as a religious leader.

And Franklin Graham. I didn't criticize is father. I think Billy Graham was an honorable man who found himself burned by may of his political connections. Badly burned. But Billy tried, really hard, to stay above the fray. Franklin has jumped into the fray and is more interested in political ideology than he is with God. He loves to quote Scripture----often grotesquely out of context----to make his point of view sound like Christianity. For many of us, Franklin Graham is the prototype preacher to NOT become.

As a person of faith, I really do believe people faith can and should attempt to influence ethical conversations and I am a profound fan of the religious liberty we have. This article, in my opinion, has lowered a rich, theological, ethical conversation into the partisan political morass our nation is currently wallowing in. Please know there are people of faith with differing perspectives who are willing to talk about their faith, share their ethical perspectives, and live patriotically, without falling into the partisan game of Mr. Pence and Mr. Graham.

Sincerely,

Rev. Dr. John Manzo

Ah, that dreary fraud Frankin Graham.

When theists and atheists alike agree that something smells, maybe it's time for Bill and Susan to re-examine a few of their faulty premises. Why is the local newspaper shilling for one variation of organized religion to the exclusion of others -- or none at all?

Ten years ago today, my guest columnist slot at the New Albany Tribune was just beginning.

Sept. 30, 2010. Dalby needed a thesaurus.

No sooner than I'd finished a tweet about the newspaper's unvarying roster of older white male guest columnists than I started laughing from the belly up, because once upon a time I was one of them.

In fact, today is the 10th anniversary of my announcement in this space, which is reprinted below. My first column in the now defunct New Albany Tribune appeared in January, 2009.

From the very beginning, I referred to it as "Beer Money," followed by the title of the specific piece. Regrettably, the newspaper never found the humor in these words. "Beer Money" was Bluegill's suggestion, one made after I griped about the pay scale, and he observed that it still was enough pocket change to buy beer.

My gig as a columnist lasted until early 2011. When I filed to run for city council at-large, the column was put on hiatus; Kozarovich made it clear that if I lost, the column would return, and I did, but it didn't.

In the interim, the Tribune's merger with the Evening News had occurred. Kozarovich departed, and the new management wasn't entirely honest with me in terms of future writing prospects, but that's an instance of water under the proverbial bridge. Still, while few in number, my grudges are carefully crafted to last decades.

What the declining newspaper needs at present is a more diverse roster of columnists. It doesn't need any more old white guys like me. We need black, Hispanic, LGBTQIA+ and youthful voices. I don't expect innovation to happen, because upper management at the newspaper is milquetoast, direly committed to the flavorless pablum of low common denominators.

They play a prevent defense when what's needed is a full-court press. Me thinks I'll stay right where I am, giving the pot an occasional stir and doing what the merged newspaper can't ... or won't.

---

New Tribune guest columnist in January. (December 8, 2008)

Last Friday afternoon I met with Steve Kozarovich, publisher of the New Albany Tribune, and agreed to write a 900-word column on a weekly basis, beginning Thursday, January 8, and running on Thursdays thereafter. It is a (modest) for-pay gig, joining paid columns I write biweekly for LEO and quarterly for Food and Dining magazine.

This announcement is provided as a courtesy to the publisher, who now has the opportunity to begin fielding complaints before the column actually appears.

The column will be of general interest, including beer, travel, local events, and plenty of atheistic, progressive, left-wing rabble rousing. It seems the advent of Barack Obama is the perfect time to torment the local yokels in such a fashion. If there aren't periodic letters of outrage emanating from Greenville and Dewey Heights, then I'll not have been doing my job.

I've been writing as much as possible lately, both here and at my other blogs. Part of the reason is the possibility of the column assignment. It's like going into training and building up seldom-used muscles for the task ahead, and similar to spending a year learning to communicate with bankers and others whose dialects are unfamiliar.

After all, there's still a brewery to build. More on that later in the week.

To know me well is to know that the art of communicating through the written word is dear to my heart, and throughout my life, the ability to write has constituted perhaps my most fundamental link to the world outside my consciousness.

There have been written successes and disappointments along the way, but the compulsion has become far clearer to me this past year, as I've actively engaged my upbringing and can see now that my commitment to education and knowledge was a reaction to a blue-collar father whose ability to express emotion was limited primarily to anger and annoyance. My way of rebelling was to become good at the things he wasn't (writing is one) while remaining true to the indignation.

I laughed while writing that, by the way. Like my father before me, expressing irritation has never been a problem for me.

During what has amounted to a professional career in beer, I may have become infamous in other fields, yet writing remains the prime defense mechanisms of choice, and a means of articulating and explaining myself when the spoken word fails.

And, while there has been a love-hate relationship with myself and the newspaper these many years, I can state without hesitation that had the Tribune not improved recently, I wouldn't even consider doing this.

Wish me luck. More importantly, wish me improved work habits. I'm going to need them. When the columns begin flowing, I'll come up with a way to link or reprint them here or elsewhere. Also note that your ideas are appreciated. Ideas hatched here are fair game for exploration and improvisation at newspaper column length.

It's going to be fun.

ON THE AVENUES: May, Kennedy, wigs and prayers, but where's the delightful infidel gardening column?

ON THE AVENUES: May, Kennedy, wigs and prayers, but where's the delightful infidel gardening column?

A weekly column by Roger A. Baylor.

Lacking time on Thursday to complete the weekly column, I took to Facebook to apologize, vowing not to resort to encore performances.

But then it was Sunday morning, and the dander rose as I viewed my Twitter feed and saw the local chain newspaper's weekly touts for Christianity.

Today’s headlines cry out the burden, don’t they? If God is good, why is there evil in the world? And if there has to be evil, then why does it have to prosper? What is God thinking in allowing all of this to happen? Why doesn’t He do something? Why doesn’t He stop it?

-- News and Tribune religion columnist Tom May

And the bookend.

The Bible says that while we were still sinners, while we were still God’s enemies, actively opposing him, willingly disobeying his laws, even while we were refusing his grace, he sent his son to die for us. That man, Jesus, God in the flesh, loves us. It’s good to be reminded that he continues to go out of his way, as far as it takes, to demonstrate his love, all in an effort to bring those he loves safely home.

-- News and Tribune religion columnist Nancy Kennedy

I had no idea local churches contributed such a high volume of advertising revenue to the state of Alabama's fashionable Bobby Jones golf courses, thinking to myself, haven't I already written the rebuttal?

And if so, don't the readers of this blog have a right to my opinion?

Consider the answers a commandment: Thou shalt uncomplainingly endure a repeat of this column from last year. 

---

ON THE AVENUES: On a wig and a prayer, or where's the infidel gardening column?

A weekly column by Roger A. Baylor (August 31, 2017)

Lately I’ve been giving the News and Tribune a hard time about the newspaper's recent doubling of column slots for religious advocacy, from one to two – or, approximately two times as many as needed.

What about an “equal time for pagans” weekly bell ringer, or even better, the long overdue humanist food column, as suggested by the estimable Goliath?

Guys, I’m tanned, rested and ready -- and unlike Nancy Kennedy, I actually reside here.

Each week, I’d begin by refuting a theist’s fallacy, end by laughing at an effigy of Ken Ham, and fill space with tips on how to make the perfect Reuben sandwich out of leftover Tex-Mex.

But no. Instead, we get the same dreary inspirational tracts. In the customary absence of newspaper management participation on Twitter in any substantive give and take, one of the reporters offered this:

A large portion of our readers are Christian. If you have specific questions or complaints, I would advise you contact our editors via email.

(Arms folded ... me, complain?)

In terms of catering content to pre-existing conditions, probably a large portion of newspaper readers use their kitchen microwaves far more often than a Lynx Sedona 42-Inch Built-In Natural Gas Grill With One Infrared ProSear Burner And Rotisserie L700PSR, now only $3,399 at BBQGuys.com … and yet, there’s an informative regular barbecuing column, isn't there?

Besides, why can’t we have the column conversation in public? You know, the new give-and-take, not the old five-and-dime. Amid the secrecy, it's just frustrating imagining what might be possible with just a dollop of creativity.

Bill Hanson seems intent on transforming his fading newspaper into a vehicle for Christian proselytizing, while I enjoy rebutting proselytizers even as I remind them to #getoffmyporch, using a lighted cigar for pointed emphasis.

You’d think Bill and I could develop a nice Saintly Christian versus Ghastly Atheist shtick, but alas, the publisher’s sense of humor simply doesn’t approach that of Rollen Stewart’s – at least before the voices in Stewart’s head began outnumbering the ones cascading from the heavenly firmament.

"God wants me to block your view of this play."

Older readers may recall Stewart’s brief, shining career of athletic venue-style religious advocacy. For a decade or more, you couldn’t watch a major sporting event on your rabbit-eared, non-digital television set without seeing the man with the crazy rainbow Afro, always seated somewhere near the middle of the most prominent camera angle (behind home plate, under the basket, in the end zone), and always holding a sign touting John 3:16.

For the blessedly uninitiated, this name and number refer to a Bible verse that provides a handily terse defense of Christian doctrine, one designed to encourage all of us to sign on the dotted line and begin Osteen Vision Level tithing.

But the Afro was a mere wig, and Stewart himself proved to be even more of a nut job than most lucre-vangelists. In due time, his fanatical religious fervor regressed to the point of stink bomb attacks on the ungodly, and in 1992 – presumably in celebration of one or the other impending raptures – he was ingloriously arrested after an attempted kidnapping.

Because of this and other less-than-holy offenses, Stewart currently resides in prison, perhaps in California, but more likely on Fantasy Island. As one wag observed, “Jesus saves, but he can’t get Rollen Stewart out of jail.”

Just for old times’ sake, I’m considering an official Rollen Stewart model rainbow Afro for the next city council meeting, along with a placard espousing a random passage selected from the wit and wisdom of Robert’s Rules of Order. I’m serenely confident that the increasingly pious (or is it porous?) Dan Coffey won’t recognize what he’s never so much as once risked reading.

Except the third floor lacks television cameras.

If the meetings were filmed and Coffey’s antics disseminated to the world at large, at least Rollen Stewart’s religious dysfunction would be supplanted by the equally frustrating political variety celebrated within the friendly confines of the Open Air Museum of Ignorance, Superstition and Backwardness.

---

Meanwhile, for atheists like me, the calendar pages may turn, but the conversation rarely changes.

It still surprises me when my theistic friends respond with annoyance whenever an atheist has the unmitigated gall to come out of the closet and seek equality in discourse.

That’s just a bit hypocritical, isn’t it?

Think of every religious adherent who has ever come knocking at your door while you’re busy eating, drinking, sleeping or fornicating in the privacy of our home.

Think of the transformational zeal of generations of ravenous Christians, traveling overseas for the sanctified purpose of subduing decadent native cultures, and conveniently spreading Western diseases even as they blamed the dying natives for falling sick, and urged them to immediately find God as the cure.

Think of how so much of the history of organized western religion is one of evangelical outreach, and by its very nature, how evangelism is invasive and intrusive with regard to the physical and intellectual space of non-believers.

Not only that, but in the ever widening search for market share, evangelists from one sect freely target those who ascribe to differing versions of ostensibly the same supernatural. You’d think that believing in any God would do, and yet it’s never enough for them.

Either way, if an atheist dares to attempt an explanation of why he or she doesn’t believe in any of it, out comes the fear-mongering rhetoric – and sometimes worse.

Granted, in some senses I spent many years evangelizing for good beer. If my pal Fred in Michigan hadn’t already taken the name, I’d probably call myself a beervangelist, though whether non-believer or beervangelist, it isn’t like I’ve ever gone door to door creating a public nuisance.

Not once have I posted myself at the entrance of a Christian church on Sunday morning in protest the worship therein, or flashed a team pennant at a devout John 3:16-er.

Never have I sneaked up into the cathedral balcony and menacingly waved my portrait of Bertrand Russell at the minister, demanding that he repent from sin -- or whatever Nancy Kennedy and Tom May insist on calling it.

That’s why, in the final reckoning, it would be somewhat hard to write an “atheism column,” because atheists are rationalists, offering no positive claims with respect to knowledge derived from outside the realm of human experience and perception.

We’ve got nothing to sell, and that’s the whole point.

In the absence of verifiable evidence, atheism is a negation. It is the theist who is obliged to prove that God exists – not the other way around.

Perhaps it’s true that some atheists go a step further and proselytize in the manner of the religionist, but the percentage surely is small.

During the past two thousand years, far more people have been asked to convert to religion at the point of a bayonet, routinely dying as a result of their refusal, than have been forcibly “converted” to atheism.

In my experience, atheists generally just want to be left alone, and prefer that religious belief remain a matter of private conscience and not a public policy lever.

They respect a separation of church and state precisely because history makes it abundantly clear against whom this public policy stick is wielded, generally resulting in a sad continuation of war, violence and strife accompanying organized religion throughout human history.

It’s too bad, albeit perfectly in keeping with past practices, that Hanson isn’t interested in his readers hearing another side of the story. It’s a shame he doesn’t grasp the interests of the smaller portion whose viewpoints differ. Have the portions even been counted?

These readers pay, right? If so, shouldn't their needs be considered?

In closing, here's the gospel truth: that $30 George Foreman Grill in our kitchen does a damned fine job, and the $3,369 we saved is more than enough to enjoy a nice, humanistic European holiday.

(Portions of this column were previously published in 2009 and 2012)

---

Recent columns:

August 30: ON THE AVENUES: From Baltic to Mediterranean, the diary of an unrepentant New Albanian Europhile.

August 23: ON THE AVENUES: The "downfall" occurs when we all fall down.

August 20: Non-learning curve: This ON THE AVENUES column repeat reveals that since 2011, we've been discussing the safety hazards on Spring Street between 10th and 9th. Too bad City Hall is deaf.

August 9: ON THE AVENUES: There's only one way to cure City Hall's institutional bias against non-automotive street grid users, and that's to #FlushTheClique.

Terry Cummins keeps fighting -- and writing.

Terry and me, 2015.

Terry Cummins was an assistant principal at Floyd Central when I was a student.  I got to know him all over again as an adult during the 1990s via the helpful medium of the Public House.

Since then, one thing I've tried not to miss in the newspaper is his weekly column. In 2015, Terry wrote wonderfully about his wife's terminal illness and his own cancer diagnosis.

August 26, 2015: On Terry and Vera Cummins, and doing what you have to do.

Vera died in early 2016, and several months later, Terry wrote one of his finest newspaper essays, bar none.

She’s been gone for seven months. It seems like forever, but I feel her presence that will not leave. Vera and I were married for over 61 years, which were packed full of all kinds of surprises, heartaches and emotions imaginable. When we chose to undergo frequent stubbornness contests, something had to give. An at-odds married couple can try discussing head-on conflicts, but it took several years for me learn to keep my mouth shut, and take her in my arms. If you do this, don’t ever whisper, “I think you were more stubborn this time than I was.” No, tightly squeeze her until her lips begin searching for yours. Then lead her to the bedroom no matter what time of day it is. It’s wondrous what love can do by what you do rather than trying to explain everything.

Terry bounced back from these reversals and beat cancer, only to face the same enemy for another round.

May 19, 2018: Newspaper columnist Terry Cummins and his thoughts about finality.

His most recent update came Saturday. If you've read Terry's writing, it makes perfect sense that he'd be chronicling his life as it is, right now -- without a trace of annoyance or self-pity, just the matter-of-fact perspective of a country boy who has retained bedrock values and an accompanying spiritual serenity.

Best wishes to Terry. What an inspiration he's been to all of us!

CUMMINS: Finishing with a flourish, by Terry Cummins

There’s no way to get around it. If you’re alive, you’re going to die. But I’m not ready yet. That’s too bad. If you’re up in years or your body is aging faster than it should, time is not on your side. Have you ever observed a beautiful flower keep its radiance indefinitely? Unless it’s plastic, it withers and returns to the earth to be regenerated again in the natural scheme of all life on earth. Unless you’re plastic, you’ll wither to dust and regenerate into eternal life, if you have faith and trust there is a Creator, an enduring, stable and abiding force.

But who wants to live a plastic, or artificial life? After fighting cancer for over three years, I’m weary of it. And after conquering colon cancer, which was like a long vicious dog fight, the remaining dormant cancer cells went to my bones and began thriving there. And now it’s another all-out battle to determine if my bones take me down deep or the poisons they inject inside me provide a bit more life of dubious quality. It gives one something else to agonize about — day and night ...

How and when will I pass on, and is there a way to prepare for it?

GUEST COLUMN: David Barksdale must recuse himself from the Reisz city hall vote.

I wrote these words in 2015.

During the time I’ve been paying attention to the local scene, there simply has not been any point of comparison with the atmosphere today in terms of retribution, intimidation and implied vengeance.

For those in support of the opposition, the consistent message is there’ll be hell to pay if the incumbent loses his bid for re-election.

My calls for UN election monitors and assistance from the Jimmy Carter Center are only partly in jest, because the situation is getting increasingly tense as voting draws near.

It's three years later, and my efforts to enlist just one or two local contractors to comment on the process by which Denton Floyd was handed the Reisz city hall project, with an unprecedented accompanying cash gift of 750,000, have met with eerily similar replies: "Roger, how can we still do business in this city if we talk openly about this?"

Trust me, folks. Had Team Gahan solicited open bids with the promise of three-quarters of a million up front, with the building's purchase price already pre-determined, and the promise that future EDIT money would preclude the possibility of failure ... let's just say that numerous contractors would have been competing for the project.

But the fix was in, and as I write, redevelopment continues to withhold the documents detailing the terms of the $750,000 check's handover to Denton Floyd -- unless, of course, there are no documents.

Pro tip: that's even worse.

I can verify the identity of the writer of this guest column, who also fears retaliation. Many community pillars don't want to hear it, and it's time their snooze ceased. It is a well-founded fear, and an oft-repeated reality. The only surprise at this point is that members of Gahan's inner circle haven't started wearing identical leather jackets.

---

Council,

Some of you know me well. Some of you barely know who I am. I no longer attend your meetings as frequently as I once did. Why? Because I sincerely believe that you as a body and you as individual councilmen have no interest whatsoever in hearing from your constituents, whether they are knowledgeable resources you could use or deluded lunatics. You ignore anyone who does not pay to or get paid by you.

This “deal” with Denton Floyd for a luxurious new city hall on Main Street is not only unwise but obviously criminal, pitifully evil, and abjectly corrupt. I hope you all have lawyers on retainer, because when the lawsuits begin, you will all be called as witnesses, if not as parties, and you will need the effective assistance of counsel.

But let’s forget for a moment the criminality. This is just foolish. This city’s resources are incredibly limited, with almost no revenues that you can deploy on a discretionary basis. To commit $10 million to a new, luxurious city hall that is by no measure a necessity is an abdication of your fiduciary duties.

You are poised to approve an enormous commitment of city funds, knowing full well that huge chunks of that will wind up in the pockets of craven bureaucrats that also have fiduciary duties to the citizens of New Albany. Further, I can find no evidence that the developer in question is committing even a single dime, risking even a penny. I can’t think of any developer – or investor of any sort – who would reject this deal. That reinforces my conviction that this is a deal riddled with corruption.

Your vote on Monday night will be your legacy. A “yea” vote will become a political Mark of Cain that will haunt you for the rest of your days. For the Democrats slavering to heed the orders of their master, it will be the vote that eliminates your party from participation in local government for at least a generation.

But I’m here to address the lone Republican who favors this boondoggle. At least I think he’s a Republican. He might be the only person in that party who supports it. Perhaps he’s switching parties?

I am greatly in favor of historic preservation of significant buildings. I think I’ve demonstrated that adequately through advocacy and at least modest financial support. But there is one person in this city who is most closely identified with that cause – David Barksdale – or as the local newspaper calls him, “Dave.”

David, Dave, Davie … you must recuse yourself from this vote. 

I seriously doubt that you have a financial stake in the outcome of this vote. I will grant you that much respect. But you have a massive conflict of interest. I vigorously disagree with your stance on this, but your reputation, also, is at stake. If you are known for anything, it is your commitment to the historic preservation of buildings. Monday's vote is your payoff.

For you to take this bribe, for you to abdicate your fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers in exchange for this pitiful – in fact, arguable – “preservation” bauble is an egregious blunder. The others planning to vote yes will pay a political price. You, David, will surrender your integrity.

Step out of your seat. Come to this podium and advocate for this diversion of public funds. I would disagree with you, but I might still respect you. But you must not cast a vote in favor. You do not have the objectivity necessary to ethically cast a vote. Recuse yourself. Abstain.

The Reisz building can still be put to adaptive re-use. Do not pretend that this is the only, or even the best proposal. Your colleagues have offered intriguing alternatives that meet the same objectives at far less cost. Let us, as a city, debate these. If the Reisz building is endangered, condemn it and seek a more rational program to restore it in place.

But do not sacrifice your reputation by pretending that you are looking at this objectively. You can’t. Media accounts report that if this were a vote on $15 million or $20 million in financial commitment, you still would vote yes. That alone is evidence that you cannot separate your devotion to historic preservation from your duties as a councilman.

Save your reputation. Step aside for this vote. Your constituents will have no problem if you move to table this notion and spend the next six months trying to sway David Aebersold or Scott Blair or Dan Coffey or Al Knable to support your views. 

But you cannot be the deciding vote on a 5-4 vote on this proposal.

Newspaper columnist Terry Cummins and his thoughts about finality.

2015.

I've been remiss in failing to post this link to a recent column by longtime newspaper contributor Terry Cummins, who was an assistant principal at Floyd Central during my years there, and later became a frequent customer at the Public House.

Simply stated, he's an amazing guy who keeps fighting through reversals that would have felled a lesser spirit. Terry just keeps on keeping on.

His ending here is a tad ambiguous, but he was back writing in today's paper. All the best to him.

CUMMINS: Thoughts about finality, by Terry Cummins (Tom May Anthology)

There was no escape from the long weekend, filled with disturbing and agonizing thoughts. After a pet scan on a Friday, I would receive the report on Monday morning that would answer my question — will I continue living or not? If this won’t get your attention, nothing will ...

"News and Tribune" changes its name to "Tom May Compendium."

Now Karl May ... there was a writer.

First the newspaper doubled down on its weekly Sunday coverage of religious superstition with two columnists, one local (Tom May) and the other not (Nancy Kennedy).

Now May gets a second column slot (albeit it one not published weekly) at a time when the newspaper surely would be better served by a newfound commitment to diversity.

Let's see: May, Cummins, Dodd, Stawar, Moss (all male, all white, average age probably 60 if not greater) ... versus Anderson and Beam (white and female; Kennedy is, too, but she doesn't count because religion is bunk and she's syndicated).

WTF, management?

Is this May character a former employee of state government in Alabama, entitled to some sort of weird pensioner columnist's kickback?

This being the News and Tribune, it gets even worse.

May's first offering in his second column slot was about sports, and someone in Indy liked it, so now the newspaper must inevitably devote column inches to praising itself for its own columnist.

Hand me an air sickness bag, and allow me to repeat: Has diversity ever occurred to anyone in Hanson Ad Sales Land?

Spoiler alert: The first sentence of Morris' paean to May is not offered in an ironic sense.

Indians offer May season pass after reading column, by Chris Morris

NEW ALBANY — Tom May figures he was at the right place at the right time — twice.

Amanda Beam's excellent newspaper column is called "Polling position."

The recent poll generated by Liz Watson's campaign was snapped up with lightning speed by the News and Tribune, elevating just another social media tout redolent of the AdamBot's knee-pants DNC tactics primer to the status of genuine news item. I find this regrettable, given that the newspaper hasn't offered the same freebie to surveys subsequently released by Dan Canon's campaign.

Either both these question-asking efforts are sufficiently reputable for newspaper coverage, or neither. I can't determine why one is, and the other isn't, although it is at least gratifying that management allowed Amanda Beam's excellent column to be published.

The past week has been critical for me in making a final decision about how to vote in May. I've leaned Canon from the start; admittedly, there's a final piece of the puzzle to be pressed into place, and I trust it will.

In the interim, merely remember that when the party establishment is the problem, party establishment candidates push no favorable buttons with me. If you have access to the newspaper's articles, I strongly encourage reading the entire column. Meanwhile, here's the middle section of it.

BEAM: Polling position, by Amanda Beam

... Fast forward a few days. I noticed an article on social media that revealed one of the results of the poll I had taken. However, not included was who had commissioned the survey or the questions they asked in the order they had appeared.

Call me crazy — again — but if a campaign paid for a survey I find it difficult to treat the results as valid.

So if you know me and my big mouth, then you would understand I could only do one thing. I spoke up not so eloquently on social media. Citing my own experience with the survey, I questioned who commissioned the poll and, ultimately, its validity.

Sometimes when you ask questions you get great responses. Other times you get insinuations that you are a mindless twit.

I got both ...

The many faces of fake news ("Old Albany and the New Albanians.")

As occasioned by a social media discussion yesterday about New Albanian history, it occurs to me that newer readers might not recall that from 2009 through early in 2011, I wrote a paid weekly guest column for the pre-merger New Albany Tribune.

Upon announcing as a Democratic Party candidate in the 2011 primary election for an at-large city council seat, I was compelled to relinquish the column, which I was assured would resume if I lost the race, which I promptly did.

The incoming editor told me there wouldn't be space in the "new" paper for all previous columnists, and so we forged a deal wherein I agreed to end the general interest column in return for one about food and drink. Six and a half years later, the editor in question is gone and I'm still waiting for our good-faith agreement to come to fruition.

Yesterday's on-line history chat was followed by an off-line dialogue about the founding Scribners. Following is an update of an ON THE AVENUES column from October 18, 2012, which referenced a Tribune piece from 2009.

Maybe it's time to write a book.

---

Old Albany and the New Albanians.

There was a far-off time, very early during my 112-week tenure as a paid guest columnist at the pre-merger ‘Bune, when I fixed my gaze on the dawning of our civic Age of Precarious, or New Albany’s approaching bicentennial celebration.

It was the year 2009, and I traced the roots of the New Albany Syndrome all the way back to the era of the Open Air Museum's birth. The story went like this.

----

It’s time to throw a slab of barbecued bologna between two slices of clammy white bread, check the mountains on your blue-cold can of Coors Light, and crank up the Victrola with some red-hot Benny Goodman, because New Albany’s bicentennial is fast approaching, and assuming that Steve Price doesn’t lead the fight against celebrating it (too few nickels and dimes in grandma’s cookie jar), here are some bicentennial basics.

In 2013, it will be 200 years since the Scribner brothers washed ashore at the Falls of the Ohio, surveyed the wilderness and concluded that this riverbank would be a fine locale for commemorating their hometown back east … and the city of Albany in New York has never forgiven its wayward sons for the ensuing guilt by association.

The Scribners built the city’s first proper structure in 1814, and the Scribner House was soon followed by two cheaply built rental quadplexes up on the future East 15th, which Joel Scribner promptly flipped. Pocketing the proceeds, he skipped on his bar tab at Ye Olde Luddite Inn, thumbed his nose at the hapless code enforcement officer, and fled town for a redeye steamboat ride to New Harmony for the hottest craps tables this side of the Louisiana Purchase.

---

Who among us foresaw that with Price removed from the council's equation, Bob "CeeSaw" Caesar would be liberated to spend $1.2 million (or more) on various birthday parties for the city, and to successfully dodge all questions as to what all this money bought?

My larger point was this: while New Albany’s earliest settlers may or may not have been angels, they somehow succeeded at city building, something that as yet eludes a great number of present-day citizens as well as their chosen, perennially underachieving political kingpins.

Moreover, a full two centuries later, the urban foundations built by previous generations remain capable of serving as a blueprint for efficient, civilized living in a modern world beset with challenges, and irrespective of dribs and drabs of "progress" in recent years, the city as yet remains ripe for adaptive reuse.

But what got me into trouble in 2009 wasn’t sneering at penny-wise, pound foolish lowest common denominators. Rather, it was exercising my artistic license by imagining that the Scribner Brothers came from Albany, New York. It read better that way, or so I thought.

That's right; before the term came into vogue, I was curating "fake news" about the founders. 

A week after my column was published, Anne F. Caudill, librarian of the Piankeshaw chapter of Daughters of the American Revolution, “correct(ed) Baylor’s history mistakes.”

I have had recurring DAR-laden nightmares ever since. Her comments follow, as does my own commitment to observe birthdays and anniversaries in a future tense. It's safer that way, with or without satire and jests -- the tricentennial inexorably approaches.

---

Mr. Roger Baylor’s article, “Unrecognizable to a Scribner,” in The Tribune on June 23, 2009, points out the fast approaching bicentennial celebration of New Albany’s founding to be held in 2013.

The Daughters of the American Revolution Piankeshaw chapter has since 1917 maintained the home of Joel Scribner, one of the founding brothers, keeping it as a museum and “home place” for the town. The chapter appreciates this recognition of the vision and enthusiasm and hard work of the Scribner brothers as they risked their fortunes and their futures to establish the town. The many handsome homes and sturdy buildings from earlier years attest that they were right in their faith in the future of the new town.

However, as we celebrate the history of New Albany, let us get the history right. According to the written account of Dr. William Augustus Scribner, son of Joel Scribner, one of the founders, his father was born in South East, Duchess County, N.Y., in 1772, but soon after the war, his father, a Revolutionary War veteran, moved the family to Connecticut, where the family grew up.

Later, Joel in turn established his family in Connecticut, but in 1808 moved to New York City, where he operated a grocery and feed store. Then in 1811, when William Augustus was 11, the family began the journey west to go into business in the frontier town of Cincinnati, along with the family of Joel’s sister and her family, the Warings.

The family never lived in Albany, N.Y.

In 1812, Joel was joined by his younger brothers, Nathaniel and Abner, and they decided to go into the business of starting a new town of the northern side of the Ohio River, then the frontier. By early January 1813, they made a trip to find a suitable location and purchased the land below the Falls of the Ohio. Tradition has it that they made this trip by horseback. It was in May 1813 that they moved the two families down river from Cincinnati by flatboat to the new location.

That year, William Augustus was 13 and helped with the surveying and laying out of the town’s streets and lots. His memory and recounting of the family story and development of the town is to be credited. They named the town New Albany after the prospering capital of the state of New York, in the belief that it, too, would become the capital of a large new rich and prosperous state to be established from the Indiana Territory. Another brother, James Scribner, their mother, Phoebe, and a sister soon followed to the new town.

Let us not allow Mr. Baylor’s article to begin another misconception, even in satire and jest, that the Scribners were greedy developers who pocketed gains and fled town for gambling tables elsewhere. Joel Scribner was a founding member of the First Presbyterian Church, organized in the home of his mother, and was an elected elder of the church.

Other members of the family were founding members. From the beginning, the family established an educational fund, contributed as a portion of the sale of each lot of land. They gave land for public buildings, a log school house and the church. All the family worked in various ways to insure the future of New Albany. Unfortunately, all of the brothers had died by 1827, too soon to fully realize how their vision would be fulfilled.