ACDC chair Jim Burn issues a P-G op-ed piece today, in which he informs us of efforts to reorganize the party apparatus by using better tools, technology and training. He is fending off accusations of "machine" politics, and blame in general for an uninspiring primary election.Controller Tony Pecora, after apparently losing the endorsement by one vote to Prothonatary Michael Lamb, went to court and ended up winning the party endorsement.
Didn't this happen the other way around? Isn't Michael Lamb the endorsed Democrat? Isn't Tony Pokora's name spelled wrong?
At any rate, the author leans heavily on the fact that since candidates work hard to win the endorsement, and sometimes drop out after failing, all must be right with the process.
It would have been illuminating if The Allegheny Democrat were still around to issue a rebuttal, but the site went on lock-down mere hours after its discovery.
the allegheny democrat was a bad idea. that's why it was taken down. no more responses.. no more bad blood.
ReplyDeleteJust re-checked Burns’ Op Ed, it does state that Lamb’s the endorsed candidate. “Prothonatary” is spelled incorrectly, but, really, who cares?
ReplyDeleteThe part that really gets me is this:
“The purpose of the Democratic Committee's endorsement process is to give the most active, faithful and engaged Democrats a vehicle to meet with candidates and vote for their favorites.”
This is wrong, wrong, wrong. The members of the Dem. Cmte. are elected by voters, they are supposed to represent their constituents when casting their endorsement votes, they are not supposed to “vote for their favorites”.
I assume the paper edition still carries the error. Confirmation?
ReplyDeleteOn wrong, wrong, wrong. Anyone?
Got the paper edition right in front of me, Bram, and you got the quote dead-on-right.
ReplyDeleteAnother reflection of the respect for the committe's endorsement process was evident in the City Controller's race. Controller Tony Pecora [sic], after apparently losing the endorsement to Prothonatary Michael Lamb, wend to court and ended up winning the party endorsement.
Somebody needs a spell check over at Party HQ.
ReplyDeleteAs best I can tell, Lamb is still the endorsed candidate.
You people sure seem to have the to uncanny ability for making something out of nothing. FYI and it probably doesn't really matter anyway but the Editor at the PG is the one that made the "corrections"
ReplyDeletewhich were actually errors. There is supposed to be a re-print with corrections tomorrow? some of it was already corrected on line which is why it reads as is in the actual newspaper.
"This is wrong, wrong, wrong. The members of the Dem. Cmte. are elected by voters, they are supposed to represent their constituents when casting their endorsement votes, they are not supposed to “vote for their favorites”.
ReplyDeleteGloria,
Did you actually bother to read the entire Editorial after you
read "the part that really gets you"?
Burn goes on to say..
"We are attempting to reorganize the Democratic Committee in such a way that committee members will have the tools, training and technology to better engage voters on the issues and to become more involved with their communities. Committee members must be more than a face people see only twice a year on Election Day if the party is to strengthen its credibility."
Isn't this the same as the verbage
you used above?
Agree the verbage is the same, however, the “vote for their favorites” statement is actually the understatement and the statement.......
ReplyDelete"We are attempting to reorganize the Democratic Committee in such a way that committee members will have the tools, training and technology to better engage voters on the issues and to become more involved with their communities.
... is actually the correction to the understatement that was made.
We all know that in this primary favorites vs experience was the leading factor
I'm not making anything out of anything, Anonymous of 4:25, but I am surprised that the author of that op-ed made so many simple errors -- one of them to the detriment of the party he was defending. And BTW, spellcheck would not have caught "Pecora."
ReplyDeleteIf you want somebody making something out of something, Anonymous, surf over to the Admiral. I tried on his tin foil hat for about ten minutes and I *definitely* felt some tingling.
That might have been the anti-fungal cream that I've been using to clear up my jock itch. But perhaps I've said too much...
ReplyDeleteLamb is the endorsed candidate.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to that Allegheny Democrat page?
ReplyDeleteI didn't even get to see it.
I've had a few Op-Eds published in the PG. The PG editors did not touch my pieces. I wish they had cleaned them up on a couple of ocassions, but they didn't and the editorials went on the page exactly as I sent them in. So if I had to bet, I'd say that Burn's misspellings and misstatements were his own (or whoever wrote them).
ReplyDeleteIsn't it interesting that the supporters of the "machine" are afraid to use their real names? Jem, is that you?!?!
ReplyDeleteA few other things...
ReplyDelete1) Party leaders filled seats with people who would vote their way...some in my district can't even walk without assistance, never mind be an active and effective committee person. How do you justify their appointments?
2) The new faces are only there because of programs like Run, Baby, Run which embraced and encouraged them, it's the old time politicians that need to win them over, not the other way around
3) And finally, Mr. Lamb won the endorsement by 1 vote...the reason it was challenged was because there were PROVISIONAL ballots provided at the committee endorsement...what's with that? It's up to the Ward Chair to make sure all their people are on the list, if a committee person isn't on the list, they can't vote...period. BIG CONCERN TO ME IS --- WHY were there PROVISIONAL ballots at a party endorsement vote?
I'm a new person to the city of steel so I don't have all this background that you do, but reading your string, couple of things...they have new editors over at the PG at the top level and they are the ones who now have altered how they do op eds. My boss has had 2 published in this past year..both were VERY much chopped and edited. We had to correct some facts in one of them, but the other was fine. As I posted on another blog (we have many more back in Seattle, what's with you Pittzburgers?) I attended the GLBT thing that the ACDC did and it was actually pretty cool. Our elected leaders and candidates didn't do that back even in Wash state. Not bad. Also, that woman who speaks for them, saw her on a horrible local show, cable with a bunch of white men (surprise) and she rocked baby!!! You all need to quit complaining and work together!!!!! Ever thought of that???? Just my two cents.
ReplyDeleteGenerally, in Pittsburgh when there is a call to 'work together' it is for the purpose of pulling the wool over the eyes of the public.
ReplyDeleteOther calls of working together means solidarity and not being a place that welcomes new ideas.
Working together is a way to stay in the same rut and sustain the status quo.
The 'working together' call is a reason to ring the alarm bells.
Welcome to town -- just saying what I feel is our legacy.
We do need more 'teamwork' where teams have leaders and teams have role players. But, that's another verse.
FWIW....
Funny to hear how they (the Ds) are going to get into new tools -- yet are sure that a blog is a bad idea. How ironic.