Well I was told I wasn't allowed to fight wit- I mean, respond to Dyna or Vanessa's posts, but I figured I could sneak this one in while the campaign was out doorknocking.;-) And while I appreciate Vanessa's clipnotes of the articles, she left out my favorite quote:
"I look forward to leading the third ward into a new era of collaboration and solidarity so that we can become a powerful and singular voice to city hall," said Samuels. "My commitment to community, my corporate and small business, my technical and artistic experience, my experience as both single father and family man, as immigrant and African American have all uniquely prepared me to serve this varied community with the maturity required to help heal the historic conflicts and promote prosperity," he said. I would, therefore have to disagree with the degree of substance vs. rhetoric, Olin does know the troubles of the ward, but then so does anyone working on either of the campaigns, or who just happens to read a newspaper. Don, on the other hand, has actually been working on the troubles of the ward. And that, in my mind, is the difference that Olin mentions it will come down to: Don has been tested by real life experience, Olin has read about it. Olin, as Vanessa pointed out, talks about what he will do to help the ward, Don, however, already has 5 years in the ward actually working on the issues. Olin says there needs to be more trust between the community and the police, Don has already been working on this trust with his neighbors and the Police Department. Olin says he will work on fiscal responsibility and economic development, Don has already made, balanced and cut budgets, created jobs and met payrolls. Olin says he will "build bridges" and bring people together, Don is already bringing people together from diverse backgrounds to work on shared interests and common goals. I know Olin's been briefed on the ward, I'm just not aware of any real life experience that is applicable to situation. I also know Olin's worked for Sabo for nine years, but I'm having a hard time connecting that specifically to the 3rd Ward. And by that I mean that in the nine years he worked his way up from receptionist/intern to constituent services, and to my knowledge, he wasn't focused on the 3rd Ward, and I'm not aware of anything in that nine years that was working specifically for or benefitting specifically the 3rd Ward. The 5th District is a big place, and I would assume he kept up on the general issues throughout the district once he worked his way up to constituent services, I'm just not aware of the direct relevancy or even how much of that experience is actual outreach. Couple that with the fact that Federal, State and City politics and processes are all very different animals, and the experience seems to me to not be as applicable. Another important difference in article was that Olin talked about what he would do but never really about why he was running or who he was. The only reason really given was that "he’s deeply concerned about the status of the neighborhood." Which brings to mind which neighborhood, and why hasn't he been working to change that status before now. Don, on the other hand, talked about the needs of the community, and the most important of which is for both North and Northeast to have an active voice on the council. The campaigns have been talking about the issues that need to be addressed constantly, I don't think anyone is providing a revelation by stating the obvious in an article, what I think that any voter needs to know is why one candidate is the best one to represent the ward. In fact Olin, never states this. He talks about what "the next council member" needs to do or can do, but he never really talks about why it should be him or that it even should be him. Don, on the other hand, talks about his committment and his varied real life experience and why it has prepared him to represent the 3rd ward specifically, and not just run for an office. In addition to reading the article, I had the opportunity to see them both at Lucille's Kitchen on Monday in a brief interview with Al McFarlane, there was only a few minutes, but I remember Don again talking about his real life experience (Fortune 500 company exec, Jordan activism, single parent, etc.) and how that prepared him for the job and how he would address the issues, the only thing I remember from Olin is that he worked for Sabo, lived in Harrison and was raised by a single mom (a point which I'd never heard him talked about before but which he stated 3 times in the few minutes they had). If we're looking at rhetoric vs substance, I think there is more substance in informing people of what they don't know and how it's applicable than simply regurgitating the obvious. I don't think that any constituency needs more of the same old rhetoric but rather someone who's been tested by real life experience. Being brief on an issue may make you cognizant of it, but it doesn't make you qualified to deal with it. Real life experience does. Jonathan Palmer Victory yj%, 'r t(ˬ*'2qzj 2>-,j[hlw騮n+˛m-jwf^+į[
