 |
| This email (above) to PNJ was sent Thursday morning from the dais while I was at the BCC meeting. Instead of considering my op-ed for publication, PNJ wrote a hatchet piece attacking me three days later in the Sunday edition..... |
But Instead of publishing it or considering it for publication--PNJ instead wrote a hit piece attacking me this morning which is ridiculous and disappointing. Most folks who take a step back and look at this whole bridge-naming issue can clearly see that a compromise is in order here. And this is exactly what I have proposed in my viewpoint. Too bad PNJ didn't print it.
But then I started looking into the PNJ's previous writings on the plan to name the bridge after General James--and lo and behold apparently they have already made a decision on this via an editorial that was printed over the Christmas holiday last year. I was out of the state and did not see it when it was first printed. Okay, so PNJ believes that this is a great plan--no problem.
But what is wrong with taking a step back, asking some important questions, and figuring this whole thing out via a rational process--or even a citizen's committee? What is wrong with my idea of honoring both men? I guess this must simply be "TOO Controversial"---not my idea of having a dual designation on the bridge--but rather having the audacity to disagree with a position with which the PNJ have already taken.
Wow.
This is a good example of the 60% rule I have heard and read about from someone you know. When 60% of a project is complete then the public can be told what has already been decided upon on their behalf because by then it is probably to late to do anything about it. There are two contributing factors to this 60% rule in my humble opinion. The first one is there are those among us in positions of power that actually feel most people are not smart enough to have their own opinion and will not hesitate to voice that opinion to those that might disagree with them. The second factor is there always is going to be that someone who will always claim they know what is best for everyone.
ReplyDeleteSince when did the editorial department of the PNJ make decisions for all? 60% rule is or will be a thing of the past. Too much on the horizon for Pensacola and Escambia County. People are starting to pay attention. A fair perspective, Commissioner.
ReplyDeleteI read a short history on Pensacola, filed under documents going forward to SCOTUS to keep the Bay View Cross standing which included a paragraph about the equal protection clause protecting the Confederate Monuments also.
ReplyDeleteIn the history, Pensacola was essentially a frontier town and the Democrats came into power and then civic improvements such as running water were made. The Democrats must have needed to get people in office who could manage these improvements, such as water towers and running water, drainage and roads. The Republican party and free people of color on the docks perhaps must not have been accomplishing these goals, so yes identity politics, if you will, came into play.
I am sure in our country there were growing pains between the founding, the abolishment of slavery until today. No doubt. If someone is illiterate can they be trusted to vote in the best interest of the whole? Not always and you see that still plays out today but the tables are turned as far as party. But to assign blame and try to stir up moral high ground based on race in 2019 is counter productive to America as a whole. It almost seems people are parading a successful African American around like a token. True he is important but they attempt to Blackwash the message.
One of the perps published a headline on Beall claiming racism, but will anyone say..It wasn't because they were black they didn't want them to vote in the primary in 1935 but because they wanted civic improvements. They may have needed to get some of the Republican party out of power, which often then brought in the black vote. They used blacks for votes.
Some caw **Jim Crow** to pass their agenda to this day.
It was more political than racial then and I suspect it is now.
As far as PNJ once bit-- twice shy. Same with race baiter trying to shut down a discussion.
Beall name should remain.
Keep on sending your message.
The PNJ is wrong, as usual. Dandy Marlette and Savage are the only members of the depleted editorial board. How pathetic and sad. Like you observe , this could be an issue so you are smart to address it. Wow! A proactive public servant. The news journal has a opportunity to foster a legitimate dialogue, but no, they pick winners and losers, a zero sum game, no one really wins but civility and our community are lost. Everyone calls it the 3 mile bridge, but it has an official name that can be changed orshared or modified. But if you dare disagree with the liberal PNJ,as you have done many times, God help you. It must be tiring for you to have to deal with such liberal arrogance of the PNJ. But keep it up. Plus you have a blog to get your message out. Your thoughts are reasonable, but the libs who hate you aren’t. Just out wait them, their paper will be shuttered and probably before most still remaining reach retirement age. They are extinct. Unable to adapt and change. They just don’t know it yet (though I really think they do and are taking the community out with themselves).
ReplyDeleteCan't believe JAR actually copied one of your blogs to her site. I guess she thinks we are impressed by Marlette's opinion..and then all the trolls think it's about Underhill. What a bunch of dupes. If they go to the free speak site they can see the Beall grandson having a discussion.
ReplyDeleteTroyan Horse
Escambia Citizen Watch (Free Speech)
Come on over and have a discussion not controlled by DUNDERHILL
Anon 2:28l and P'cola Gir--great analogy about the BS "60 %" rule and how apparently PNJ believe in it. Awesome comparison. Dang it--they don't want the average citizen in on the front end of some of these plans. Dadgummit! How dare anyone provide logic and facts to tube their editorials! Anon 5:53-very good arguments and logic-thanks for your input. Anon 6:25--You nail the essence of the entire issue with one paragraph. Thanks for that. Wish I had the gift of brevity like you apparently possess. Thank you all for crushing these posts today and for sharing your thoughts. The PNJ actually published my Op-Ed (the one I submitted last Thursday) this afternoon at 1:00PM. Better late than never I guess, although it sure would have been nice to have my piece published side by side with Marlette's attack piece. I hope the hard copy paper has my op-ed in print tomorrow, that would be nice given it did not appear in today's (biggest circulation day) edition. I can't wait until February 7th to discuss this if in fact it is put on our agenda. This will be an interesting meeting to watch. Can't wait!
ReplyDeleteWell too bad some one just derailed the discussion to the gutter on Escambia Citizen Watch. Who in their right mind wants to tackle that?
ReplyDeleteName it the Pensacola Bay Bridge.
Senator Beall was a very successful young attorney and president of the state senate in his time. He did roll back prohibition, so the awful Lewis bear family could rise up and over power Underhill on that fateful night January 28 2019.
Everybody knows that. It was a conspiracy.
Gulf breeze tried to rename it Andrew Jackson bridge Indian killer in the 80's
so now we're going to name it WarDog bridge..
cheers..
Check HB97 2019 page three. If that passes it may be end of story. https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0097__.docx&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0097&Session=2019&fbclid=IwAR3L7h6tCaO9Tiro0d21dXDkmICVLFb3Pk2bun0YohXsrFixxuUigfeyVuU
ReplyDelete