Today is

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Gazette Editor's Sound Off Against Protesters

Sunday's Janesville Gazette editorial was a simple rehash, cut and paste of the Beckord Forward Janesville editorial posted just days earlier, except the newspaper continues to malign the protesters without cause.

JG Editorial: (Titled: Forward Janesville is right to bring Governor here)
"The last thing Janesville needs is an ugly incident Tuesday that sends the wrong message about our community."

Yet despite dozens of peaceful local protests around the state during the past week including the multiple massive protests of tens of thousands in the Capitol without an "incident," the Janesville Gazette continues to demonize the protesters. What does the Gazette know about that? Are they working on planting some trouble or a "false flag" project to embarrass the protesters? Or are they just spreading fear?

No business in Janesville, not even the Forward Janesville corporate collective, has used their business services in such a way as to spread misinformation, lies, chaos and fear against the working poor, middle class, labor unions and now the protesters of Forward Janesville's dinner with Scott Walker - than the Janesville Gazette. Clearly the protesters are protesting the wrong institution.

Boycott Scott Walker Contributors Facebook

Ramblings published in the Janesville Gazette anonymously

On School Budget: Once again, the teachers union say "no" to concessions. Their next strategy will be to tell us we don't care about our children. That's worked in the past.

Excuse me? But it was Scott Walker who said "no" to concessions, negotiations and compromise. He's leading the way. Don't blame anyone for following his lead. But look at the bright side. You'll be able to stop worrying about the teachers strategy when Walker finishes cutting nearly $900 million from education. Your children will be in your care.

On Unions: As unions continue their policy of negotiation by intimidation by calling for boycotts of businesses that supported candidates that they don't like, they should be aware that it could backfire. What if somebody called for a boycott of GM, Ford, and Chrysler and supported only buying cars from companies that build in America by non-union workers?

There's a lot of festering hate in that one. First of all, unions are not the only ones calling for boycotts. Plenty of regular old-mom-and-pop-never-been-in-a-union or "goons and thugs" in your book, are calling for a dramatic change in buying habits to help turn our ship around away from the brink of serfdom. Calling these boycotts "union" driven is repeating a false narrative from the guns blazing defensive corporate media. Plus, consumers have been boycotting, without union direction, American auto unions for over 30 years now, it's called Toyota. So go ahead, at this point it no longer matters.

On Yuri Rashkin: Regarding the March 23 Sound Off about a nonpartisan city council, if you think Rashkin is partisan, check out his Facebook; you will not believe it. He is not non-partisan at all.

I really love these. One anonymous statement challenging another anonymous statement. No nick name or screen name to follow. No attribution, no nothing but the fact that it is published in a newspaper. The truth is the partisanship or lack of partisanship of individual city council members has no bearing on the quality of the city council as a whole non-partisan entity. It's all in your head. However, a breach of that confidence arises when council members acting under the auspice of city council government endorse the legislative agenda of a politically active lobby group. Such was the case in January of 2009 when Rashkin made the motion to approve a resolution endorsing Forward Janesville's agenda. I gather however by the obviously neutral tone of the anonymous statement that it wasn't referring to that brand of partisanship.

No comments:

Post a Comment