Should I break the rules if my opponent already has, if the end result of not doing so could lead to continued acts of self-interest enabled by Greensboro’s status quo?
Will my kids understand if I break the rules to compete after my opponent violated the government’s policies without consequence?
If Greensboro’s government doesn’t or can’t enforce zoning codes and the local news industry doesn’t report on illegal sign placement, are the signs really “legally” placed?
Why would anyone vote for somebody who knowingly broke campaign rules, unless they didn’t know, and who could be considered partly responsible for many not knowing?
Were it left to me to decide
whether we should have a government without newspapers,
or newspapers without a government,
I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
Information is the currency of democracy.
Thomas Jefferson
Is this shameful or just the way it is?
Should I just shut up and go with the flow?
Should this behavior be expected by those who seek leadership roles?
Is this what Greensboro stands for, or is something as ethically simple as where candidates put yard signs a symptom of the disease that is infecting American politics?
The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement.
The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.
Niels Bohr
4 comments:
While you attempt to set a good example for your children, your opponent stands at a local bar, waiting like a vampire to victimize them.
Sorry George, but I get confused with the way you "write" (do you read it before you upload it?)....are you suggesting that one (or both) of your opponents is breaking the law? And instead of asking questions, why don't you make things clearer and just say what you mean? I suppose by asking questions (to which you almost never provide answers), it leaves you a bit in the clear in terms of accountability...kind of like suggesting you wouldn't seek the Simkins endorsement, yet going to visit with them anyway.
Thanks for the feedback Everest. This was a pretty emotional post after trying all afternoon to find out what the deal is with the rules and enforcement. It ends up it's kind of free for all, and the people who knew went out and did what they wanted to, regardless of rules they passed out multiples of times. I thought that as much as the Board of Elections emphasized sign placement, which caused most of the newbee candidates to take it seriously, seeing those that ignored the rules was almost heartbreaking.
Here are the rules.
http://gcms0004.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/docs/Misc%20Documents/GREENSBORO%20CITY%20SIGNS%202008.pdf
I have been going back and forth in my head whether to do what they do or not. But if I decided to not do it, do I let them walk all over those who don't "cheat" on principle?
I keep running into "if you don't sacrifice your prinicples, you won't win." The best most relavent example I have found are the donations Cindy Hayworth turned down in 2007 which Zack Matheny took while both served on the Zoning Commission.
I keep saying to myself "this isn't supposed to be like Russia," but the more I experience the way Greensboro politics works, the more dissapointed I get for the world we seem to have created, that my kids are going to inherit.
I intend to fix as much as possible, within what I can realistically achieve, so thier world will be better than it is now.
For me, asking questions provides the ability to confront subjects that otherwize would not be considered.
I didn't think I would be up against such powerfull interests. But I am committed to doing right by my family, and this is the way I figured out to do it.
George Hartzman
On Simkins as well as meeting with TREBIC and filling out thier questionaire, which I would be happy to provide, I learned a great deal about the game board I am playing on, and would definatley repeat the meetings if I had to do it over. In fact, choosing not to know the players and thier postiions would seem to be a strategic mistake. I wish the meetings could have been longer, and public.
What is most vexing is the lack of interaction among the candidates. There should be debates, not forums where you get 1-3 minutes and not really have a back and forth with oppenents. The forum format in an election cycle like Greensboro's seems to heavily favor the incumbents and the players with the most money. Notice who hasn't showed up to the forums to date. Why should they bother?
G
Post a Comment