Today is May 19, Brother Malcolm X's birthday. If that means something to you, great. If not, perhaps it should but I'm not forcing it on you.
Let's talk about the power of art, caring and sharing. The first time I saw Chris Ivey's "East of Liberty: Part One", I cried. I then showed it here on the Hill and some folks came out but not enough. Now, "East of Liberty: Part Two" is out and I've not seen it yet because I had schedule conflicts with each screening. I'll probably cry again when I see this new chapter because I'm sensitive. I realize this might be hard for some to believe, especially if you've only seen my angry or righteous indignation side; but the truth of the matter is that most artists are extremely sensitive at all times and when you see injustice and inhumanity so close and personal, it causes a very human reaction--empathy, sorrow, despair, rage.
So, imagine my glee when Chris Ivey, the Documentarian / Hyperboymedia put an excerpt called "Bakery Square" on YouTube for us all to watch.
I have some great advice for the folks in East Liberty / the East End if they are seeking a Community Benefits Agreement or any type of proper reinvestment. You know where to find me.
Thank you, Chris, and let me know your thoughts, folks.
Happy Birthday, Brother Malcolm. I'm so sorry we don't appreciate you enough but my elders didn't even when you were alive, so I'm not surprised.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
The One Hill CBA
So, this Saturday, the One Hill CBA Coalition is going to vote on Saturday to pass the tentative CBA Agreement "up or down". Despite reports that Chair, Carl Redwood, is quoted as saying that "the majority" of the members must vote in order for it to pass, the reality (confirmed last Monday and the Monday prior) is that only twenty (20) of the 98 supposed members of One Hill need to vote in order to meet "quorum" and only a majority (as opposed to the consensus touted by Tom Hoffman at the beginning of this situation) is required to pass.
So, at bare minimum, only eleven (11) people need to vote "yes" in order to pass the One Hill CBA. It's so sad, it's amusing, especially considering that the negotiation team is nine (9) persons and the strategy team is a total of twelve (12) persons, which includes the negotiation team. So, quite frankly, the strategy team can vote the entire CBA "up" with very little effort (or approval) from the community.
Unfortunately, I'm not confident that many of the organizational representatives or their members really know what's in the CBA and what they're voting for. There were over 50 persons in attendance two weeks ago; but there was so much confusion over what was actually in the CBA (including the most recent inclusion of the value / reinvestment amount of the 28-acre site) that some of the members asked for another week to ask questions, get answers, etc. And, unfortunately, it seems the next meeting (this past Monday) was not advertised because approximately 15 persons (total) showed up. Evan Frazier was well-meaning in attempting to answer the questions posed but he did not know many of the answers and it was clear that any revisions offered from the week prior either weren't considered or just weren't taken seriously---and certainly not included.
Carl Redwood announced that the CBA will not be changed at all this week and that members needed to vote the present CBA up or down. I later found out after the meeting that the CBA is still being worked upon every single day and that the Pens have even attempted to provide a further clause. This sort of back-and-forth between the lawyers was presented as the reason for which the detailed CBA was not passed out three (3) weeks ago.
It's pretty amazing how this is all going down.
In its present form, I would not vote for the CBA and here's why:
1. The last-minute inclusion of the 28-acre site WITHOUT proper reinvestment is a sham, plain and simple. Sure, there is job inclusion and work on the Masterplan but the Pens are trying to get away with not providing ONE DIME of reinvestment based on the 28-acre site.
2. The Neighborhood Partnership Program that is proposed offers $500,00 per year for six years with a POSSIBILITY to renew for another six years, which is not enough.
The problem? The Pens aren't paying one dime into this fund either. They are going to help "in good faith" find corporate partners. Gimme a break. (For the record, the NPP was suggested by Jake Wheatley as a START 1.5 years ago).
3. The Pens spent a year and a half telling everyone within an eye or ear's reach that the Arena is not built with public subsidy, therefore they should not have to provide reinvestment relative to the CBA. Now, they have allowed for language regarding the 28-acre site but with little to no PROPER reinvestment (i.e. not one dime based on the huge amount of public subsidy and profit to come from this site). For those who might have forgotten the gargantuan amount of public subsidy the Pens received, click here. This is unacceptable.
4. The City and the County robbed the Hill District community of Don Barden's $350 million dollars of spurred development in the Lower Hill with a focus upon sweeping that development up through the Centre Ave. corridor and above Crawford Street. They chose to give it to the Pens but are not forcing them to provide PROPER reinvestment for the arena and the 28-acre site.
5. The BEST part of the CBA has the LEAST amount of proper investment --- the One Hill First Source Hiring Center (patterned after the Milwaukee Big Step Program), which is set to be funded at $90,000 per year for two (2) years, subject to the availability of funds and with the hope that the Falk and Heinz Foundations will supplement this gap. But this is not their responsibility, the funding should come from the PENS.
The Hill Faith and Justice Alliance has been repeatedly maligned in this process because we insist on much more and, you know, a novel idea that---we live, work and play here.
And now for the amazing One Hill double standard:
1. In April 2007, the Hill Faith and Justice alliance demanded, among other things, $10 million dollars in reinvestment funds for development.
Now, One Hill's negotiating for $3 million dollars in reinvestment funds for development with the possibility of $3 million more if the NPP program is renewed for another six years. Add the $1 million for the grocery store and we're at $7 million total.
We were considered elitist, extortionists, greedy, crazy, the whole nine.
2. We were kicked out of One Hill, supposedly, for negotiating separately for the CBA when we are the ones who secured a commitment for the CBA to begin with. The truth is, we were kicked out because of the agreement between three entities because we were considered too radical and demanding too much---supposedly without the community. This was entirely untrue, it was all about control but at the end of the day, preventing the history from ever being known to One Hill members, as a whole, in addition to relentless attacks from various parties inside of the organization only served to maintain the division, no matter how many times we reached out. Carl's response: "just join One Hill", which is hilarious.
Hypocritical much?
I could go on but I'll have to get into it later. Just thinking about this makes me sleepy and I have set new limits of what I can tolerate for myself.
All that I ask at this point is that Ron Porter not be allowed to return to the Hill House Association Board to help advise or otherwise manage monies flowing through the Hill House Association after he "temporarily resigned" from the Board to take a Senior Consultant position with the Pittsburgh Penguins to negotiate a substandard CBA and talk smack on the community the entire time.
Shady much?
See ya.
So, at bare minimum, only eleven (11) people need to vote "yes" in order to pass the One Hill CBA. It's so sad, it's amusing, especially considering that the negotiation team is nine (9) persons and the strategy team is a total of twelve (12) persons, which includes the negotiation team. So, quite frankly, the strategy team can vote the entire CBA "up" with very little effort (or approval) from the community.
Unfortunately, I'm not confident that many of the organizational representatives or their members really know what's in the CBA and what they're voting for. There were over 50 persons in attendance two weeks ago; but there was so much confusion over what was actually in the CBA (including the most recent inclusion of the value / reinvestment amount of the 28-acre site) that some of the members asked for another week to ask questions, get answers, etc. And, unfortunately, it seems the next meeting (this past Monday) was not advertised because approximately 15 persons (total) showed up. Evan Frazier was well-meaning in attempting to answer the questions posed but he did not know many of the answers and it was clear that any revisions offered from the week prior either weren't considered or just weren't taken seriously---and certainly not included.
Carl Redwood announced that the CBA will not be changed at all this week and that members needed to vote the present CBA up or down. I later found out after the meeting that the CBA is still being worked upon every single day and that the Pens have even attempted to provide a further clause. This sort of back-and-forth between the lawyers was presented as the reason for which the detailed CBA was not passed out three (3) weeks ago.
It's pretty amazing how this is all going down.
In its present form, I would not vote for the CBA and here's why:
1. The last-minute inclusion of the 28-acre site WITHOUT proper reinvestment is a sham, plain and simple. Sure, there is job inclusion and work on the Masterplan but the Pens are trying to get away with not providing ONE DIME of reinvestment based on the 28-acre site.
2. The Neighborhood Partnership Program that is proposed offers $500,00 per year for six years with a POSSIBILITY to renew for another six years, which is not enough.
The problem? The Pens aren't paying one dime into this fund either. They are going to help "in good faith" find corporate partners. Gimme a break. (For the record, the NPP was suggested by Jake Wheatley as a START 1.5 years ago).
3. The Pens spent a year and a half telling everyone within an eye or ear's reach that the Arena is not built with public subsidy, therefore they should not have to provide reinvestment relative to the CBA. Now, they have allowed for language regarding the 28-acre site but with little to no PROPER reinvestment (i.e. not one dime based on the huge amount of public subsidy and profit to come from this site). For those who might have forgotten the gargantuan amount of public subsidy the Pens received, click here. This is unacceptable.
4. The City and the County robbed the Hill District community of Don Barden's $350 million dollars of spurred development in the Lower Hill with a focus upon sweeping that development up through the Centre Ave. corridor and above Crawford Street. They chose to give it to the Pens but are not forcing them to provide PROPER reinvestment for the arena and the 28-acre site.
5. The BEST part of the CBA has the LEAST amount of proper investment --- the One Hill First Source Hiring Center (patterned after the Milwaukee Big Step Program), which is set to be funded at $90,000 per year for two (2) years, subject to the availability of funds and with the hope that the Falk and Heinz Foundations will supplement this gap. But this is not their responsibility, the funding should come from the PENS.
The Hill Faith and Justice Alliance has been repeatedly maligned in this process because we insist on much more and, you know, a novel idea that---we live, work and play here.
And now for the amazing One Hill double standard:
1. In April 2007, the Hill Faith and Justice alliance demanded, among other things, $10 million dollars in reinvestment funds for development.
Now, One Hill's negotiating for $3 million dollars in reinvestment funds for development with the possibility of $3 million more if the NPP program is renewed for another six years. Add the $1 million for the grocery store and we're at $7 million total.
We were considered elitist, extortionists, greedy, crazy, the whole nine.
2. We were kicked out of One Hill, supposedly, for negotiating separately for the CBA when we are the ones who secured a commitment for the CBA to begin with. The truth is, we were kicked out because of the agreement between three entities because we were considered too radical and demanding too much---supposedly without the community. This was entirely untrue, it was all about control but at the end of the day, preventing the history from ever being known to One Hill members, as a whole, in addition to relentless attacks from various parties inside of the organization only served to maintain the division, no matter how many times we reached out. Carl's response: "just join One Hill", which is hilarious.
Hypocritical much?
I could go on but I'll have to get into it later. Just thinking about this makes me sleepy and I have set new limits of what I can tolerate for myself.
All that I ask at this point is that Ron Porter not be allowed to return to the Hill House Association Board to help advise or otherwise manage monies flowing through the Hill House Association after he "temporarily resigned" from the Board to take a Senior Consultant position with the Pittsburgh Penguins to negotiate a substandard CBA and talk smack on the community the entire time.
Shady much?
See ya.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Darnit, Rev. Wright! You Done Wrong!
Alright, see, this is just so frustrating in a way because:
1. Rev. Wright's speech at the NAACP Awards was SUPERB, outstanding, factually accurate, inspirational, even entertaining. His discussion of America and "difference" not being "deficient" was just wonderful. He wasn't Barack. He wasn't Michael Dyson or Cornel West. He wasn't Snoop Dogg. But he was wonderful.
2. I missed the interview he did with Bill Moyer and only caught a snippet of it; but even then, it was okay.
3. I caught only a part of his speech at the National Press Club but even that speech was very good. (I was giving finals, forgive me)
4. I only heard about the disaster of the Q & A but when I saw the recap, my heart sunk a bit. See, that was all about ego. I defended Wright's need to come out and give his speech and stand up for himself, Black liberation theology, the Black Church and even set the record straight about a few things. He did that very well and on every occasion --- until that Q & A.
Wright is a public intellectual, not just a preacher. He has a responsibility, especially in this country, when we can name the Black public intellectuals we see on TV on one hand (a testament about America in and of itself). And, unfortunately, there is no reason why you should be throwing up Que (Psi Phi) signs, dancing at the mic, suggesting you should be Vice President and undercutting Barack Obama's chances.
It's sad but I felt that Rev. Wright doing this was a bit vindictive and also rested in ego-mongering. And, please, I live in the Hill District, I get enough of that b.s. every day or at least every Monday.
It's just hurtful and Wright did not just hurt Obama, he hurt all of us who are out here in the public, he hurt all Black radicals and progressives, he hurt all ministers and he most certainly hurt the everyday people who are still riding for Barack.
I am still riding for Barack . . . BUT:
Barack needs not to listen to his campaign managers all the time. What his campaign managers should have done was to bring out the Black intellectuals AND all progressive intellectuals who could accurately verify much of what Wright said in his previous speeches.
Yes. Unfortunately, Wright's antics have overshadowed the fact that 99% of what he has said in his speeches is entirely accurate. Even Thomas Jefferson thought that America was, literally, God-damned. Harriet Beecher Stowe, an avid abolitionist, feared that if America did not repent for 'Her' original sin (slavery), America would be God-damned. Heck, even Pat Buchanan feels that liberal tolerance of homosexuality and abortion makes America God-damned. If we added up all the Americans (of any ethnicity) who believed that America was God-damned, we might find we outnumber the terrorists who believe the same---albeit for different reasons.
So, this is why I say that the public intellectuals should have stepped up. Let the media see what Howard Zinn has to say. Let Tim Rice speak up. Check out Michigan State University's Race Conferences and pick ANY of those folks. Personally, I can contextualize and provide greater understanding for Wright's commentary with my eyes closed, including the accusation that the U.S. Government invented AIDS---because I was an Africana Studies major and I'm a scholar of American Studies. And in these kinds of ignorant newsmaking and viewership, I cannot overstate the need for an intellectual conversation about what has been happening and why race is still a problem in America.
As far-fetched as the AIDS in America theory sounds and as ridiculous as it seems, there are real and factual reasons why even this paranoia is perfectly valid---especially if you're Black. I'm not saying Barack needs to validate that. But Rev. Wright is not crazy for believing it, although he might be irresponsibile for putting that theory out there without providing the factual information to back it up. Besides, this is not just a Black theory. This theory has been touted and put forth by The Strecker Memorandum and many others, including many doctors who live outside of the United States.
And let's not act like spreading disease as a form of biological and chemical warfare is somehow inexplicable. Smallpox in Indian blankets, anyone? Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, anyone? Agent Orange, anyone?
I mean, come on . . .
Anyway, my point is that if Rev. Wright had been properly supported in the mainstream, he might not have felt the need to lash out and defend himself---and then act a fool.
I'm embarrassed and sad that he chose to do that and I know it must be painful for all involved.
In the end, people are not thinking about Rev. Wright. People are worried about their gas, worried about their rent, worried about losing their homes and worried about their jobs. If the media wants to focus on Rev. Wright, fine. But the more responsible thing to do is focus on the candidates, themselves, their ideas and how they plan to change this country.
For me, Barack Obama is still the change I can believe in.
And I am 100% committed to making Michelle Obama my first lady.
1. Rev. Wright's speech at the NAACP Awards was SUPERB, outstanding, factually accurate, inspirational, even entertaining. His discussion of America and "difference" not being "deficient" was just wonderful. He wasn't Barack. He wasn't Michael Dyson or Cornel West. He wasn't Snoop Dogg. But he was wonderful.
2. I missed the interview he did with Bill Moyer and only caught a snippet of it; but even then, it was okay.
3. I caught only a part of his speech at the National Press Club but even that speech was very good. (I was giving finals, forgive me)
4. I only heard about the disaster of the Q & A but when I saw the recap, my heart sunk a bit. See, that was all about ego. I defended Wright's need to come out and give his speech and stand up for himself, Black liberation theology, the Black Church and even set the record straight about a few things. He did that very well and on every occasion --- until that Q & A.
Wright is a public intellectual, not just a preacher. He has a responsibility, especially in this country, when we can name the Black public intellectuals we see on TV on one hand (a testament about America in and of itself). And, unfortunately, there is no reason why you should be throwing up Que (Psi Phi) signs, dancing at the mic, suggesting you should be Vice President and undercutting Barack Obama's chances.
It's sad but I felt that Rev. Wright doing this was a bit vindictive and also rested in ego-mongering. And, please, I live in the Hill District, I get enough of that b.s. every day or at least every Monday.
It's just hurtful and Wright did not just hurt Obama, he hurt all of us who are out here in the public, he hurt all Black radicals and progressives, he hurt all ministers and he most certainly hurt the everyday people who are still riding for Barack.
I am still riding for Barack . . . BUT:
Barack needs not to listen to his campaign managers all the time. What his campaign managers should have done was to bring out the Black intellectuals AND all progressive intellectuals who could accurately verify much of what Wright said in his previous speeches.
Yes. Unfortunately, Wright's antics have overshadowed the fact that 99% of what he has said in his speeches is entirely accurate. Even Thomas Jefferson thought that America was, literally, God-damned. Harriet Beecher Stowe, an avid abolitionist, feared that if America did not repent for 'Her' original sin (slavery), America would be God-damned. Heck, even Pat Buchanan feels that liberal tolerance of homosexuality and abortion makes America God-damned. If we added up all the Americans (of any ethnicity) who believed that America was God-damned, we might find we outnumber the terrorists who believe the same---albeit for different reasons.
So, this is why I say that the public intellectuals should have stepped up. Let the media see what Howard Zinn has to say. Let Tim Rice speak up. Check out Michigan State University's Race Conferences and pick ANY of those folks. Personally, I can contextualize and provide greater understanding for Wright's commentary with my eyes closed, including the accusation that the U.S. Government invented AIDS---because I was an Africana Studies major and I'm a scholar of American Studies. And in these kinds of ignorant newsmaking and viewership, I cannot overstate the need for an intellectual conversation about what has been happening and why race is still a problem in America.
As far-fetched as the AIDS in America theory sounds and as ridiculous as it seems, there are real and factual reasons why even this paranoia is perfectly valid---especially if you're Black. I'm not saying Barack needs to validate that. But Rev. Wright is not crazy for believing it, although he might be irresponsibile for putting that theory out there without providing the factual information to back it up. Besides, this is not just a Black theory. This theory has been touted and put forth by The Strecker Memorandum and many others, including many doctors who live outside of the United States.
And let's not act like spreading disease as a form of biological and chemical warfare is somehow inexplicable. Smallpox in Indian blankets, anyone? Tuskegee Syphilis experiment, anyone? Agent Orange, anyone?
I mean, come on . . .
Anyway, my point is that if Rev. Wright had been properly supported in the mainstream, he might not have felt the need to lash out and defend himself---and then act a fool.
I'm embarrassed and sad that he chose to do that and I know it must be painful for all involved.
In the end, people are not thinking about Rev. Wright. People are worried about their gas, worried about their rent, worried about losing their homes and worried about their jobs. If the media wants to focus on Rev. Wright, fine. But the more responsible thing to do is focus on the candidates, themselves, their ideas and how they plan to change this country.
For me, Barack Obama is still the change I can believe in.
And I am 100% committed to making Michelle Obama my first lady.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Election Results in the Burgh
Okay, good people. Let's look at the FACTS:
In sum, lots of new registered voters voted. A ton of Democrats voted. Hillary won PA but Barack is still in the lead. Barack got more delegates from the Burgh and Jake made it rain.
STATISTICS REPORT-EL45 PAGE 001 VOTES PERCENT
PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 1321) . . . . 1,321 100.00
REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL . . . . . 913,628
REGISTERED VOTERS - DEMOCRATIC . . . 567,516 62.12
REGISTERED VOTERS - REPUBLICAN . . . 250,427 27.41
REGISTERED VOTERS - REFORM. . . . . 178.02
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL. . . . . . . . . 377,631
BALLOTS CAST - DEMOCRATIC . . . . . 317,023 83.95
BALLOTS CAST - REPUBLICAN . . . . . 60,513 16.02
BALLOTS CAST - REFORM . . . . . . 95.03
VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL . . . . . . 41.33 (this is still low, for shame, America!) VOTER TURNOUT - DEMOCRATIC. . . . . 55.86
VOTER TURNOUT - REPUBLICAN. . . . . 24.16
VOTER TURNOUT - REFORM . . . . . . 53.37
********** (DEMOCRATIC) **********
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
BARACK OBAMA . . . . . . . . . 141,596 45.34
(Congratulations on closing that gap, Barack!)
HILLARY CLINTON . . . . . . . . 169,073 54.14
(Nice try, Hillary, just don't cheat!)
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 1,600 .51
ATTORNEY GENERAL (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JOHN M. MORGANELLI . . . . . . . 212,416 99.41
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 1,265 .59
AUDITOR GENERAL (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JACK WAGNER. . . . . . . . . . 254,773 99.73
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 690 .27
STATE TREASURER (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JOHN F. CORDISCO . . . . . . . . 55,570 23.27
ROBERT MCCORD . . . . . . . . . 106,608 44.65
DENNIS MORRISON-WESLEY . . . . . . 15,987 6.70
(Sorry, Dennis!)
JENNIFER L. MANN . . . . . . . . 59,973 25.12
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 646 .27
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 19TH DISTRICT
(WITH 80 OF 80 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
DEIDRA L. WASHINGTON. . . . . . . 3,482 27.17
(Sorry, Deidra, they lied to you Sistagirl!)
JAKE WHEATLEY . . . . . . . . . 9,312 72.66
(Congratulations on a smashing victory, Jake!)
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 22 .17
DELEGATE TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION 14TH DISTRICT
VOTE FOR NOT MORE THAN 7
(WITH 739 OF 739 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
NO CANDIDATE FILED . . . . . . . 0
DAN FRANKEL (M) . . . . . . . . 72,344 7.50
JAMES SHEPPARD (M) . . . . . . . 67,122 6.96
CLIFFORD B. LEVINE (M) . . . . . . 74,491 7.72
TONYA D. PAYNE (F) . . . . . . . 67,489 7.00
(Hillary Clinton supporter---just shameful)
ROBERT C. HAMPSHIRE (M). . . . . . 71,533 7.42
BETSY MAGLEY (F) . . . . . . . . 70,405 7.30
DOUGLAS A. SHIELDS (M) . . . . . . 74,182 7.69
KAREN ROLLINS-FITCH (F). . . . . . 71,405 7.40
(go head, Karen! You got more than our councilwoman!)
GARY A. VAN HORN, JR. (M). . . . . 64,612 6.70
SYLVIA C. WILSON (F). . . . . . . 64,771 6.72
HEATHER ARNET (F). . . . . . . . 66,782 6.93
(sorry, Heather, next time support Michelle Obama)
SUSAN GOLOMB (F) . . . . . . . . 73,285 7.60
ETHAN SMITH (M) . . . . . . . . 56,477 5.86
JOSEPH PRESTON, JR. (M) . . . . . 68,844 7.14
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 563 .06
And, by the way, folks. I will not soon forget these statements from this article:
The problem here, good people, is that the Democratic Committee's votes (and Tonya Payne's de facto candidacy via Ms. Washington) demonstrates that the Democratic Committee representatives are "out of touch" with the wants and needs of the District.
And it's a shame because Ms. Washington is probably a good person who got caught up in all of the negativity and mayhem Tonya was swirling around her. The reason for the division in the Hill District within the last two years is mostly due to Payne's poor leadership, petty politics, grudge-holding and a fanciful imagination. Certainly, there was division beforehand but she exacerbated and exaggerrated it.
My recommendation is that the Democratic Committee (along with everyone else) re-thinks its analysis and, for just a fleeting moment, consider that Tonya Payne's lies, manipulation and traitorous behavior to her community are coming to a swift end.
Jake Wheatley is "The Peoples' Rep" and "the people" have voted in overwhelming numbers to support him.
And next year, Tonya will receive a very Payneful reminder about whom "the people" DO NOT support --- her. Goodbye, Tonya!
And anyone else who still can't see the forest for the trees.
In sum, lots of new registered voters voted. A ton of Democrats voted. Hillary won PA but Barack is still in the lead. Barack got more delegates from the Burgh and Jake made it rain.
STATISTICS REPORT-EL45 PAGE 001 VOTES PERCENT
PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 1321) . . . . 1,321 100.00
REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL . . . . . 913,628
REGISTERED VOTERS - DEMOCRATIC . . . 567,516 62.12
REGISTERED VOTERS - REPUBLICAN . . . 250,427 27.41
REGISTERED VOTERS - REFORM. . . . . 178.02
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL. . . . . . . . . 377,631
BALLOTS CAST - DEMOCRATIC . . . . . 317,023 83.95
BALLOTS CAST - REPUBLICAN . . . . . 60,513 16.02
BALLOTS CAST - REFORM . . . . . . 95.03
VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL . . . . . . 41.33 (this is still low, for shame, America!) VOTER TURNOUT - DEMOCRATIC. . . . . 55.86
VOTER TURNOUT - REPUBLICAN. . . . . 24.16
VOTER TURNOUT - REFORM . . . . . . 53.37
********** (DEMOCRATIC) **********
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
BARACK OBAMA . . . . . . . . . 141,596 45.34
(Congratulations on closing that gap, Barack!)
HILLARY CLINTON . . . . . . . . 169,073 54.14
(Nice try, Hillary, just don't cheat!)
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 1,600 .51
ATTORNEY GENERAL (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JOHN M. MORGANELLI . . . . . . . 212,416 99.41
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 1,265 .59
AUDITOR GENERAL (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JACK WAGNER. . . . . . . . . . 254,773 99.73
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 690 .27
STATE TREASURER (WITH 1321 OF 1321 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
JOHN F. CORDISCO . . . . . . . . 55,570 23.27
ROBERT MCCORD . . . . . . . . . 106,608 44.65
DENNIS MORRISON-WESLEY . . . . . . 15,987 6.70
(Sorry, Dennis!)
JENNIFER L. MANN . . . . . . . . 59,973 25.12
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 646 .27
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 19TH DISTRICT
(WITH 80 OF 80 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
DEIDRA L. WASHINGTON. . . . . . . 3,482 27.17
(Sorry, Deidra, they lied to you Sistagirl!)
JAKE WHEATLEY . . . . . . . . . 9,312 72.66
(Congratulations on a smashing victory, Jake!)
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 22 .17
DELEGATE TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION 14TH DISTRICT
VOTE FOR NOT MORE THAN 7
(WITH 739 OF 739 PRECINCTS COUNTED)
NO CANDIDATE FILED . . . . . . . 0
DAN FRANKEL (M) . . . . . . . . 72,344 7.50
JAMES SHEPPARD (M) . . . . . . . 67,122 6.96
CLIFFORD B. LEVINE (M) . . . . . . 74,491 7.72
TONYA D. PAYNE (F) . . . . . . . 67,489 7.00
(Hillary Clinton supporter---just shameful)
ROBERT C. HAMPSHIRE (M). . . . . . 71,533 7.42
BETSY MAGLEY (F) . . . . . . . . 70,405 7.30
DOUGLAS A. SHIELDS (M) . . . . . . 74,182 7.69
KAREN ROLLINS-FITCH (F). . . . . . 71,405 7.40
(go head, Karen! You got more than our councilwoman!)
GARY A. VAN HORN, JR. (M). . . . . 64,612 6.70
SYLVIA C. WILSON (F). . . . . . . 64,771 6.72
HEATHER ARNET (F). . . . . . . . 66,782 6.93
(sorry, Heather, next time support Michelle Obama)
SUSAN GOLOMB (F) . . . . . . . . 73,285 7.60
ETHAN SMITH (M) . . . . . . . . 56,477 5.86
JOSEPH PRESTON, JR. (M) . . . . . 68,844 7.14
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 563 .06
And, by the way, folks. I will not soon forget these statements from this article:
But Deidra Washington, his challenger in Tuesday's Democratic primary, contends
Mr. Wheatley, 36, is out of touch with the concerns of people in the 19th District.Well, 72% say Wheatley IS in touch.
Ms. Washington, a former site manager for the Pittsburgh Housing Authority, is also a Democratic committee member since 2002. She lost the endorsement of the Allegheny County Democratic Committee to Mr. Wheatley by three votes in February, 55-52.
Such a showing for a first-timer, Ms. Washington said, gave her hope
that the district is ready to change leadership after three terms under Mr.
Wheatley.
The problem here, good people, is that the Democratic Committee's votes (and Tonya Payne's de facto candidacy via Ms. Washington) demonstrates that the Democratic Committee representatives are "out of touch" with the wants and needs of the District.
And it's a shame because Ms. Washington is probably a good person who got caught up in all of the negativity and mayhem Tonya was swirling around her. The reason for the division in the Hill District within the last two years is mostly due to Payne's poor leadership, petty politics, grudge-holding and a fanciful imagination. Certainly, there was division beforehand but she exacerbated and exaggerrated it.
My recommendation is that the Democratic Committee (along with everyone else) re-thinks its analysis and, for just a fleeting moment, consider that Tonya Payne's lies, manipulation and traitorous behavior to her community are coming to a swift end.
Jake Wheatley is "The Peoples' Rep" and "the people" have voted in overwhelming numbers to support him.
And next year, Tonya will receive a very Payneful reminder about whom "the people" DO NOT support --- her. Goodbye, Tonya!
And anyone else who still can't see the forest for the trees.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Three Great Historic Moments
So much happening, so little time to blog about it. But:
1. The great Aime Cesaire (Negritude) has passed away. R.I.P., Mr. Cesaire.
2. Jake Wheatley is going to be re-elected State Representative. I'm claiming it.
3. Baracky the Vote - absolutely hilarious.
1. The great Aime Cesaire (Negritude) has passed away. R.I.P., Mr. Cesaire.
2. Jake Wheatley is going to be re-elected State Representative. I'm claiming it.
3. Baracky the Vote - absolutely hilarious.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)