More Pettifoggery from the Schrieber Campaign
Is the Paul Schrieber for Mayor Campaign running scared?
Today's Ann Arbor News included a letter from Normal Park Neighborhood Association president (and Schrieber campaigner) Lisa Wozniak, as well as one from Lorie Thoms of the now-defunct YCFE.
Ms. Wozniak takes issue with Steve Pierce's use of a single pronoun by choosing a narrow interpretation of "we." Clearly, Mr. Pierce could have meant "we" because he is an Ypsilantian and was discussing an Ypsilanti issue. But Ms. Wozniak's interpretation allows her to accuse Mr. Pierce of taking credit for someone else's work. This, of course, is such a character flaw that the reader --if there is any justice in the world-- should run shrieking into Paul Schrieber's camp.
In general, I recommend voting for the candidate who uses the broadest possible interpretation of "we."
Ms. Thoms (letter available only in today's print edition) contests the claim that Steve Pierce hosted ycfe.org for free, disregarding the larger argument that Mr. Pierce supported YCFE in blocking the rollback of the 2002 charter amendment. In any event, she says, Paul Schrieber was more supportive of YCFE, and therefore deserves the (now-defunct) YCFE vote.
First, let me say that I enjoyed working with Lorie in 2002 and 2004. She's witty and fun and a dogged campaigner. I would enjoy working with her again.
However, the civil rights enshrined in our city charter are a testament to all Ypsilantians and our sense of justice. The former members of YCFE do not own the issue. (For another perspective, check out Barb's & Celeste's letter to Lisa and Beth.) Not only do they not own the issue, it's a non-issue. All three mayoral candidates stated their loyalty to the charter.
What remains is the public animosity of Lisa Zuber, Beth Bashert, Lorie Thoms and, now, Lisa Wozniak.
But where is Paul Schrieber? Does he condone these attacks on Steve Pierce? If so, it's a side of Paul that I've never seen, and one I don't like. If not, he's showing that he can't lead his own campaign and, by extension, city government.
posted by Eric 3.0 @ 1:30 PM
14 Comments:
Eric, I think your last paragraph really sums it up well where Paul Schrieber is concerned. Whatever the case it does not look good. If he does condone what others are doing in his name he shouldn't be mayor. If doesn't condone it why hasn't he said anything?
I'm with you 110%, Eric.
I frankly can't wait until this election is over. My degree of disappointment with so many of the opposition players is beginning to overwhelm me.
My disappointments grow every day. I keep wondering whether the opposition will stop burning bridges. There is a bridge too far, you know.
Sam, please let me know if you come up with any answers.
I was in attendance that evening at the meeting cited. If I recall correctly, it was mentioned by one of the Ypsilanti School District representatives that they had asked for the opportunity to speak to the NPNA. So, I don't think that the NPNA can take all the credit for the meeting, either. In fact, I would be surprised if it had been initiated by the NPNA, since all the board members have children in charter schools. I believe I was the only one present with school-aged children that actually supports the public schools.
Now, I find THAT shocking!!
Stacey
Stacey,
I was at one NPNA meeting with Joe Guillen, Chapelle principal, and two or three teachers. At the time I was the Chapelle PAB treasurer. You and Steve were also there. If we're talking about the same meeting, you, Amy Doyle and I were the only parents in attendance whose children attended public schools. I remember discussing the "reach out to the neighborhood" strategy at PAB meetings, but I also remember discussing it on Lisa Wozniak's doorstep as I campaigned for one candidate or another. I don't recall where the idea originated.
Of course, we could be talking about different meetings. But you're spot-on when you say that some people in our neighborhood give lip service to our public schools while they send their own children to private/charter schools.
I know we're talking about different meetings, because the one held in April wasn't with Joe or the teachers. Emma Jackson and Pat DeRossett were there, and Dr. Hawkins was supposed to be there but Richard Weigel (sp?) took his place.
Anyway, I'm glad the Pierce campaign is keeping things on the up and up. I am so turned off by this negativity. I prefer when supporters stick to informing voters of the qualities in their candidate instead of spreading misleading information about their opponent or looking for trivial things to blow out of proportion. It's just so much more dignified.
Stacey
I must be thinking about the 2005 meeting then.
I agree wholeheartedly -- the Pierce campaign hasn't gone negative, and that means a lot to me, too. There are at least a half dozen good reasons not to go negative, not the least of which is how bad/desperate/ignorant/Republican your own campaign will look.
I stand corrected!
While it is not clear who requested the specific meeting in April (both Lisa W. and Emma Jackson said they did so), it was part of a larger effort to increase the dialogue between the schools and the neighborhood that Lisa organized. Also, there is a meeting scheduled for August 9th with representatives from Ypsi schools to meet with charter school families. I forgot to get more information about that. Lisa, can you help out here?
Stacey
This is ridiculous! I know Paul Schreiber to be a man of integrity and Eric and others have been blowing this non-issue out of proportion in their blog echo chamber.
The Pierce campaign through surrogates like Getto has been clinging to this one endorsement letter with melodrama from the get go. Address issues that matter to people like me who live and work in Ypsi. Leave your campaign inside baseball and YOUR negativity out of it.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Oops on the prior - sorry.
So, mac, negativity is okay when the candidate you support does it?
I thought Paul was a man of integrity, too, but I must admit my faith was shaken by the contents of the letter he sent.
You might think that such a betrayal of trust is "ridiculous," but many of the rest of us don't. We believe it to be a serious transgression. When several of us asked him to correct it and he refused, I think that spoke to both his integrity and how he will conduct himself if elected.
Mac, the Pierce campaign has nothing to do with this or any other blog that I'm aware of. Please show me otherwise.
I have pointed out the animosity of Schrieber campaigners, true, but that's not equivalent to the animosity itself.
What you haven't seen is a Pierce supporter going negative on Paul. Every endorsement letter that I've read, anyway, speaks only to Steve Pierce's strength. So, why the difference? Why do Schrieber supporters have to motivate with fear (Bashert & Zuber) and anger (Wozniak)?
I think it's fair to wonder why. I also think it's fair to ask where the candidate -- Paul -- is when his campaigners are throwing firebombs. Paul is a very nice man. Is he being overrun by stronger personalities in his campaign? And if that's so, what is the administration going to do to him? Can he stand up to the developers who would eat Ypsi's lunch?
The point is that I don't know what's going on in the Schrieber campaign, but I don't like it and I don't think it bodes well for Ypsilanti.
What really is damaging is the burning the bridge mentality of the Schreiber campaign. The latest, the use of photos that the township campaign used against our own standing Mayor and their township exec (regarding collaboration) is not only in bad taste, it is a bad way to campaign in this small town.
Post a Comment
<< Home