Metro Times - News+Views: Resign time, a duet

4/8/2009

[41]

Politics > Politics & Prejudices

Resign time, a duet

SEE ALSO

Politics & Prejudices ARCHIVES

More Politics Stories

Smashing ACORN (2/3/2010)
There’s a bigger scandal than the pimp tapes

Cable TV vs. America (1/27/2010)
The problem with paid-for pundits

Adaptive Obama (1/13/2010)
Why we shouldn't give up on change just yet

More from Jack Lessenberry

Two cheers for Granholm (2/3/2010)
Our governor (finally) decides to lead on two key issues

Cable TV vs. America (1/27/2010)
The problem with paid-for pundits

Unstoppable Matty (1/20/2010)
Like a zombie, Moroun takes a beating and shambles forward

By Jack Lessenberry

Jennifer Granholm has been governor, or, more correctly, playing one on TV, for more than six years now. So let me start by naming her greatest accomplishment since she took office: 000000.

Sigh. Yeah, I know. There hasn't been one. True, other people would have done worse. She is not malevolent, or evil. She apparently has good values, and would stand up for them and try to get something accomplished ... except that it might make someone mad.

Her real tragedy — and even more so ours — is that she is fundamentally unsuited to govern. She is highly intelligent and educated, but is afraid to make difficult decisions. When she does, with great reluctance, make them, she seldom follows through.

Here's just one small example: Just before her State of the State speech two months ago, her troops leaked the news that she was determined to consolidate 18 government departments into eight. That made some sense; it was clear even then that the state was facing looming budget deficits that are scarily large. But as soon as the news came out, she got some criticism, and apparently panicked.

Suddenly, she was announcing that our long-suffering Lt. Gov. John Cherry would be put in charge of a commission to study this. In other words, she effectively killed her own proposal.

Now things have gotten much worse. The deficit for the year ending in September is approaching $1 billion; the one next year will be more than $2 billion. The Center for Michigan, an entirely nonpartisan, middle-of-the-road think tank, has outlined $1.5 billion in sensible cuts that could be made. Others have suggested other measures.

But the governor has no response.

She appears to be desperately dithering, hoping things will get better. They won't. State government is facing the mother of all fiscal crises. Sure, the politicians in Lansing will improperly try to use the federal stimulus money to plug the deficit, but that may not work. Even if they can misappropriate that money, it may not cover the deficit, and even if they can pull it off, this would be like putting makeup on your cancer lesions instead of treating them.

Hard decisions and tough political infighting are needed. Make no mistake: Most of the Republicans who control the state Senate have little interest in good government. They are perfectly happy to wreck Michigan if it means power will fall into their hands in 2010. And that's exactly where we are headed now. Don't expect Jennifer Granholm to suddenly morph into a leader. She can't do it. If that were going to happen, it would have happened in 2007. She was then better positioned than perhaps any other governor in history to make the really hard decisions, and fight for what was right.

She had just been re-elected by an enormous landslide, despite being heavily outspent by the Amway salesman. Term limits meant she couldn't run again. Nor does she have anyplace else to go, in terms of elective office. Both U.S. senators are Democrats, and they evidently aren't going away as long as either one has a pulse.

Yet Granholm muffed the whole budget mess two years ago; she provided no, or contradictory, leadership, and exasperated her own party. We ended up with a business tax calculated to drive commerce away, and a second-rate Oakland County politician, state Sen. Mike Bishop, whom she allowed to emerge as her effective equal.

Had she been tough and strong and forced a sensible solution, she might well be in the Obama cabinet now. But he is no fool, and despite her fawning all over him after the election, he wasn't having any. We are in a major crisis, and he needs people who can get things done. So here is a serious suggestion, for the good of this state and the Democratic Party that the governor professes to care about: Gov. Jennifer Granholm should resign.

Now. By which I mean, as soon as a face-saving way out can be devised. President Obama could appoint her to something harmless, like attorney for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Failing that — if we can find a good-paying private sector job for the arrogant criminal who worked hard to wreck the city of Detroit, we can certainly find one for a nice mom with a Harvard law degree.

That would give Lt. Gov. John Cherry a fighting chance to show what he is made of, and maybe win re-election next year. I don't know him well, but unlike his boss, he was in the Legislature and knows how it works. What I do know is what will happen if she doesn't resign, or ascend bodily into heaven.

Democrats will nominate Cherry for governor next year, and he will be badly defeated by some ruthless Republican, most likely Attorney General Mike Cox. Lieutenant governors lose, period, especially one that serves under a governor who is a failure.

Will this happen? Democrats ought to think about it.

How bad is the Detroit newspaper experiment? Worse than even I could have imagined it would be. On purely mechanical grounds, Dave Hunke and the Detroit Media Partnership clowns have taken incompetence to a new level.

Example: I did not get a Wall Street Journal all week. Reason: It had been delivered by the now mostly laid-off newspaper carriers. Thursday, a WSJ operator told me, "The people running the Detroit papers really messed this up. We are trying to find a new delivery system." I shouldn't feel bad; I at least got The New York Times. A friend of mine in Grosse Pointe didn't get his NYT either.

As an experiment, I signed up for mail delivery of both papers. The Detroit News never came at all. The Free Press, to my surprise, came every day, about 4 p.m. But the news in it was many hours older than the paper you can buy on the newsstands.

On Friday, my carrier threw the papers in a planter full of water, so I can't analyze them very well. For whatever baffling reason, they did bring me two Sunday Freeps. I have never seen an uglier or more wretched paper, and that is saying something. One longtime Free Press editor wrote to me: "most of it reads as if it had been 'written' for someone with an IQ of 52," adding, "I give it till December — if that long."

Another reporter who has hotly defended the paper against my criticism in the past said simply that he was giving up. As he said, "the designers have taken over," even more so than they did when Gannett was ruining The Detroit News in the 1990s.

But hey. How 'bout them Spartans!

Monica Conyers watch: Originally I thought of writing about her this week, but Nolan Finley wrote the perfect column about her in last Sunday's Detroit News (which amounts to one whole opinion page in the Freep): "Impeach Conyers Before It's Too Late." I would add only that the city's black leadership ought to stand up and say the truth, which is that she is doing more harm to the image of blacks in power than Birth of a Nation did a century ago.

What is really needed more than anything else is a complete reform of the terribly written city charter. If anybody can stay awake through a Dave Bing or Ken Cockrel debate long enough to tell me if they are for this, please telegraph details.

Jack Lessenberry opines weekly for Metro Times. Contact him at letters@metrotimes.com.

Comments

On 4/8/2009 2:03:14 AM, ValerieM said:

We already know what John Cherry is, and what he isn't: He's a knee-breaker. He gets things done, as long as he's allowed to work in the shadows. But he's simply not executive material. He's short, mean and anti-charismatic, and getting him elected governor will require the biggest advertising snow job since the Kent Micronite filter offered the greatest health protection of any cigarette. Much as I'd like to see Granholm gone, ending up with Cherry is worse than Faustian. Once again, Lessenberry displays his blatant favoritism for the Democratic party. Even a bad orc like Cherry receives Lessenberry's fawning, as long as he belongs to the right party. If you're going to continue publishing such a blatant shill, at least publish the other parties' shills alongside him. p.s: 56% was a comfortable and decisive win, but hardly an enormous landslide. John Conyers wins by landslides; Granholm didn't.

On 4/8/2009 4:24:48 AM, Sarah Edmonds said:

If we want to play by your standards, then perhaps everyone remaining in the Michigan press corpse should resign as well. The stunning failure of the newspaper industry is proof positive that there is no leadership there, and the "guardians of democracy" have obviously let us all down. Since reporters are the ones with the real power to make or break the industry by providing the product that could have saved it, I guess I will await your next column that announces that you, too, are a failure, and have decided that you should resign as well. Fair is fair, Jack.

On 4/8/2009 7:47:39 AM, JLCGULL said:

Even Mitch Albom can't save the Freep now. I wonder where he'll end up. Hollywood?

On 4/8/2009 10:13:09 AM, Doc d20 said:

Valerie and Sarah hit the nail on the head: Newspapers are dying because they aren't producing a product that consumers want. Yes, I said "consumers"--Even with a First-Amendment-defined job description, the press is still subject to market forces (for now... Hello, Obama's "Pravda"!) I refuse to believe that everyone has succumbed to the mania surrounding the current Oval Office occupant. There must be a significant amount of people that realize how the watch dogs have become lap dogs. A lot of people can't stomach the sychophantic tripe that pollutes their local daily (or "alternative weekly"), and have cast their "vote" by withholding their discretionary dollars.

On 4/8/2009 11:53:41 AM, Buster said:

Monica Conyers is a perfect example of "Money Can't Buy Class." The black ministers helped her get elected, yet, not one of them will stand up and be counted on getting rid of her. Monica is a disgrace to herself, her family and the community, John Conyers is running a close second by his failure to stop her crazy behavior. I would rather be a "Sambo" than a low class, ghetto hood rat.

On 4/8/2009 3:54:23 PM, Thrasher said:

This column is so revealing on some many levels it clearly reveals the double standard that white media types like Jack and others invoke when they contrast a white woman and a Black woman when both are public officals Instead of Jack inserting and invoking angry vile venom against Jennifer Granholm he treats her with dignity and respect yet in contrast with Monica Conyers a Black woman Jack continues with his racist venom and media assualt on Monica Conyers ..I image being a white privledged make living in the suburbs gives license to people like Jack to verbally assault Black woman like Monica but treat with dignity and respect white woman like Jennifer.. What is really insane is Jack an angry white male with a legacy of attacking Black public officals in Detroit and other progressive Black leaders had the audacity to demand Black leaders to beat down Monica Conyers..It really must be a white male privledge behavior to demand that Black Folks do what white folks like Jack want..The Birth of a Nation was a racist white film which has nothing to do with Detroit of Monica Conyers..I guess when engages in racist venom like Jack pulling garbage like the Birth of a Nation out of his ass must be a 'White Thing" reservedjust for Black woman and not white woman.. It is so sad to observe such raw contempt for a Black woman by a suburban AWM like Jack...

On 4/8/2009 7:03:18 PM, Maestro said:

I can't believe I actually went through the trouble of registering for this site just to react to another readers comments. But, here goes it: Thrasher, that was honestly the most idiotic, non-sensical rambling I have seen this side of the Detroit City Council President. Because, you, like Conyers, can't seem to understand that it's not her skin color or urban address that's the problem - it's that she regularly exhibits a severely unbalanced, if not schizophrenic, personality. She verbally assaults fellow Council members. She physically assaulted a fellow bar patron. She vouched for her felony-convicted brother to get a city job and then, when called to account for the blatant nepotism (and poor character judgment), denied even knowing him! Yes, she actually denied - and this is no bullshit - she knew her own brother. After vouching for the sonofabitch! Thrasher, or perhaps Madam President would be more appropriate, these are undisputed facts (except for the part where Conyer's disputes she knows her brother). So, looking through that prism, how is it inappropriate to suggest that a.) she be removed or b.) the actual community "leaders" that are black tell her to stuff it. Because, the truth is, just like she did to Rebecca Mews at that bar four years ago and just like she does to the City of Detroit regularly, she is giving local black leaders a black eye as well. That's not controversial. It's true. Because Thrasher, as you so aptly demonstrated in your post, perception is reality. And the more Kwame Kilpatrick/Monica Conyers politicians this city has (especially in such visible positions), the more that perception becomes reality. And what a God awful, jive-speaking, hip-hopping, law skirting perception it is (for the record, I am a big fan of jive-speaking and hip-hopping -- just not in politics).

On 4/8/2009 7:56:10 PM, Tinkler said:

Right on, Maestro! Right on!

On 4/9/2009 1:19:40 PM, paloma said:

Why do people complain that Lessenberry has a bias for the Democratic party? He's a Democrat. This is an opinion piece. What a shocking accusation: he actually includes his opinions in it!

On 4/9/2009 4:06:36 PM, Doc d20 said:

paloma: So, by your reasoning, all the people bitching and moaning about Savage, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, et al. ought to just can it. Like Jack, none of the aforementioned have ever deceived their respective audiences that what they share is purely their own opinion. Agreed?

On 4/12/2009 4:54:37 PM, Thrasher said:

Maestro, Your post was what I expected from the chatter class..My issue is with Jack's twisted double standards and his vile media assaults on Monica...Your history lesson is not my focus or issue

On 4/13/2009 11:22:02 AM, Maestro said:

OK, Thrasher. Perhaps I went a bit overboard in my critique. Let me boil it down this way for you: What Jack is doing by writing this piece is not a vile media assault. It is simply commenting on situations Conyers has put herself in; situations that, in most circles, would qualify as conduct unbecoming of a public officer. This isn't a case of "whitey" takin' it easy on the white governor and slamming the black city council member. He's slamming both. But - and this is a key but - it is for distinctly different reasons. From the way I understood it, in Granholm's case, Jack believes her to be a do-nothing cheerleader, someone who is afraid to make the difficult political decisions expected of an executive leadership position. Conyers, meanwhile is totally different. While Jack doesn't go much into detail about what exactly irks him about the Council President, he does cite Nolan Finley's editorial as pretty much stating his thoughts. If you haven't read it yet, do it. In his piece, Finley references many of the things that I did in my original post, none of which could be considered in the vain of "not making tough political decisions." Conyers obviously has no issue with tough political decisions as evidenced by her controversial, if not unpopular, stance on the Cobo deal. What Finley, and by attribution, Jack, are criticizing is her apparent aversion to conducting herself in a professional, politically-correct manner. She is, after all, being paid a nice, professional-level salary for her service as Council President. And, Thrasher, if ever there was a place where political correctness is at a premium wouldn't that be in the political arena? Scenario to mull: Jennifer Granholm is holding a hearing on the disbursal of stimulus funds for various contracts. A black contractor comes up, does his presentation, and then begins to field questions from the government officials that will either approve or deny his bid. At this point, Granholm, the most important official in the room, begins to inquire about whether this contractors employees look like him or like Granholm. What happens next? If your Granholm, you would have the good reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson marching on Lansing, demanding that Jenny from the block relinquish her post, effective immediately. By way of contrast, if you're City Council President Monica Conyers, this blatant display of racism is about par for her course and nothing happens. And, of course, this same scenario pretty much played out verbatim in February during a hearing on the Cobo deal (in this case, Conyers' comments were directed to a white teamster). But, Thrasher, I guess Conyer's outward displays of racism don't matter when you're blasting Jack for being a racist honky. Because, after all, in the words of the Council President herself, "black people can't be racist."

On 4/14/2009 11:18:24 AM, Thrasher said:

Maestro, I thought you did not give a damn about Monica so why are you now giving her quotes any value?? BTW your scenario is meaningless and only serves to fit your designated objectives and intentions.. You simply are so full of venom you cannot understand my point which BTW is not a validation nor affirmation of Monica Conyers but an opinon on how Jack's twisted doauble standard smacks of racism and classic cheap pulp fiction it is quite apparent his disregard for Monica is vile and nasty and his disregard for Jennifer is not personal nor vile...I doubt if he even knows Monica on a personal level but that is not relevant to bigots they attack at will and without regard for any decorum or decency.. BTW I will let you insert tired obsolete racist terms like "whitey and nonsense like 'black people can't be racist".You seem to live in the pile of scum...I of course do not..

On 4/14/2009 1:52:25 PM, Maestro said:

Thrasher, to your points: 1.) I never said I did not give a damn about Monica. What I said is that she conducts herself in a manner unbecoming of a public officer. And the reason that I quoted her was to illustrate that she is the one that seems compelled to interject the touchy subject of race into everything that she does. For you to criticize Jack for being full of venom when writing a commentary on a person who seemingly embodies the word, well, it seems a bit duplicitous if not selectively ignorant. 2.) My scenario is as meaningful as you want it to be. But Thrasher can we at least agree that a.)Conyers was involved in that scenario and received little retribution and b.) if Granholm did something even remotely similar she would be crucified? I think it's fair to make that assumption, but please tell me why it isn't. While it is a bit off topic from Jack's article I would appreciate the insight into your thought process to understand why Jack is such a heavy-handed judge of black women. 3.) I am not full of venom, despite your belief. Nor is Jack full of any unwarranted venom. Is his tone snappy and sarcastic? Of course, it's his style. But he employs that style when describing both Granholm and Conyers. Could you cite some specific passages between the two critiques that you think were decidedly easier on Granholm than Conyers? I would be interested to hear your rationale. 4.)Who cares if Jack knows Conyers? All he needs to know are the race-baiting, caustic, and aggressive comments she seems to make on a weekly basis. As for the "without regard for any decorum or decency," comment, when is enough enough? I mean, Monica Conyers, with her above-described comments, exhibits neither all to frequently. Why should the people whose job it is to comment on the position Conyers holds go to greater lengths than she does to maintain decorum? 5.)I inserted the "whitey" comment in jest because of the tone you take in your posts. You say "white male privilege behavior" and "angry white male" both in a pejorative manner. Following your lead, I didn't think "whitey" was to much of a stretch. As for the "black people can't be racist," well, you yourself say it is nonsense. So does that mean then, that you want a City Council President who speaks nonsense, especially about such a sensitive issue such as race? And if she is speaking nonsense about race what else is she speaking nonsense about? 6.)You're mistaken, I don't live in a, or any specific, pile of scum. Glad to hear you don't either. Thrasher, it is mindsets like yours that have long troubled me. You are crying bigotry when I think any rational, objective observer could clearly see that there was no racist undertones involved. But please, I would like to hear an explanation with examples on why Jack is so racist. I just can't see it.

On 4/14/2009 2:42:20 PM, Doc d20 said:

Maestro, all of those carefully-worded arguments to Thrasher are falling on deaf, racist ears. You and he could eyewitness Joe Negro setting a new-born on fire, and he'd attack you to the bitter end for daring to express any disgust for a black man. His LOLercoast and ROFLcopter-laced butchery of English betrays any claims of superior intellect. In short, you'll have better luck persuading a dog to stop sniffing ass.

On 4/14/2009 3:52:12 PM, Thrasher said:

Docd20, You still angry at me becuase I dismissed your pedestrian posts and I revealed to many who visit this forum how dense you are and how much aof a latent backward underdeveloped bigot you are..I know you are still mad becuase you cannot measure up to me in here and as a result of this reality I still have you obessing over me ...Please get over me you little small mental slug...I intentionaly dumb down my posts whenever I dominate you in here..Now run along and got throw some darts at my photos or go email some of your pitiful cohorts about my latest posts....lol,lol,lol

On 4/14/2009 4:01:48 PM, Thrasher said:

Mastero, Wow that was lomg winded...Shakespeare once noted"brevity is the soul of wit' in othr words when folks take forever to explain thier logic clearly they have none or theyare fighting to establish it.. It is obvious to me you suffer from both ..I have no intentions of explaining to you the obvious differences in Jack's protrayal of Monica and Jennifer if you cannot observe that truth than I truly question why I should spent any more time with you on this issue.. Your logic also regardinr your need to insert tired and stale racial verbiage leaves much to be desire and in truth rather stupid and reveals your shortcomings with racial issues... I would suggest you visit Jack latest assualt on Black woman who hold public office on his website again he invokes the same themes and format attack Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and be nice to Nancy Pelosi..Jack suffers from the usual white male myopic snydrome which always to compare Black folks with White folks never consider that perhaps each stands on thier oown merits and weakness.. Finally your continued focused on this issue has confirmed a couple of things for me..I am right and You I am right..

On 4/14/2009 4:05:46 PM, Thrasher said:

BTW I give less than a fuck about spelling and grammar and syntax in a chat forum.So spare me the posts about my spelling etc..My genius never worries or concerns itself with the small stuff..I am about substance over form....It is part of my brand.....lol,lol,lol

On 4/14/2009 4:13:35 PM, Doc d20 said:

Do you even know what "pedestrian" or "latent" mean? Dumbshit. You are substanceless taunting. You never last two posts in the arena of ideas. Fucking racist coward screaming, "Racists!" You're handicapped by skin color and this archaic idea of "race." You and skilled, logical argument are anathema. (This is the point where you pause to click open a new window to dictionary.com. Take your time; I'll wait...) At least now you're taking time to proofread your posts. Your spelling has improved, though you'll need to ask the librarian to install grammar & punctuation add-ins. I can almost see you Alt-Tab'ing furiously between Word & Netscape. I already know better than to "obess" over you. Maestro can take my advice or learn the hard way.

On 4/14/2009 4:15:35 PM, Doc d20 said:

Thrasher and English are not the best of friends. It's part of his brand.

On 4/14/2009 4:22:19 PM, Thrasher said:

Docd20, Wow..I know how to push your little button you penis envy Wayne State student type( 2nd tier university in the state reveals a lot about you btw..tee hee) You are so ordinary, so forgettablke, so just boring yet another tired angry white male....lol,lol,lol Now again for the last time run along and report to your other yoyo's how blessed you were that I posted with you.. Lol,lol,lol,... I love knowing I dominate slugs like you in chat forums..You are truly a wimp...lol,lol,lol

On 4/14/2009 4:23:37 PM, Thrasher said:

Docd20, Oh yeah Holmes( I love that white folks phrase when they try to be hip and urbane..lol,lol,lol) Check my spellin,,,,tee hee

On 4/14/2009 4:27:53 PM, Doc d20 said:

Dearest Thrasher: The back-and-forth name calling is fun, but it gets boring after a while. It's too predictable. Let's try to make some hay out of all this. Make good on your claims of genius, substance, and logic. Describe a solution for reversing the economic collapse of Detroit (a love for the city seems to be a common thread between us, and probably a lot of others who post). The way I see it, there are two outcomes. 1. Your answer so completely addresses the matter, that I am forced to respond only to "tap out" to your dizzying intellect. 2. Your answer is so truly pedestrian, that it differs not one iota from the failed policies put forth by our elected leaders. In this case, I will not respond, as it will be far more effective to leave such an impotent "solution" untouched. You game, genius?

On 4/14/2009 4:40:13 PM, Thrasher said:

Doc d20's very own post.. "Why does Jack persist with rubbing his liberal, class-warfare salt in a wound that so many are trying to heal? Doc d20..stop back pedalling..I determine when and where I seek to insert my opinons and ideas into a situation...Remember Doc the world has changed it no longer revolves around white folks anymore.. Folks that look like me are now in charge..Let me explain it this way..I opened a lecture once with this metaphor.. 'The Big BEN RACE CLOCK..for 23 hours and 45 minutes white folks have fucked up our nation from slavery,segregation, jim crow laws disparate treatment to profiling and just garden variety racism..now for the next 15 minutes until a new day I have to fix this damage.My clock is ticking..tic toc..tic ..tock... Your questions are worthless and only confirm life from your vision and reference points..I define what is important..I always reserve that right..Now deal with my Black genius...Your time is up..tic ..toc..

On 4/14/2009 4:49:36 PM, Doc d20 said:

Now who's obsessing? At least provide some context when you quote me, professor. I'm keen to your metaphor, but the explanation is lacking. So, what exactly ARE you going to do for the next 15 minutes? What event demarcates the next day? Surely you realize that your self-professed genius, left unapplied, is useless. What good is art without an audience? You've been invited to back up your braggadocio by sharing IDEAS. Are you going to step onto the field and play, or continue to jeer and throw popcorn from the bleachers?

On 4/14/2009 4:54:03 PM, Thrasher said:

Mastreo, Caused I feel like it..Some of Jack s recent comments about Monica and Black woman" Ignorant, nasty, ill-informed ... ......poisonous-looking Monica Conyers talking into the ear of a catatonic and apparently brain-dead Martha Reeves*..she is doing more harm to the image of blacks in power than Birth of a Nation did a century ago..... ..let's face it — the fact that a famous much-older man impregnated he... The quotes are endless and truly depraved....But I guess in your world the demonization of Black woman is honorable and the result of good satire and wit and real good journalism.. It shows a poisonous-looking Monica Conyers talking into the ear of a catatonic and apparently brain-dead Martha Reeves*

On 4/14/2009 4:59:21 PM, Thrasher said:

Doc d20 .stay focused I decide when and where..I define ...I am.. Nice try and now just deal with this truth..Your questions are dumb and I will let you know when I will decide to define what is significant not you....lol,lol,lol BTW feel free to visit my blog for some background..planeideas.blogspot.com or watch my local TV show or read my frequent commentaries in the Freep & Det News..or email folks..I am water cooler chatter and folks email others often about my views and insights...Yes I am a brand name.... I have deadline..I shall return tomorrow..I am sure Jack will not disappoint.....

On 4/14/2009 5:05:42 PM, Doc d20 said:

Folks that look like you, eh? Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Emmanuel,... Obama is only in power because of George W. Bush. You are only significant because I exist. The imminent buyer's remorse and subsequent backlash will wipe the Thrashers of this world from history (not that Thrasher was ever relevant). You don't want to play? I decide that you lose by forfeit. You're a blogger... Who is stuck in Michigan... Amusing himself by making a lot of noise and saying nothing. You're not worth my time.

On 4/14/2009 5:42:08 PM, Thrasher said:

Docd20..Lol,Lol,Lol,..you are a sucker..I own you in here....Stop doing me and using my talking points...Again You do not matter..Obama and Black men like me make a difference... Back in the AM..

On 4/14/2009 8:30:24 PM, Doc d20 said:

Classic Obama technique, folks. Never let yourself be compelled to answer a direct question.

On 4/15/2009 6:52:47 AM, bsjones said:

This thread saddens me.

On 4/15/2009 5:55:10 PM, Maestro said:

Wow, quite the flurry of posts. . .From which I have determined that I will never get to understand the rationale behind your world view, Thrasher. By the way, thanks for the link to your blog. It really crystallized your thoughts on race pretty well. And while I don't agree with them, damned if you're not ideologically consistent when it comes to black oppression.

On 4/15/2009 6:07:01 PM, Thrasher said:

Maestro, Sure my pleasure I always like to educate and inspire the needy and the uninformed..I am a brand and as such I do a lot of PSA and Pro Bono deeds..

On 4/16/2009 12:49:54 PM, ValerieM said:

So if I understand correctly, Jack Lessenberry is white; Jennifer Granholm is white; John Cherry is white; Mike Cox is white; Lessenberry's worried that the poor/non performance of the Granholm/Cherry administration is likely to result in a Cherry defeat in the 2010 election for governor, but it's actually all about racism and the Detroit city council? . . And I'm not complaining that Lessenberry has a bias for the Democratic party. (although he's certainly old enough and educated enough to be wiser than that by now) My complaint is that the Metro Times can't seem to publish anybody but Democratic-party apologists.

On 4/16/2009 4:12:09 PM, Thrasher said:

Valerie, My posts target Jack's racist and vile personal attacks on Black woman who hold public office from Monica Conyers to Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick and others...My focus and theme is on this issue not the issue you are posting about.. Again that is my focus only on this thread ..please get that straight of course I have other issues and concerns about the Metro Times and its journalism but that is for another day and another topic..

On 4/16/2009 11:45:45 PM, dingbats7 said:

i agree with jack, governor granholm is always a jenny come lately after the fact. what got me going with her was with the kwame kilpatrick debacle. not til the very end could she show leadership to kick him out...she was, is gutless. granholm is like that on every issue....monica conyers is nothing but free entertainment.

On 4/18/2009 9:51:00 AM, bitemymetalass said:

Thrasher is an ignorant racist troll.

On 4/18/2009 6:05:17 PM, Thrasher said:

being a black man with an opinion in this town angers bigots so sad but not my problem...lol..lol..lol

On 4/20/2009 12:10:29 PM, B.Frank said:

I agree with Mr. Lessenberry, for the most part. She has done ONE good thing and that is bringing the film industry to Michigan. She was NOT re-elected by a "landslide" either. True she did get more individual votes than any other gubernatorial candidate, but it was only 53% of the total vote. DeVos received the second most individual votes. There was that big of a turnout on election day that year, which is a good thing. I am neither a Democrat or Republican. I vote for the best PERSON I feel is best suited to handle the job, reguardless of which party they happen to represent. This decade was the perfect storm of bad leadership. Bush, Granholm and Kwame! It doesn't get any worse than that! For what it's worth, Michigan is a swing state with a long history of electing the opposite party governor that the country elects president. During the Reagan 80's, we had Democrat governor Jim Blanchard. During the Clinton 90's, we had Republican governor John Engler. And the 2000's, up til now, have been Bush and Granholm. Which means that if history repeats itself, which it often does, the 2010's will be Obama and a Republican governor. That is something the Dems really need to consider. Again, I have no party preference. If indeed next years governors race ends up being Cox v. Cherry, we will have a better governor reguardless of the outcome. Unlike the author of this article, I don't think that Cox is a "Ruthless Republican." I don't think he is even a bad guy. But since we have a Dem in the White House a Dem in the governor's chair is more likely to have his ear. Had McCain won, Cox may indeed be the better choice. There are two rules of thumb to elections. 1st, the party in power is ALWAYS more likely to change when there is no incumbant running for re-election. How else can you possibly explain both Bush and Granholm getting RE-elected after the piss-poor jobs both of them had done? Did the people really think they would do better a 2nd time when they have nothing to lose?! 2nd, elections are nothing more than a popularity contest. Arnold Schwarzenegger has done a good job as governor of California. But how did he win running on the Republican ticket in the most liberal of liberal states? He's popular! Ask 10 people today who Mike Cox is and all 10 would tell you he's the attorney general. Ask those same 10 people who John Cherry is and I bet you that 5 of them don't know. If Granholm cares about her own party, she needs to put her own arrogance aside and let Lt. Governor Cherry take the wheel. Give him the next year and a half to let us see what he can do. Instead of him running for election, let him run for RE-election. All joking aside, how could he do worse?

On 6/26/2009 2:25:09 PM, Doc d20 said:

The petulant hood-rat pleaded guilty this morning to conspiring to commit bribery. Thrasher the Troll keeps defending the indefensible.

On 6/26/2009 5:49:53 PM, Thrasher said:

Doc, The obessive troll with a fetish ffor me again does not have a clue about urban politics and as usual spits out the usual anti-detroit and anti black rants....Interesting how intellectual cowards like Doc only spits his venom at Black folks and Black woman none for Synagro thugs who was the mastermind of these crimes..Then again those folks are angry white males like Doc...