Frank Melton Walks Out of Mayoral Forum at Medical Mall

In case anyone is in doubt, Frank Melton just called the office personally and confirmed his attendance at this panel tonight. Please join us. Get there at 6 p.m. or before to get a seat.

Donna

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 14, 05 | 3:47 pm

Frank called you personally? Wow, Wyatt must really envy you! But then he already got the hand-on-my-shoulder and look-in-the-eye treatment. Guess heís still one up on you, Ms. Ladd.

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 14, 05 | 4:05 pm

Well, he was returning my call for confirmation ... but he did call.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 14, 05 | 4:14 pm

I've been trying to think of a good Jim Lehrer joke, but you know, there aren't very many good Jim Lehrer jokes.

Congrats--and give 'em hell, Donna!


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 14, 05 | 4:30 pm

You did what you could, but the craziness between the candidates was ridiculous.

  Posted by: hmg on Apr 14, 05 | 10:09 pm

Yes, I will be courious to hear JFP's take on the event. The TV new, WJTV at least, was kind of weak and only focudsed on the chanting and that lady shouting.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 7:47 am

Too weird from what I read this morning. What really happened? Did y'all know Johnson was going to be "surrogated?"

Starting to sound like, after making such noise about "why won't Johnson debate me," Melton seems to want to avoid joint appearances as much as possible. Isn't this the second one he committed to and then pulled out of?

So... what did he tell the northeast Jackson GOPettes, "It's over?"

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 15, 05 | 7:59 am

Did Johnson also confirm personally with you? Was there any indication that he was going to be late and planned to send a stand in?

  Posted by: Proud To Be Right on Apr 15, 05 | 8:24 am

It is my understanding that he was giving awards to JPS students at City Hall, and thus the delay in getting to the forum. Remember this was a forum, not a debate. Melton should have seized the opportunity to talk to the crowd before Johnson showed up. What is that quote from Melton about "underexecuting?" He missed a great opportunity to speak to the people over rules and people he thought were phony. rolls eyes

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 8:55 am

Oh yes, the Salute to Scholars event. Well, I guess we have two problems then. Melton went off half cocked looking like a postal worker on steroids and Johnson appears to have organizational problems. No one seems to be completely blameless on this one.
Well, I take that back.
Looks like Anelle is sitting pretty...

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 15, 05 | 9:06 am

I want to commend the JFP and JAN for hosting this forum. It was run very well and, for the most part the audience adhered to the rules. Donna did an excellent job by not letting anyone disrupt the flow of the forum.

It was stated last night that the hosts were notified that Mayor Johnson had a previous commitment and that he would arrive around 7p.m. The Mayor walked in at 6:58p.m. If Mr. Melton, had waited patiently he would have had a great opportunity to put his platform out there for the 100+ attendees to hear firsthand. I am a strong Harvey Johnson supporter but I am still at least willing to listen to all of the candidates with respect, and I thought I would've had that opportunity last night.

Instead, Mr. Melton and his supporters chose to do otherwise and walked out of the meeting under the assumption that Mayor Johnson had "lied" to them about his attendance at the forum!! I and many other attendees were offended by the conduct of his campaign team in the hallway of the Medical Mall. This is not the type of leadership our Capital City needs!!

I am looking forward to the debates this Sunday at Murrah High School.

Again..thank you Donna for keeping the forum flowing and to JAN for asking questions that dealt with the issues!!!

  Posted by: seanbp on Apr 15, 05 | 9:11 am

Wow, sorry I missed it. Sounds like quite the circus. Love to get a blow by blow recap of someone who was actually there. Not that I don't trust the CL version of events, but, well, I guess I'd like to hear corroborating stories.

  Posted by: kate on Apr 15, 05 | 10:04 am

You're welcome, Sean. It was a bit of a challenge at first, but it worked out fine in the long run. The audience members who stayed were very respectful of the rules and allowed the candidates who stayed to answer the questions in a detailed way.

Here's a quick recap of what the hoopla in the beginning. First, I wasn't involved with the invitations or confirmations by the candidates that they would attend. That was done weeks ago. I was brought on about a week ago as moderator, and I was privy to the goings-on of the last few days. The board has known that the mayor was going to be half an hour late; they were willing to accommodate either candidate being late by allowing them to send a stand-in to take their place until they got there. The mayor has said he had the youth event when he confirmed and would send someone. There were no secrets or organization slip-ups there.

My first involvement in the confirmations was when I called Carolyn Redd Tuesday to ask her if Melton was going to participate for sure in this forum, Sunday's debate and a forum April 23 being put on by high school and college students (more on that soon) so that I could put them in my paper this week. She was confused about what forum was happening when and then called back and confirmed that he would participate in all three.

Then, Wednesday, according to JAN board members, the campaign called and said Melton didn't want to participate, that he didn't want me moderating. The JAN people said to them, apparently, that that didn't make sense being that all I was going to do was call on people and enforce the clock. It went back and forth more, and then Mr. Melton called a board member and said that the problem was actually that he didn't want to appear on the same stage at the same time with the mayor. As of early yesterday afternoon, the word was that he was not showing.

I placed a call to his home yesterday -- he and I talk pretty easily one-on-one, although they have cancelled sit-down interviews with me since early February -- to ask him directly if if he was going to participate or send someone. We really wanted all three candidates there to address neighborhood issues. He called back about 4 p.m. and said that he was going to attend for sure and would be there at 6:30. He said to me then about me, "I have absolutely no problem with you being there." Then JAN president Darrell Dobson called and said that the campaign had called them back as well and said he would be there at 6:30.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 10:32 am

Cont....
Fast forward to the panel: James Covington arrived about 6:15, along with Nikki Burns, the mayor's press woman, and said he was standing in for the mayor, who would be there before 7, which is exactly what everyone had expected. Then Bob Hickingbottom, who works for the Melton campaign, arrived and said Mr. Melton would be there at 6:30. When 6:30 came, Mr. Melton wasn't there, yet, and we asked Mr. Hickingbottom (a) if he would draw the number on Mr. Melton's behalf for seating order and (b) if he would like to sit in until Mr. Melton got there (he said Mr. Melton was about 10 minutes away). He seemed angry, though, for reasons that weren't clear to us and snapped at Mr. Covington. Mr. Covington didn't seem too fazed by it, although he snapped back a bit. But I should make it clear right here that, at least last night at the Medical Mall, all the objections came from Melton's camp. That is simply fact.

So just as we were seating the candidates, I saw Mr. Melton walk in the door with a bunch of people around him. All seemed extremely angry, which confused me. Mr. Melton walked up and I went over to shake his hand as I had with the other candidates. He shook it limply, but wouldn't look at me. He sat in the place for a few minutes, as I was explaining to the audience how the forum was going to work. Then I saw him get up and move to another table and huddle with his posse. It was all quite disruptive, as they were making quite a bit of noise -- ironically just as I was explaining the rules about trying to move about between questions and the like to show respect.

Then as Mrs. Smith was giving her opening remarks, Mr. Hickingbottom walked up to me at the podium and started saying that they refused to "sit next to a convicted felon." And he wanted the mic to tell the audience that! OK, being that I had no idea of Mr. Covington's record, I wasn't going to give Mr. HIckingbottom the mic to do launch an unsubstiated tirade! So I looked at him and said, "No, that's inappropriate." Somewhere in there, during other candidate's opening remarks, Melton and his supporters got up and walked out. When it got to his turn for an opening statement, I asked on the mic if Mr. Melton was coming back to give his statement. Someone yelled that he had to leave for another commitment. MORE ...

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 10:34 am

cont....
For the next 10 or so minutes, things were a bit blurry because things were very unsettled. Melton's people (and media) were walking in and out and making a lot of noise out in the mall. At some point, I thought I remembered one of the white men with Melton sitting at the table in his seat for a few minutes, but I can't swear because the other table where they huddled was so close. Then, apparently, Mr. Doug Anderson walked up and sat in his spot (this was probably about 20 minutes into the forum). I didn't immediatelly recognize him (I wasn't wearing my regular glasses), but it wasn't up to me anyhow. I was kind of relieved that someone was going to take Melton's place, hoping maybe things would settle down so we could get on with the forum.

Next thing I knew, one of the JAN board members had pulled Mr. Anderson to the side and, apparently (as I would learn later), told him that he was too late to provide a stand-in because Mr. Melton had walked out on the forum without wanting to participate or something to that effect. I didn't make that decision, and I'm not sure I would have, but I can see the JAN board's point: Melton's campaign had done everything possible to disrupt up until that point; they probably just preferred that they leave, especially if they were just going to keep sending people in and out. It was JAN's call to make; they had worked hard to accommodate the candidates already. So Mr. Anderson left, I believe.

Somewhere around that time, the mayor arrived, looking a bit surprised by it all. He came up and took Mr. Covington's seat, and we continued with the timed questions without delay; I didn't even explain the rules to him, figuing he had missed them and was on his own. MORE

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 10:37 am

cont.
Shortly after the mayor arrived, Ms. Smith was answering a question when we heard chanting out in the mall from, apparently, Melton's group of supporters: "Melton for mayor! Melton for mayor!" People in the room -- who were wonderful and held all their applause to the end and such -- just looked around puzzled. Ms. Smith stopped, we waited for a bit, and then I told her she could have another 10 extra seconds. People laughed a little. And that was it. I assume Melton's folks moved on soon because the fracas died down, and we had a really good forum for more than half an hour with the two candidates answering questions.

Then at the end, JAN President Darrell Dobson told me he wanted to make remarks when it was over, and lambasted the Melton campaign for putting them through so much before the forum and then coming there and "disrespecting" the neighborhood association and the issues. He was visibly angry. Then a Melton woman popped up in the audience and started yelling. I don't remember what, exactly, but we videotaped the event so I can look later. And I believe one of the TV stations showed her last night, but not Mr. Dobson (which seems odd being that she was responding to him. Oh well.)

And that is the whole night. After it ended, one of the TV stations threw a camera in my face and asked me why I wouldn't allow Melton's stand-in (apparently Doug Anderson) -- I told them to talk to the people who made those decisions. But that seemed to be their main focus. I think that was WLBT, but not certain.

The whole thing was, in a word, remarkable. I'm simply befuddled why Mr. Melton didn't just sit down and answer questions -- these were wonderful questions about crime, human relations, economic development and neighborhood revitalization presented by middle-aged African Americans representing neighborhoods of Jackson. I just can't imagine him passing up that opportunity. And I would have loved to have heard his answers. I am truly, truly dumbfounded by his response. I hope to talk to him more about it.

Finally: Remember, there was no back and forth, so it didn't make sense to me that Mr. Melton was bothered by the mayor being there or not at the beginning. I would have thought he would have seized the opportunity to "own" the limelight, especially since he had told the JAN board that he didn't want to answer questions at the same time as the mayor. It seemed this was his chance to make some points and then even leave early if he wanted to avoid the mayor.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 10:39 am

Sounds just like I heard it from a participant last night. Too bad you can't post the video or highlights on the site. Or can you? :-)

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 11:51 am

I dunno. I'll check with the high-tech powers-that-be around here on that. And, truthfully, I can't spend my day on this dust-up. As the Ledge figured out today in its editorial, there are actual ISSUES to be concerned with. (Wonder where they got that idea?) And that circus last night has me pretty worn out on petty games.

Fortunately, my reporter (and my videographer) was there covering the issues partóand how the remaining candidates answered the question, so the forum was of some use. We have the whole thing on tape, not just the circus at the beginning.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 11:55 am

One more thing: If the damn local media were doing their jobs on these campaigns, all this wouldn't be such a mess. The Melton campaign apparently is not liking the way he has presented himself publicly, and they are trying to blame the messenger (us, in most cases). The fact is, we are the only media outlet that has tried, or bothered, to show up at many appearances by the various candidates and then simply report what they say, getting responses and letting the chips fall where they may. This is REAL journalism, people, and we are going to keep doing it, no matter how many times Melton people complain about us on screech-radio. They need to get used to it, whether or not he is elected.

If other media did real reporting on the campaign, all the attention wouldn't be focused on us.

Finally, if Mr. Melton wants to look better in media coverage, then perhaps he should reconsider how he is presenting himself and who is speaking for him. Back in early February, I starting asking him to sit down with me for a long Q&A interview, which I would put unedited on our Web site, and put his picture on the cover of the paper. His woman, Carolyn Redd, cancelled the interview three times in a week, twice in one day. I have done everything in my power to give this candidate the opportunity to address the issues. I asked him again yesterday if he would sit down with me next week. He said he would think about it.

It so happens that the mayor's campaign is not treating us this way, and hasn't since the very beginning. Now, let me ask y'all: Should we pretend they are both acting the same way, and "balance" our coverage so neither looks "worse" than the other? Should we not report things one candidate says because the other candidate hasn't made as many accusations? Should we pretend Melton's "leadership" has brought together a great campaign, when in fact they are a bona fide disaster to date?

Seeing the problem with feigned objectivity, yet? It's dishonest.

I started this coverage wanting to get to know Mr. Melton and get past the political veneer. I've heard wonderful things about him, and I've heard bad things about him. I have done everything in my power to try to form an educated opinion about him, so I can communicate that to my readers. And I (as was Todd) was perfectly ready to endorse him as mayor if, during his campaign, he proved to me that he would be a better mayor than Harvey Johnson. I was a blank canvas, having few preconceived notions of my own about him. MORE

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 12:18 pm

Instead, I have been personally slandered by his staff because I reported what he said, my paper and my reporter have been dragged through the mud to try to ruin our credibility, I have been yelled at, I have been haranged on talk radio, my reporter has been embarassed in public. All the while, we have kept calling the campaign, trying to arrange interviews and response time from Mr. Melton to comments made by other candidates; we have done EVERYTHING in our power to give him a forum to say ANYTHING he wants to say to the people of Jackson, Miss. We have been polite and respectful all the way through.

I can't tell you if the problem is with Mr. Melton, or with the people he has put around him, or bothóbut, Houston, there is a serious problem here.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 12:18 pm

Doesn't having your stuff discussed, or bashed, on talk radio come with the territory though? In the past you've always proudly worn that as a badge of courage and accomplishment. You're getting discussed because you are the only 'media' trying to bring any depth into the discussion. The Mayor is also referring to you to prove his points. Isn't this a sign of a growing influence?

His woman, Carolyn Redd, cancelled the interview three times in a week, twice in one day.

His woman? A typo, right?

  Posted by: Proud To Be Right on Apr 15, 05 | 12:40 pm

Actually, I don't mind "them" talking about us on talk radioó"them" meaning people who listen to talk radio. Any publicity gets us more readers. (And we had one advertiser recently sign on specifically because he heard WJNT bashing us because he said that means everyone's talking about the paper and picking it up.) What I'm addressing here is the CAMPAIGN bashing us in dishonest ways for reporting what their candidate said. Allowing that is inappropriate for someone who is trying to become the mayor of the city. And it says a whole lot about what his leadership style is likely to be, IMHO. One thing that a campaign's response to media tests is how open a candidate is going to be once they get into office. So far, it's not looking good. I hope they reverse the trend in the next couple weeks.

And, yes, in my frenzy, I should have typed "press woman," which is what I usually call her. Thanks for calling it out. ;-)

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 12:46 pm

By the way, PBR, there is no need to put "media" in quotes. Media is not simply corporate monsters, so please respect us enough to simply call us media, even if you don't like everything you read here.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 12:49 pm

I love the way you can't resist spitting in the face of someone who was actually giving you some credit. I did not mean any slight by putting the word in quotes. If I didn't respect you, though I don't agree with everything I read, I wouldn't be reading. Sometimes you are worse than a female Preying Mantis post-mating.

  Posted by: Proud To Be Right on Apr 15, 05 | 1:00 pm

Calm down, I'm not spitting in your face. I am grumpy and tired today after that circus last night, I will admit, so I'm sorry if I made a false assumption. I should have asked first: Why did you put it in quotes?

And I'll refrain from posting a suitable equal insult to the Mantis quip; you do have a history here, too, you know. ;-)

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 1:09 pm

And BTW, PBR, I should have thanked you for this comment:

You're getting discussed because you are the only 'media' trying to bring any depth into the discussion. The Mayor is also referring to you to prove his points. Isn't this a sign of a growing influence?

Thank you. And peace.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 1:13 pm

Good grief, Ms. Ladd. You have given Frank Melton every opportunity to use this forum to bring his views to the people of Jackson. In reading your description of last night's events, he should blame no one but himself if he is cast in a negative light. It makes it hard to "keep the faith" in our system.

Signed,
"Keep the faith" lady

  Posted by: Steph on Apr 15, 05 | 1:17 pm

lord. have. mercy.
there is NOTHING in today's ledge about this!
well, nothing prominent. i scanned it over lunch.
the editorial about melton and the homestead issue, though? and that front page 'CRIME' story?? GIVE. ME. A. BREAK!!! if it weren't for your scrappy little paper, there would be NO ONE holding his feet to the fire!!
this is stokesian behavior, and is typical of who i believe melton represents. what is the man's problem???
i'm curious to see how the folks over at harveymustgo are spinning it.
thanks, donna. talk about influence? you (and your intrepid team) have more credence than 95% of the journalists in this town.
when y'all goin' daily???

  Posted by: Jay on Apr 15, 05 | 1:51 pm

I agree with Jay. . this is a bizarre turn of events . . . and the C-L's pathetic coverage of this event is, while not surprising, a disappointment. . .

I have to say, though, that I have never heard of a candidate having a stand-in for a political debate. . . but, if Melton knew about that arrangement beforehand, he should have voiced his objections then. . .

  Posted by: buckallred on Apr 15, 05 | 2:03 pm

this is stokesian behavior, and is typical of who i believe melton represents.

That is a whole lot of people, far too many of them poorer than anyone understands and I'd venture most of them do not behave that way. So many of our poor in Jackson are ready to live with the bombaste of a Stokes, and they repeatedly prove that by re-electing him, or maybe a Melton, because our city government is providing them with few tangible reasons to do otherwise.

  Posted by: Proud To Be Right on Apr 15, 05 | 2:16 pm

to clarify: by 'stokesian' behavior, i was referring to melton being visibly angry, and blustering around, demanding bizarre concessions and courtesies.
i'm gonna make a leap here, so bear with me:
in many of my dealings with people on melton's end of the wealth pool, there is certainly an air of entitlement, a 'can't-be-bothered' right now attitude. and a whole lot of not caring about things unless there's a point to be proved.
i think it's funny that all the wealthy white folks in town are crowing about crime and trashing harvey, while they live in fortresses surrounded by gates, and drive hummers to drop the kids off at the academy. what are they so scared of??

but yeah: can anyone imagine kenneth stokes and frank melton in the same room? melton does know that he can't fire the city council like he's planning to do to the police chief, right?

  Posted by: Jay on Apr 15, 05 | 2:32 pm

buck, just to clarify, it wasn't a debate. It was questions from JAN, which each candidate got a chance to respond to.

  Posted by: kate on Apr 15, 05 | 2:44 pm

"this is stokesian behavior, and is typical of who i believe melton represents. what is the man's problem???" - Jay

I must have some form of psychic, broadband connection to this site... I just said a VERY similar statement in an email sent before logging onto this site.

Ironically, many of the people throwing dollars into Melton's campaigns have publicly ridiculed Stokes' actions and "grand standing"... I'm curious if any are singing the same song about Melton's dramatics now?

I'm losing all hope of seeing anything positive about Melton running this city. In discussions last night, two, dear friends told me they supported Melton. So, I took the opportunity to ask why (because I honestly want what is best for this city and have no allegiance to any political candidate).

Both expressed a heavy amount of respect for Melton's community service and were involved directly with Melton in projects at an early age. I couldn't disagree with that. I think he's done wonders on a community level. I actually like Melton as a community activist...

I asked what other reasons? But, before I let them answer, I loaded the question to see if "personal respect" was the dominating factor... I asked if they knew about the sell-out of WLBT... I asked how the sale of this business reflects the bigger concerns of many (especially older blacks and whites in the community) citizens. I threw in a few other items such as the unchallenged stats regarding MBN arrests dropping significantly and the fact that his wife and children live in Texas.

They stuck to their guns when it came to Melton. I was impressed at how much respect they had... But, one (especially) admitted he had not really heard much about the WLBT saga and had not thought about how his wife and kids being in another state might reflect negatively. Neither really addressed the arrests stats dropping rather than maintaining or increasing...

I was hoping to gain some insight from them on Melton and finally know whether Melton or Johnson should get my vote in this race.... Nothing. I wasn't swayed a bit. I explained to them that I can mentor young kids, help build homes for Habitat, organize fundraisers for charity, register voters, police my community, help clean public parks, and so many other "community-oriented" events BUT that doesn't mean I can run a city... EVEN once you add management experience it still doesn't mean I can run a city.

Now, I'm more confused WHY someone (especially the people that rightfully gripe about the Stokes' Show) would think bringing this man into office will HELP Jackson on ANY level...

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 15, 05 | 2:52 pm

Kate's right, Buck. It wasn't a debate; it was a forum; Melton's behavior would have made more sense had there been ANY back and forth between candidates themselves. But there was none. It's not uncommon to send someone to stand in on something like this, and the mayor had a good reason, which he told the organizers about right up front. Nothing, to my knowledge, ever changed on his end of things.

Also, Jay, to make sure you see it, here's the Ledge's story today about it. It's better than the TV coverage I've seen, but as I said already Jack hadn't arrived for the fireworks. He was covering the mayor at his other event downtown. And the headline is a bit misleading in that the mayor wasn't "running late" based on when he had confirmed for, but Jack does make that clear early in the story.

The "Stokesian" behavior point is interesting: the side show did remind one of one of Kenny's blustering incidents.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 3:04 pm

Also, all, I saw an account of what happened by someone on the Ledger's forum a little while ago, which seemed very accurate to me. One thing she (?) said, though, was that when the man yelled out that Melton had another commitment, he asked me if Anderson could come sit in and that I said, "yes." That I didn't doóat least not intentionally. What probably happened was that the man, whom I think was in the back of the room, said that, I didn't hear that part because people were laughing at the first thing he said (being that Melton had been there about five minutes), and so he took whatever I said next as indicating a "yes" (I guess). So I didn't (intentionally, at least) say Mr. Anderson could sit in. I didn't care if he did, but it wasn't up to me. It wasn't my forum. So if anyone thought I said that, I didn't. I remember being surprised (and rather relieved) when I saw someone (who turned out to be Anderson) in Melton's seat. But then Mr. Hill of JAN called him to the side, blah, blah ... as I say above.

Anyway, I just wanted to clarify that since that seemed to be the only thing that participant remembered that was different from the way I remember it. And if it sounded from the back of the room like I had heard that part, that could be the reason the TV folks stuck the camera in my face later. I don't know. That's just speculation. But the truth is the first time I realized it was Doug Anderson who had been up there was after the forum when the TV guys came up. (And then I talked to him outside on my way to the car; he was there then; I don't know if he had been there the whole time and had come back. Anyway, I told him that I wouldn't have minded him taking Melton's place, but that it wasn't up to me.)

For what it's all worth. Sigh.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 3:14 pm

The issues are defintiely what we need to focus on. The Mayors talks about all kinds of good stuff; but, the TV and C-L largely ignore it or twist it. Melton doesn't seem to want to talk about his ideas to anyone but a few select Jacksonians and in controlled ads/settings. But, I think at this point Melton has so many "issues" of his own , a campaign staff that says what they want when they want with no reprecussions or explinations, his crazy quotes and promises in the TV/paper, and the overall Jackson bashing from his supporters has worn thin on a lot of us. It has tarnished this race so much that the issues can be debated; but, it is likely to fall on deaf ears now because a lot of people are going to show up to see if a train wreck happens not a debate.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 3:20 pm

While you're criticizing re: sound bites, don't forget that these campaigns are refusing any print advertising, opting instead for easy TV and radio sound bites. This is something Wyatt and I can agree on: the candidates play right into the hands of superficial coverage by focusing so much on TV themselves.

Just sayin'.

If they cared about people who READ, they would place detailed print advertisements that people can read and think about, instead of just fly-by sound bites. I know this sounds self-serving, but the point really needs to be made: the candidates (all of 'em) in some ways get what they deserve fromt he TV conglomerates that they're making richer.

Just sayin'.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 3:23 pm

My Lord, how bad can the media coverage around here be??? Check out this WAPT story about last night. They call it a "mayoral debate," which it wasn't, and then quote Frank Melton saying he left "because he did not go to the forum to debate a 'Johnson substitute.'"

This. Wasn't. A. Debate.

This little fact matter a whole helluva lot in this storyóit would make sense for him to be upset about "debating" someone else, but not when he would have no interplay with the person sitting in the next chair. Good Lord. Can't they get anything right??

That's it. I'm signing off. No more corporate media garbage for me today.

Aloha.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 3:47 pm

We understand! You seem to be getting thrown under the bus for something you didn't do by people who don't seem to care about facts surrounding the forum.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 3:48 pm

OK, I slunk back in for a minute. Look at this WJTV story! Who's spinning this stuff??

Three Jackson mayoral candidates were scheduled to debate at a forum Thursday night, but one candidate walked out.†

Frank Melton chose not to debate against James Covington, a man who stood in for Mayor Harvey Johnson until Johnson arrived. Melton walked out and told event sponsors that a representative for his campaign would finish the debate.

It wasn't a debate.

Had they been listening when the Melton were powwowing at the beginning of the debate, they might have heard me explain clearly that each person got two minutes per question with no back-and-forth allowed.

Either somebody's out spinning the "debate" yarn today to cover what happened, or these TV folk are morons.

Or both.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 3:57 pm

One weird thing. OK there's a lotta weird here but answer me this:
Why was Meltonís guy (or Melton himself depending on the version of the event you read/hear) so upset about sharing the stage/sitting next to/"debating" a ìconvicted felonî? Hasn't Cowboy Frank made a career out of adopting felons, chauffeuring felons to the authorities, and otherwise conversing with them on a regular basis? Why was this guy, who had his 20-something year old record erased, so much worse than the ones he has dealt with before?

It has to be more of what Donna said earlier:

Öthe problem was actually that he [Melton] didn't want to appear on the same stage at the same time with the mayorÖ andÖ The Melton campaign apparently is not liking the way he has presented himself publicly.

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 15, 05 | 4:07 pm

Thanks for the clarification of the Jackson, MS definition of "Stokesian". I was struggling with the meaning, since for me, a Stokesian (or non-Newtonian) fluid is a viscous fluid whose shear stresses are a non-linear function of the fluid strain rate.

While I am here though, can anyone tell me what a "rope-a-dope" is?

From CL:
Redd said Melton's organization quickly decided the forum wasn't "a level playing field."

"Truthfully, when we walked in, it felt like a rope-a-dope," she said. "We're not going to sit there and let him (Covington) badger our candidate."

  Posted by: pjiv on Apr 15, 05 | 4:12 pm

Rope-a-dope refers to the boxing strategy made famous by Mohamed Ali in which we would cover-duck and shuffle step against the ropes while letting his opponent swing away at him, occasionally connecting but causing no damage, while being hit with occasional solid flurries and eventually wearing himself out.
Melton's folks were saying that the surrogate would get in some punches making Melton defend himself while Johnson stayed fresh and unhurt.
Best I can give you.

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 15, 05 | 4:17 pm

this is amazing. Makes one shudder about the future. At least you tried, Donna.

  Posted by: Scott Albert Johnson on Apr 15, 05 | 4:20 pm

GDI: "Why was Meltonís guy (or Melton himself depending on the version of the event you read/hear) so upset about sharing the stage/sitting next to/'debating' a 'convicted felon'?"

He would have only had to stay for about two to three questions before the Mayor showed up, so it wasn't set-up as a "rope-a-dope." Sports Marketing and running a policital campaign are two different beast! Melton needs better advise and prepping! This is a mayoral forum not a Mike Tyson prefight presser!

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 4:37 pm

Ah, so it seems that we now have the source of the "debate" spin: a press release just came from the Melton campaign:

April 15, 2005/verbatimJACKSON: Members of the Frank Melton for Mayor campaign are speaking out against what they feel was an unjust situation which occurred last night.† The Jackson Association of Neighborhoods sponsored the mayoral forum which took place on Thursday evening at the Jackson Medical Mall.

Carolyn Redd, Melton's campaign manager, said that The Clarion-Ledger article, ìJohnson Runs Late, Melton Leaves Candidate Forum,î was somewhat misleading about Melton and his campaign supporters during the debate.† ìThe real issue is that Melton came to the forum with the understanding that he was to debate Mayor Harvey Johnson, Jr.î

Upon arriving at the debate, Melton sat down next to James Covington, who introduced himself and advised Melton he would be representing Johnson in the debate. Upon realizing who Covington was (a convicted drug dealer), Melton moved to another seat.† Moments later, Melton got up and left the building, telling his campaign advisors and supporters that he came to debate Johnson.† The Johnson campaign had previously arranged with the forumís sponsors to have Covington act as a surrogate until the mayor could arrive.† While Melton was informed prior to the forum that there would be a substitute, he was not told who it would be.

According to Redd, "we were in constant communication with the organization right up until two hours before the debate. There was no mention that Mayor Johnson was sending Mr. Covington.† The debate was to be with the three mayoral candidates.† Mr. Melton was simply not going to debate Covington on the issues.† Basically, we were blind sided by both Covington and the Jackson Association of Neighborhoods representatives."

Hinds County Supervisor Dough Anderson was then called by the Melton camp as his substitute, but when Anderson arrived, the forum organizers refused to allow him to participate in the debate.†
MORE

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 5:16 pm

MORE MELTON RELEASE:
Following the debate, Darrell Dobson, president of the Jackson Association of Neighborhoods, said the board, other candidates and public were disrespected and that Melton and his supporters ìwere acting like teenagers ó a bunch of thugs.

ìWe take offense to those remarks,î replied Redd.† ìWhat happened is that we quickly decided the forum wasn't ëa level playing field.í† There was no way we were going to allow our candidate to be badgered by Mr. Covington.† Members of this campaign were insulted and irritated with the situation.î† Redd went on to say that the entire situation could have been avoided had Johnson simply made it a priority to be on time.† ìWe were promised a fair debate and we didnít receive one.î

Covington was convicted of cocaine possession in the 1980s, but the he says the conviction was expunged. ìWhether or not he is a convicted felon, the fact of the matter is that he was not Harvey Johnson, and thatís who we came to debate.î†

Johnson arrived at the forum after Melton left and continued on to debate Annell Smith, the third candidate for mayor in the Democratic primary.†† ìIn the upcoming debates, Mr. Melton looks forward to debating the mayor, not his hired guns and convicted felons,î said Redd.

And that, my friends, is the bottom line.
_____

Whoa, this is seriously incorrect. It was NEVER a debate, with no one "debating" anybody and was never supposed to be. The materials didn't say "debate," and the JFP story this week (page 9) says "no back-and-forth discussion will be allowed."

That, actually, is the bottom line.

The media need to get this story right.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 5:17 pm

I'll say it again; Sports Marketing and running a policital campaign are two different beast!

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 15, 05 | 5:25 pm

Here's one of the descriptions of the forum provided to me and the candidates in advance:

The purpose of this Forum is to focus on neighborhood revitalization, economic development, crime prevention and public safety and human relations in the city of Jackson. The JAN board expects to have 300 citizens from neighborhoods all over the city in attendance. The Forum will be held on April 14 at 6 PM in the Community Room of the Jackson Medical Mall. We expect the Forum to last approximately one and one half hours. All Mayoral candidates, Republican and Democratic, have been invited to participate.

The format for the Forum is as follows:

Introduction of candidates and panelists by Moderator

Opening statement by each candidate ñ 3 minutes each

Panelist questions to candidates ñ 2 minutes per answer

Closing statement by each candidate - 2 minutes each

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 5:27 pm

Here's the other description; no mention anywhere of "debate"óer, because it wasn't meant to be one:

Recently the Jackson Association of Neighborhoods has become increasingly concerned about neighborhood issues that affect many areas of the city of Jackson. It is our feeling that the best place to address these issues is with our elected officials. Since there is a municipal election coming up on May 3, we decided to ask the candidates what their reactions to our concerns are. To that end the Jackson Association of Neighborhoods is planning a Mayoral Candidates Forum on April 14 at 6 PM in the Community Room of the Jackson Medical Mall. We plan to ask questions of the candidates focusing on neighborhood revitalization, economic development, crime prevention and public safety and human relations in the city of Jackson. JAN expects to have citizens from neighborhoods all over the city in attendance. All Mayoral candidates have been invited to participate and all 3 Democratic candidates have acceptied.†We encourage every resident of the city of Jackson to attend and find out what the candidates are saying.

Darrell Dobson, President
Jackson Association of Neighborhoods Board
P O Box 7145
Jackson, MS 39282
601-502-8382

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 5:28 pm

First: "While Melton was informed prior to the forum that there would be a substitute, he was not told who it would be."

But then: "Whether or not [Covington] is a convicted felon, the fact of the matter is that he was not Harvey Johnson, and thatís who we came to debate.î

Do they still have Stupid Human Tricks on Letterman? I bet there'd be a slot for someone who can talk out of both sides of their mouth like that.

  Posted by: Scott Albert Johnson on Apr 15, 05 | 6:01 pm

Did you see the lead "convicted felon" story right now on WJTV? These TV folks are morons and are being played hook, line and sinker. I'm embarassed as a journalist over had bad their coverage is on this story. Idiots.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:06 pm

OK, here's my question: If Melton was so offended about being in the presence of an apparently reformed drug user ó I guess it was the first time ó why didn't he sit down, answer the questions and then hold a press conference later and lambast the mayor for who he sent to warm his seat when he got there?

Also, I just caught the end of the Kim Wade show. (Boy, is he against Melton, but that's a different topic.) Anyway, one caller said that the forum was slated to start at 6 p.m. Actually, it was publicized, including in my paper and press releases, that doors would open at 6 for people to come in. Most people didn't get there until right before 6:30. We started pretty much on the dot at 6:30. We had to be out of the building by 8:30 at the latest, and it was believed that the forum itself (with all three candidates) would take an hour and a half and then it would half an hour for the meet-and-greet.

Is all this really so hard to understand for people?

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:10 pm

I heard that question also. Looking above, I don't see anything about a 6:30 start except in your after the fact recap. I do see where you urged people to get there at 6 or earlier. But I think that caller to Wade's show brought up an interesting point. If it was known the Mayor wouldn't get there until 7 pm why not just wait till then to start? How many hours, or days, in advance was it known that the Mayor wouldn't be there until 7 pm? Do you have any insight into that?

  Posted by: Proud To Be Right on Apr 15, 05 | 6:28 pm

"Debate"-gate update: OK, I just got off the phone with Susan Marquez who wrote and sent out the press release pasted above. I asked her who told her that last night was meant to be a "debate" between candidates:

"Thatís what Carolyn was calling it," she said. I asked her if she was aware that it was never meant to be a debate, or publicized to anyone as one, and she said no, she wasn't. She said she would send out a corrected press release before the 10 p.m. news tonight.

"They were kind of using the terms 'debate' and 'forum' interchangeably," she said of the campaign.
_____

Then I called Carolyn Redd to ask her why it was called a debate:

Her answer: "A forum, a debate, a discussion of the issues. Please excuse the word 'debate' instead of 'forum'...just like 'timer' was used instead of 'moderator.'"

[I wasn't clear what she meant by that, but didn't dwell on it.]

Me: "Is it clear to you why it matters whether this was called a debate or a forum?"

Her answer: "In every case, communication matters. In every case it matters."

I asked her if anyone had told her in advance that it would be a "debate" between the candidates, or that Mr. Melton would "debate" the mayor, Covington or anyone else.

She didn't really answer that part, but said: "It had been told to me that mayor would be there. We were going back and forth on the phone (up to) two hours before. It was not once communicated to me that he (the mayor) would be late, that there would be a surrogate sitting in (the mayor's) position."

I told her then that the press release her office just sent out said that Mr. Melton knew before the "debate" that the mayor would be late ("While Melton was informed prior to the forum that there would be a substitute, he was not told who it would be," it says. See above.)

Redd: "I'd rather refrain from making any more comments ..."

Me: "But you just told me Mr. Melton didn't know ahead of time (that the mayor would be late)."

Redd: "(Someone called) my campaign office ... and communicated to Frank on a personal call right before (the forum)."
[She was flustered during this part, and stuttered around, saying that she was not told, but Mr. Melton was.]
She then said she didn't want to talk about it anymore, and ..."Weíre moving forward now," and then mentioned the forum Sunday night.

Me: Is he definitely planning to participate in that one?

Redd: "Thereís no sure anything. No for-sure timer, or for-sure moderator." She then hung up.
______

One note here: If she is saying that Mr. Melton was only called when he was on his way to the forum (by Mr. Hickingbottom, presumably, who arrived before him), he would have been told that it was Mr. Covington. Mr. Covington was there well ahead of anyone from Melton's campaign.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:37 pm

By the way, there was no "soap on a rope" there last night, either, I promise.

Going to the movies now. Ciao, all. ;-)

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:39 pm

How many hours, or days, in advance was it known that the Mayor wouldn't be there until 7 pm? Do you have any insight into that?

Just saw your question, PBR. No, I don't know how long. I just know that it was well established by the time I came on board as moderator that the mayor would be late. The room was reserved for 6, and there was concern about getting out completely by 8:30 p.m. So, it made sense to open doors at 6, get people in there and fed their cookies and the candidates time to get there, because they tend to run late because they're scheduled tightly. There was a great deal of talk about making it convenient for them, and I didn't hear one pro- or anti-thing said about either candidate ahead of time, other than frustration that Melton was vascillating that last two days about doing the forum and why he didn't want to. That was trying for folk. And Mr. Melton's campaign was told in advance that the mayor would be late (as the Melton press release states), and no objections were made ahead of time.

There's nothing nefarious here; these are very nice and well-meaning neighborhood folk who were trying to do a good thing for the community (thus, part of the reason it is angering me to see it spun against them). Starting Wednesday, though, as I've said, the Melton campaign started trying to back out with him finally telling a board member that he didn't want to be on the stage at the same time with Johnson. (I'm not sure how that meshes with the current round of protestations about the mayor not being there at the same time, but it's not my protestations to understand. And I doubt I ever will the way they're going, but I will try.)

I can't honestly tell you why Melton would arrive and then walk outóit doesn't make sense that it was because he didn't want to "debate" Covington, because there was no "debate" planned (which I was saying when they were in a huddle, but they probably weren't listening then). It felt to me as if they were looking for a reason not to do it. And I don't think Mr. Hickingbottom told me that Mr. Covington was a "felon" until after their huddle, although I'd have to watch the tape to know for sure.

The campaign hasn't been great at keeping track of what happens when and suchóthey're EXTREMELY disorganizedóso it just may be that they were confused and thought it was going to be a debate. But you would think someone would have simply stepped up to me or one of the JAN members and clarified the format if it was in question. We had it in writing right there. It really didn't have to be all that commotion and melodrama. That part seemed a bit like it was staged on their aprt, to be honest, but I can't swear to that. Only an impression. But I was embarrassed on their behalf. Their response was in very bad taste, and the people there knew it. It was just such a MINOR thing to get all hot and bothered over.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:55 pm

And I'm bothered, too, at the tarring of Mr. Covington's record from two decades ago by people who say they want to help young people get off drugs and set their lives straight. He's a successful businessman now from what I can tell, and doesn't seem to have any shame over the fact that he did drugs and then got away from it. Why would he? That's something to be proud of. Personally, I hope he seizes on the opportunity to go talk to kids about drugs and his story if he doesn't already. Turn stupid political grapes into useful Koolaid and all that.

Now I'm going to be LATE for the movie. Ta.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 15, 05 | 6:56 pm

As an undecided Democrat, it really turns my stomach to watch the JFP take things so personally and keep blabbing about the things that don't really matter. So what if it is a forum, discussion, debate, or whatever you want to call it. If the Mayor couldn't make it on time, the event should have been postponed or delayed.

To allow a stand-in sounds like a great idea, but it is far, far from that! After following the story on several other media outlets and blogs, I have to agree that allowing a stand-in is extremely unfair. What controls are there? What role does he play in the campaign? Why not send your press person or campaign coordinator to stand in for you? Whether he was or not, this guy looks to be a hit man for the mayor.

So the reaction wasn't "classy". I am sure if they knew in advance it would have been better choreographed.

I think the JAN and the JFP should be the one's embarrased here. What could have been and should have been a great opportunity was squandered away. Complain all you want about the other media outlets.... So far they haven't gone off half-cocked.

Next time remember the 7 P's or let someone else run the show.

  Posted by: jarisc on Apr 16, 05 | 12:41 am

I think one of the problems is that we don't really know what a debate is anymore. Given the fact that we live in an "argument culture", no one really knows what the difference is between a debate and a forum, and so are likely to interchange the words. From Dictionary.com:

fo?rum ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fÙrm, fr-)
n. pl. fo?rums, also fo?ra (fÙr, fr)

The public square or marketplace of an ancient Roman city that was the assembly place for judicial activity and public business.
A public meeting place for open discussion.
A medium of open discussion or voicing of ideas, such as a newspaper or a radio or television program.
A public meeting or presentation involving a discussion usually among experts and often including audience participation.
A court of law; a tribunal.

de?bate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-bt)
v. de?bat?ed, de?bat?ing, de?bates
v. intr.
To consider something; deliberate.
To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.
Obsolete. To fight or quarrel.

jarisc, you're mixing up points here. First, it does in fact matter whether it's a debate or a forum. One involves "argurment by discussing opposing points" and the other is "a medium of open discussion." In one, you have the candidates interacting with each other. In the other, they interact with the audience. It's actually quite important to the discussion, because there's a difference between Melton refusing to debate Johnson, and Melton refusing to answer questions asked of him by an audience made up of citizens groups.

Second, please read. The Melton campaign did know in advance. Also, JFP did not sponsor the event. JAN did. As in, Jackson Association of Neighborhoods. Because they wanted a FORUM in which to hear the candidates.

And, what is a "hit man" for the mayor? Also, not sure why having your "press person or campaign coordinator" stand in is such a bad idea? You might want to actually contact some of the people at JAN, and find out what their thinking was. Since the JFP had NO ROLE in setting up the event, it's a bit disingenuous to complain about it here.

As for me, I'm still waiting for Melton to articulate something other than "crime is bad!" as a campaign platform. To my mind, he had a chance to do just that, and ran away rather than answer questions.

  Posted by: kate on Apr 16, 05 | 8:50 am

I say 'contrare', Jarisc.

I, for one, have found this thread to be the about most interesting and informative thing about the mayoral election so far. JFP, I say run with this 'meta-coverage'. Not just online, but in print. I think that there are plenty of people who don't read news online and won't see this that should know what went on before, during and after this forum. I don't have any stake in this election, as I vote in another county, but this little peek behind the curtain, not only in relation to the forum but also to Melton's repeated cancellations of interviews, has been most illuminating and has given me more insight into who Melton really is than any appearance or speech he has made. From the sound of the talks with his press woman, his campaign is, at best, disorganized. At worst, well, make up your own minds there. Point being, though, that with all the posturing and choreographing that goes into any candidates media appearances and messages these days, it is perhaps more telling of their character to know how they deal with the media when the camera or tape recorder is not rolling.

  Posted by: dvc on Apr 16, 05 | 9:21 am

"The public square or marketplace of an ancient Roman city that was the assembly place for judicial activity and public business. "
Nope, Jackson isn't Rome.

"A public meeting place for open discussion."
There was public there, but no open discussion.

"A medium of open discussion or voicing of ideas, such as a newspaper or a radio or television program. "
Nope.

"A public meeting or presentation involving a discussion usually among experts and often including audience participation."
Once again, audience lacking.

"A court of law; a tribunal."
While something Mr. Johnson's surrogate was no doubt familiar with, this one is imapplicable.

ìTo consider something; deliberateî
Nothing really was considered there, they just repeated the same things weíve heard before.

îTo engage in argument by discussing opposing points.î
The most applicable one of them all.

îTo engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.î
Also applicable.

îTo fight or quarrel.î
Iíd have paid good money to watch this.

  Posted by: hmg on Apr 16, 05 | 10:04 am

I'm sorry about your tummy-ache, jarisc, but the JFP is not going to stop telling the truth about what's really happening hereóincluding the Melton's campaign's trashing of us for telling the truth about what's really happening here. Try some Pepto; works for me. And, yes, Anon, the real facts about the another night and our dealings with this campaign to date will be in the paper Wednesday.

Now, to The Clarion-Ledger today. Their editorial is terrible and plays right into Melton's press release above. First, note the headline: "Debate debacle reflects tensions."

Once again: This. Wasn't. A. Debate. This matters, jarisc, because Melton's spin on it is that he didn't want to "debate" a stand-in. (While earlier in the day, he told JAN he didn't want to appear at the same time as Johnson, remember.) Why do the local media refuse to get this right? They are either inept, or trying to provide cover for Melton here. There is simply no way to turn this into a "debate" after the fact out of convenience. Twasn't.

Then, the "editorial" gets inconsistent: First, they say that the mayor had planned to get there late, and that had been approved with the organizers. That's true. But then they, inexplicably, lambast both Melton and the mayor equally: "Hopefully, all will show up ó and show up on time ó and there can be a real discussion of the issues."

The mayor did show up "on time"óexactly when he had said he would there. You can criticize JAN if you want for allowing that, but it's not fair to the mayor to criticize him for showing up exactly at the time that he said all along that he would. That's just fake "objectivity," which in this case plays right in the hands of Melton, who knew in advance there would be a stand-in and that it wasn't a debate.

As for JAN's decision, I can tell you that you have to set times for these, or any, events and go for them. Then if the candidates come, they come. I'm also helping a group of young people trying to schedule a forum next week with the candidates: the mayor confirmed right away, but the Melton people could not remember when it was, despite all the materials they had on it. (They are also confirmed now.) And as you can see from the Tougaloo debate, a candidate confirming well in advance does not mean they will follow through with their commitment.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 16, 05 | 10:22 am

The point is: You set the time and if the candidates can make it, they make it. You do everything you can to get them there. And in this case, it is VITAL to understand that this wasn't a debate, so allowing any of the candidates to have a stand-in (which was offered to Melton as well before it began) only hurts them, not other candidates, who do not interact with each other. Thus, the excuse that Melton didn't wan't to "debate Covington" is simply a smokescreen. And the media should not blame the organizers for Melton's behavior; they did everything like clockwork, and dealt with a lot of crap from one of the campaigns in advance. It is entirely possible that Melton doesn't show up Sunday night (he has missed two forums so far in a week; if he does, that won't be the fault of the organizers. It is his personal responsibility to show up and use the opportunity to talk directly to the people.

The truth is: It should not have mattered to Mr. Melton who was sitting next to him. It wasn't his choice to control the event. He should have sat down in that chair and answered the very good questions that JAN members had prepared about crime, economic development, neighborhood revitalization and human relations. He should have given that audience who had come there, and listened attentively once the sideshow was over, the specific answers they wanted. But he didn't want to do that, as he had shown in the two days before the forum as he had tried to back out. This was not about who was sitting in the mayor's chair, I assure you. That's an excuse, and the media are providing him cover by misreporting, intentionally or not, that it was a "debate" and that the mayor was "late."

The truth isólike it or notóthe mayor and Ms. Annell Smith did exactly what they said they were going to do, and when they said they could do it. They answered every question asked to themand showed no disrespect toward the organizers or the audience members. They were both classy and forthright.

Melton and his posse, on the other hand, acted like a bunch of trouble-making teenagers who showed up looking for a way to get out of something they did not want to do. They wouldn't look us in the eye; they gathered up in a circle and came up with a plan to get him out of there. Then they walked out and tried to disrupt the forum from the hallway. That is not a "half-cocked" accounting of anything; that is an eye-witness accounting of exactly what happened from someone right in the thick of it. That's the bottom line on Thursday night, whether or not other media are willing to tell you the truth.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 16, 05 | 10:29 am

Since then, a Melton campaign officialóthe same one who tried to disrupt me at the forum the other night at the podium on Melton's behalf and tried to grab a microphone to tell the audience Covington was a felonóhas gone on the Larry Nesbit and Kim Wade radio shows to trash me personally, even saying that I'm paid by the campaign (funny, being that no candidate as even run an ad in our paper!). This is slander on the part of the campaign. He also trashed James Covington and anyone associated with the mayoral campaign. He even, apparently, talked about putting people in the morgue Friday afternoon over what they're saying about his candidate. I believe that could be characterized as "half-cocked" at best. We're getting a tape of that one, too, to get the exact transcript.

So, yes, we are going to continue putting the truth out there as best we can, even if the other media are abdicating their responsibility and, thus, allowing some really ugly stuff to transpire without exposing it. That's why we are called an "alternative," and we will continue being just that. Our job is to "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted" of this city, and we are going to stay with our mission, even if that makes some folks uncomfortable. The truth is, it's the facts that are disconcerting here, and withholding them out of some sort of fake corporate objectivity does not serve the best interests of our readers.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 16, 05 | 10:33 am

Harvey, you're being cryptic and not making much sense. This was an "open" forum in the sense that it was open to the public and not filtered by the media (or, at least techically). The participants could say what they wanted in the time allotted. What it was not was a back-and-forth argument or debate between the participants.

Is there any way to make this clearer? Not. A. Debate. ... Not. Meant. To. Be. ... Calling. It. That. Either. A. Lie. Or. An. Error.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 16, 05 | 10:36 am

It's not like Johnson sent Otha Burton or Chief Moore or even his own campaign manager. He sent a pawn, and it was taken as an insult, rightly or wrongly.

In Alan Lange's attempt to spin the JAN forum into a conspiracy by the mayor and the organizers, he makes a very telling factual error here. Uh, city officials cannot participate in a political forum. Does Lange really not know this basic legal fact?

Otherwise, to my knowledge, Lange (who wasn't at the forum) has not asked the organizers, or me-the-moderator, or anyone else about what actually happened. He seems to be concocting a cover story for his candidate out of thin air.

That's helpful to the city.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 16, 05 | 11:36 am

Yep, the other media outlet's (including the planet's hit piece) are all out of line! Especially Larry and Alan that spew hate and misinformation against Jackson on the radio. They both said they were not at the forum (I thought you were "packing heat", so why couldn't you make it?) and based it on what they had read and then heard from "bob." Thank god they are not on the TV! ("My Eyes, My Eyes... arrggg...") Are they paid by the surrounding cities? I am beginning to wonder? They are absolutely out to report the least amount of news they can while spreading factless rumors about our city! And, then hide behind the mantra of we need to focus on more issues. Umm, TV outlet's did you cover any of the issues at the forum the other night. Larry, Alan? (please don't bash me kate, this is an analogy ;-) JFP is the Fox News of this race.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 16, 05 | 12:05 pm

"It's not like Johnson sent Otha Burton or Chief Moore or even his own campaign manager. He sent a pawn, and it was taken as an insult, rightly or wrongly."- Alan

I'm curious if Alan is speaking in Chess terms... OK, I looked and he is...

A pawn is by far the weakest piece (technically) on the board and causes the LEAST damage potentially unless it is ranked eighth making it a King. If the Melton-eers thought of Covington as a pawn, you'd think they would have seized the opporunity to attack, "take" the piece, and control the forum since it was filled with "weak pieces" according to their position.

As it is, the Melton campaign seems to be throwing smokescreens all over and I can't help but think I'm calling the Johnson campaign next week for a yard sign.

The very fact that Melton and his posse fled and caused such a scene, makes me wonder if they only appeared to grandstand thinking it would make the mayor look bad. Instead, it made them look bad from my point-of-view with or without Donna's testimonial.

Grow up and act like men!

As it is, it really closed any potential vote (from me) for Melton.

This is the second debate/forum he's skipped. If this were an interview process (and in all reality it is), he's already proven he's not qualified or considerate of the voters... Whether that's because of his managers or not is a different topic but he should probably investigate the public's PERCEPTION of how his managers are handling all this.

As I just told Alan on his site, the Melton team is already acting like the losing team.

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 17, 05 | 11:16 am

If the Melton-eers thought of Covington as a pawn, you'd think they would have seized the opporunity to attack, "take" the piece, and control the forum since it was filled with "weak pieces" according to their position.

Funny you say that, Knol. I wasn't thinking about chess and hadn't seen the Meltonian camp's "chess" or "soap on a rope" <grin> rhetoric, yet, but that's exactly what I was thinking Thursday night: I think the Melton team missed a major opportunity to score points before Johnson arrived. Why pass that up? His advance-man drew No. 3 for him, after all; he would have had several chances to "answer" anything Covington said, even though it wasn't a debate. Seemed a sweet spot to be in to me.

Also, I still don't get the Covington "hit man" rhetoric. I think Alan's desperately scraping the bottom of the barrel on this one. Covington is not some brilliant orator from what I've seen. Just ain't buyin' it. I think he was someone was was available on a very busy night to sit in until the mayor got there when he had said he would be. And I haven't seen any proof otherwise, yet (on this or any of the other conspiratorial allegations the anti-plumbers have come up with).

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 2:22 pm

The only thing I'll add about your Melton campaign comments, Knol, is that they are acting like their own worst enemies, and are blind to that fact, it seems. I think it's sad that many people may never get the opportunity to hear specific ideas Mr. Melton may have for the city -- maybe today on WJTV at 5 if he shows for the debate; it is a "debate," right? -- because his campaign is so afraid of him saying the wrong thing. Carolyn Redd told me last week that she has to be careful what she "sends" him into. Huh?

But, it is vital to remember that Mr. Melton is responsible for the people around him, whether or not they're reflecting him correctly, and will be if he is elected. And the taxpayers will be as well, especially if current types of behavior result in mega-lawsuits as I predict will happen. You just can't spin and twist and fib and even threaten on the state's dime and time, as we've seen from the Melton campaign for the last few weeks. You get ding-ed for it, as you should. That's why we have a Constitution--he will be under entirely different scrutiny than he's used to as a private citizen, aside from his short stay at MBN.

I will agree with Mr. Melton on at least one point: "leadership" is indeed the center issue of this campaign.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 2:52 pm

Wow. I don't know what to think about Melton's campaign, but he just won that debate on WJTV. Johnson had some good points, and from the first 15 minutes I thought it was going to go his way, but once Melton got going it wasn't even close.

Still not sure exactly what Melton will do that's different from Johnson, but there are fine points that make me think he might actually be a pretty good mayor. Best example: The candidates were asked about crime. Melton said the best way to address crime is to address the dropout/truancy rate. Johnson said it was through community policing. Melton agreed that community policing was important, but it was clear that he had put a lot of thought into the dropout/truancy issue.

Two things Johnson said that made me think less of him. The first was when he said Melton wouldn't be able to find certain inner-city neighborhoods on a map. He said this to a community activist who can not only find those neighborhoods but name the kids who live in them--someone who was not that long ago accused by one overzealous Johnson supporter as having "criminal connections" because of his work with at-risk kids. I think the Melton campaign as a mayoral campaign has been a joke, and said so as recently as an hour before the debate, but one thing Melton can never be accused of doing is insulating himself from inner-city crime. I found that downright offensive.

The other thing Johnson did that annoyed me was that when he was asked if he had any regrets regarding his time in office, he gave the same answer Bush did: He changed the subject. Well, okay, he admitted to not courting the media enough (and used that to take shots at Melton and Whitlow), but that wasn't a real answer.

I still think Johnson will win. I still think I'll probably even vote for him, because Melton just doesn't have enough good, specific ideas on how to get things done; Johnson seems like the more substantial candidate. But my take is that the debate helped Melton, and if Melton ends up actually winning this thing, people will point to this debate and say that's what carried it for him.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 6:13 pm

I don't know who I thought "won"; it felt about 50-50 to me just based on debating-type things. I need to watch the tape again for specifics -- and we're going to Truth Watch the statements they made, so keep an eye out.

The funniest moment to me was when Melton answered Johnson's accusations about sound bites with a quippy sound bite. That was funny. ;-)

One thing I don't get is who can answer an issues-oriented question in 60 seconds. That lends itself to sound bites. Anyone know who wanted what in the negotiations?

I've heard Melton make the drop-out point before (and have heard the mayor address it as well at youth summits and such), but I haven't heard Melton suggest much specific beyond getting them into religious after-school programs. I did like the mayor's comment about adequate funding; I'm surprised Melton didn't jump on that, unless he feared offended his Republican supporters. That seems an easy point to make when it comes to Jackson education.

Otherwise, though, I'll need to go through it again for factual questions and to comb for SPECIFICS that the candidates pointed to, which is all I ever care about.

We'll have more soon on it. We're working on the print issue, too, so it may take a little bit, but it'll be here -- especially the Truth Watch questions based on the debate.

BTW, Melton's answers on walking out of the forum from the other night were interesting -- and just showed the inconsistency in his campaign's handling of it. He made it clear that it wasn't a surprise that the mayor had a stand-in.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 6:23 pm

BTW, the questions didn't impress me much over all. And it's intriguing that no one asked Melton about being a Democrat only so that he can win, being that's being talked about incessantly around town. I thought for sure that Stringfellow would ask him about it. And I was surprised that no one asked Melton about his family and whether his wife plans to move here, or how often he plans to commute to Tyler.

Likewise, I was surprised that no one asked Johnson to respond to the accusation that he is trying to take credit for work by other mayors, being that that's been one of his opponent's main memes.

In fact, it would be interesting to pull all the questions and list them on the blog so we can see what was included and what was left out. We'll try to do that, too. In our spare time. ;-)

And how about when Joyce Dortch called Johnson "Mayor Thompson." Now, there's a slip of historic proportions. So I wonder where the Thompson Tank is these days??

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 6:36 pm

I thought the stuff about the forum was probably Melton's weakest point, and one of the reasons why Johnson seemed stronger for the first few minutes of the debate. But he picked up speed (and, thanks in part to the lousy non-JFP local coverage, most people don't know the backstory anyway), and I think he cleaned house in the debate as a debate. Of course that doesn't mean his policies are necessarily any better, or even as good; it just means that he won the debate.

Agreed on the 60-second format. I also don't like the fact that there's only one debate, assuming there is only one debate. My dream debate format would be Kerry-Weld '96--nine debates, each on a specific topic. But as our dear Rumsfeld once said, you go to war with the army you have--and in this debate, I feel like Melton just plain cleaned house. Maybe he wouldn't have done as well in a longer, more focused debate. Then again, maybe he would have done better. Dunno. Melton's brilliant but volatile, and I think the debate demonstrates the former as well as his odd behavior at the forum demonstrated the latter.

The thing about sound bites is of course that any debate based on 60-second statements and responses will consist of sound bites. But the "I may be a 45-second sound bite, but you're an 8-year sound bite" bit is gold--that's the kind of line that gets people elected to national office, where even folks who don't like Melton have to laugh and go "Okay, that was a zinger."

I'll be interested in seeing a Truthwatch on the debate, though. Lots of statements from both sides that sounded a little flaky.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 6:38 pm

I gasped when she said "Mayor Thompson" because I'm a youngun and thought she meant Bennie Thompson, and I shook my head and went "Hoo boy, she's going to get in pretty big trouble for this." I'm glad, mainly for her, that she was thinking of a former Mayor Thompson.

I thought the questions were pretty soft-hitting, too, not addressing the core arguments of either campaign (where were the "perception of crime" questions?). And there were a few questions that were actually pretty good--the 19-year-old kid who asked about careers, for instance--that neither candidate really answered.

Re winning the debate: I suppose I'm not so much saying that Johnson bombed as I'm saying that Melton soared. I always thought the weekly "Bottom Line" segments were prewritten, but after tonight I'm beginning to wonder if they were spoken contemporaneously because Melton is obviously really good at this kind of thing when he's in control of his temper, and when his people let him do his thing.

Much more interesting election, in any event, than I'd expected. I'm no less high on Johnson, but I won't be brokenhearted if Melton gets it, and a few hours ago I would have been. One thing Melton did say that made me feel more comfortable was that he wasn't going to march in and fire Johnson's entire staff. From the way he'd been campaigning, that was certainly the way it sounded.

One thing I don't agree with Melton on is, of course, firing the police chief. I think Johnson is great.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 6:47 pm

Yeah, I just hate sound bites, period, so I'm a harsh judge on this one. It always amazes me the things that make people think that someone will be a good public servant (rewind to Bush-Kerry).

It wasn't as succinct, but Johnson's return volley on, "no, you didn't vote for me; you couldn't have" was pretty pointed as well, as was Melton telling the Georgetown folks to vote when he wasn't even registered here then.

I also suspect some things are going to resonate very differently for you and me, Tom, than for other folks around the city. I'd be interested in hearing lots of viewpoints on it. I suspect the voting points, although they sounded a bit like Johnson was hectoring Melton, will score big with at least some valuable voters.

Johnson is a bit like Kerry in the sense that he wants to talk about a lot of details and his record, and that's hard to do in 60-second sound bites. I think he used all of his time every time, and Melton lodged a lot of zingers and didn't say anything more. I know some people prefer the zingers, of course, rather than policy. But it is policy that gets the day-to-day work of government done.

Also, based on my personal dealings with Melton's campaign, I almost lost it when he talked about his ability to bring all these effective people around him. Whoa. I'm just not buying that one.

Speaking of, did I see Carolyn Redd coming out from behind the curtain to give Melton something when Johnson or the moderator was talking? Was this happening the whole time, with both of them? I'll be curious to see what Adam says when he returns. I watched it on TV. And it was amazing when WJTV cut away to the Gray-Daniels commercial. Sigh.

OK, this political junkie has to get back to work now. I have an issue to put to bed.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 6:49 pm

One thing I don't agree with Melton on is, of course, firing the police chief. I think Johnson is great.

Tom, did you mean to say Johnson?

I wish I had your confidence that Melton will be a good mayor. They just have not met the burden of proof to me and, after that embarrassing episode Thursday night, I'm willing to say it. I went into this in early February with an open mind and had really hoped to get to know Melton better, talk to him in specific about his ideas, and so on, but they have run so defensively from real questions that they have engendered NO confidence in me that he is qualified for this job, and nothing in this debate made me feel better about it. I just don't think he has many specifics to offer, and I'm real worried about who is going to have influence over him if he is elected. (Think Bush.)

I am very disturbed, for instance, by the attempt to pit downtown redevelopment against the needs of other neighborhoods. That is extremely divisive, and shortsighted. This is not an either-or proposition, and it strikes me as a very cheap way to get votes. And if he comes in and tears down all the efforts that have been made by the public and private sector to make this a city in which creative and involved people WANT to live (and thus build back up the tax base, and everything that can mean), it's going to just be tragic.

Also, the way Melton tried to mock Johnson over his (Melton's) saying he wanted move the Convention Center to Rankin County was just rude. The truth is, Melton stated that to a roomful of North Jackson supporters. If it's so ridiculous, why did he need to tell all those women that he wanted to do just that. The panelists severely needed to get into the issue of Melton promising different things to different people. Somehow.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 6:58 pm

I thought the "you couldn't have" line was perfect, right up there with "eight-year sound bite," but I thought it was a bad choice to end the debate on. I'm not sure it'll resonate with voters, given that we all know people who don't vote. Of course Melton should have voted, and it's fair game for a mayoral campaign, but Johnson had him on that issue with the Georgetown line. When he brought it up again after that, he was putting raisins in the matzoh.

Agreed on the choppy editing. It cut out what I think was probably Johnson's best zinger (and the reason he let Melton go first): "And that, my friends, is the bottom line." If it didn't happen to coincide exactly to the hour shift, I would suspect a conspiracy.

I think it's important to note that I didn't do a detailed evaluation of the candidates' platforms and decide that Melton had strong policies in an hour. But debate is a fine art, and I believe Melton won this one with room to spare. But you're right--we're both media people, and we look for different things than the average viewer. I thought Kerry cleaned up in the third debate, and most people didn't agree with me, so...

In terms of personas, I think Dole-Buchanan might be a better comparison than Kerry-Bush. Bush is deeply, genuinely a droning anti-intellectual and everybody basically knows it, but he was elected because he's a tough guy who makes people feel safe. Melton is a genius, and everybody basically knows it (especially Melton), and while the tough guy/cowboy similarity is there, Melton's problem isn't that he can't speak English fluently; his problem is that he shoots off his mouth and behaves strangely at times. Enter the Dole-Buchanan comparison: Dole knew the issues and gravitas, Buchanan was more interesting to watch, but Dole ended up carrying the primaries. Of course one advantage Melton has that Buchanan didn't have is that his gravitas is basically equal to that of his opponent, or at least it was before his campaign.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 7:05 pm

I don't suspect a conspiracy; just more bad corporate media goof-ups.

Is Melton really a "genuis"? I haven't seen that, but you've been watching him longer than I have. I came in freshówhich means fresh perspective on him and no preconceived notions, which could have benefited the Melton folks, had they not been so terrified of real media coverage. To me, so far, Melton has everything in common with Bushóor at least the important stuffómeaning that many of his supporters only seem to back him out of fear of a vague and amorphous enemy of "them," even as he doesn't tell those supporters exactly how he's going to make them safer. The unknowns are enermous with Melton, and I think that's much scarier than the crime threat in Jackson. Again, at least when I first met, he seems to be a nice guy, and he certainly has a record of doing good things in the community. I'm just not envisioning him in the public sector, at least not leading the city. Perhaps he should have served in City Council first to learn more about running a city government. As it is, I think he's in way over his head.

Also, Tom, "Mayor (Allen) Thompson" is a very racist mayor of the 1960sówho vowed to fight segregation at all costs and brought in "Thompson's tank" to park in front of City Hall to warn the "agitators" to stay in their place.

Bit o' trivia: Jackson police and the FBI took "Thompson's tank" to the RNA house for the early-morning raid that got Lt. Skinner killed.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 7:11 pm

I should also add that the fact that he is running as a Democrat out of "convenience" doesn't bother me nearly as much as it does (and should) actual Democrats (which I'm not). I don't like either party, either, and I respect me an independent-thinking politician even if I dont' agree on every issue (from Lincoln Chafee to John McCain). However, I'm not believing him that he's not actually a Republican with Republican-esque ideas, from thumbing his nose at the U.S. Constitution to using crime as a politican weapon and not focusing enough on prevention. Or, at least, I'm very concerned at how willing he is to pander to some of the worst Republicans ideas around, and he has got some intellectually vapid GOP supporters saying he's the best thing since sliced pound cake. That's a sign of something, and I don't think it's healing and reconciliation, if you know what I mean. Most of the "thinking" Republicans I know in Jackson are very suspicious of himóbecause, just like anyone else, they can see that he has few specific plans, is toying with the truth a bit too often, says what people want to hear and is inconsistent (sometimes in the same conversation).

It really shouldn't be a partisan issue. To me, it's not. I'm focused on the man himself, and the people he brings with him, and his specific plans to make the city better. That's all that really matters in a mayoral election.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 7:20 pm

Thanks re: Thompson's tank. Some of it is coming back to me now, but I think I need to do a little reading on Jackson's history...

Re police chiefs: I meant Moore, not Johnson. We have had too many police chiefs named Robert!

As far as Frank Melton goes: I think the guy is running a terrible campaign and I probably won't vote for him, but I've been praying for him to run for mayor since I was 12. He was the straight-shooter, the philosopher-king, in some ways the shadow mayor, a guy who really did get things done, things he had no formal power to do. He stood up against corporate interests and city officials with equal gusto; he named criminals on television (I'm paraphrasing only a little: "Drive down [X] street at 9 til midnight and you'll see [X] working the corner, just like he always does...") who would sometimes end up arrested soon afterwards, and even living behind two gates, he was gutsy to do that. You know that "When you see five black men walking together, that doesn't mean it's a gang" line? He's been using it for 10 or 15 years.

This mayoral campaign is the first public act he's ever done that I do not completely and enthusiastically condone. I would say that he is definitely a genius (though seriously flawed, like most geniuses), and he definitely represents Jackson. The vague fear platform is something I don't like, but if that's all he had to go on he wouldn't dare run as a Democrat. He didn't just crawl out of the woodwork and start criticizing the administration; he's earned his brass balls. But I think he could have had the mayor's office in a cakewalk during the Ditto era (people have been telling him to run for years, but he has always declined), which makes me wonder why he wants it now. He could have become mayor in 1993, and he'd be seeking his fourth term. Instead he's coming in at least 8 years too late, running against a guy who is actually getting some things done.

When I heard Melton was running, I rubbed my hands together with glee and thought "Well, I know who I'm voting for!" Then I actually saw how he was campaigning, sighed, and reluctantly sided with Johnson (whom I liked--even in 1993, when he lost--but never as much as Melton). The Frank Melton campaigning right now doesn't have very good odds of getting my vote, or getting enough votes to win, period. But the old Frank Melton? He'd have my vote. Wouldn't even have had to ask for it. He'd have it by default.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 7:31 pm

I appreciate all that, Tom. You're not the only one who's told me about the "old" Frank Meltonóthat's exactly why I tried to keep an open mind going into this. I wasn't around for his glory years, but people I respect remember them fondly. However, you must understand, that the Melton I've seen acts like he wants to roll back so much good that has happenedómuch like Giuliani, he wants to roll back crime-fighting strategies and personnel that are WORKING, even though it'll take more time for it to play out. As I said, he thumbs his nose at the Constitution. He accuses the police department (and police officers) of faking crime statistics, but provides no proof. And he is tearing down, and apart, the city to get elected. He talks so much about not using race and such, but he is the only one I've heard directly play a race card in the campaign! And his campaign treats us like we're stupid, giving us sound bites, but little more.

Now, I LOVE this line: "When you see five black men walking together, that doesn't mean it's a gang." But so many of his supporters. think exactly that. They think he is going to round up young black men, and throw away the key. They think crime is all about a bunch of black "super-predators" running loose in the city that needs one of them to round them up. Those people are not supporting Adequate Education funding. Has he told THEM what it's going to take to reverse drop-outs? Does he know? It's going to take more than religious after-school programs.

Also, it's important to understand that many young blacks (of voting age) do not trust Melton. They believe he is trying to put them in jail; so where's the disconnect here?

Now, I don't think he is necessarily going to lock up every young black man in site (in fact, his record shows that many he's caught don't actually go to jail, and I'm not criticizing that)óbut I really don't want to see a lot of Drug War-type grandstanding that is as likely to reverse our crime trends as move them forward.

Here's the thing I don't understand, Tom: Why is he pandering to the worst elements in (and around) Jackson? If he's as wonderful as you say, he doesn't need the North Jackson Angry Men's Club to get elected. In fact, they may well keep him from getting elected -- because he's worked so hard to pander to them (and their families) that it's made him look inconsistent at best. I just don't get it; he should be able to put together a coalition of African Americans and progressive whites just as easy as Johnson has if he is who he (and you) say he is. What is the game here? It makes no sense to me.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 7:46 pm

It makes no sense to me either, Donna, and that really sums up the only important reason why he isn't getting my vote: I don't understand his campaign. Why now and not 1993? Why the weird rhetoric, the erratic behavior? Has he lost his mind?

The old Frank Melton would never have run as a Democrat; if he ran at all, he would have run as an independent and funded his own campaign. To his credit, he has been talking tough since day one--putting names and faces on billboards is entirely in character for him--but it does seem strange that so many oddballs are latching on to him like they are. I have no theory as to why. I could say Melton can't choose his own supporters, but that's a cop-out. There's no getting around the fact that he's running what amounts to a conservative campaign, and Melton has never fit the conservative mold very well (though he hasn't fit the liberal mold very well, either--in some ways Giuliani is a very apt comparison).

It's also important to note that in addition to the old-Melton/new-Melton comparison, there's also the personal-Melton/candidate-Melton comparison. Look at tonight's debate, for example, where he said arrests were up when he wasn't MBN coordinator because he was only interested in the big fish and not just young African-American men. That's the old Frank Melton talking. But how do you think some of his supporters feel about that style of leadership? I don't see much demand from privileged whites for a mayor who will appoint an administration that arrests fewer people.

I have a few theories about Melton's supporters:

(a) He is attracting support from people who are really pretty far to his right, but know Whitlow doesn't have a prayer.

(b) He is attracting support from people who are really pretty far to his right but want to get rid of Johnson, who is a major figure in the national Democratic Party (heading up the mayors' association, being profiled and endorsed by DNC chair Howard Dean, etc). Melton is telling the truth when he says he's an independent, and he could be seen as a Lieberman figure--the conservative's favorite Democrat.

(c) He is attracting support from people who are really pretty far to his right, but are willing to overlook their differences with him because they honestly believe he'll cut crime and they haven't really thought through how.

(d) Melton's supporters are not, by and large, as conservative as they seem. This I actually feel pretty confident about--certain right-wing bloggers have created the impression that Melton's supporters are a bunch of conservatives, but he has the endorsement of the AFL-CIO, and I've never heard of a conservative union. Not to mention the fact that of the nine names I recognized on that host list you posted a while back, all but one are folks I would describe as moderate to liberal.

(continued)

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 8:11 pm

(continued)

But why is he talking to white little old ladies? And what's this business about Rankin and the Convention Center? Dunno. Some of his best friends are probably white little old ladies, but I have to agree that the way he's running his campaign right now is a little mind-boggling. Melton needs to work on defining what he stands for. I think his strong performance in tonight's debate helped, but it will take more than that to earn my vote.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 8:12 pm

Yep, befuddled here, too. I would think it was great if I felt like he was putting together a coalition of folks from all sides for the good of the city. But so much of what you see with the people close to him in the campaign are angry folks with vendettasómany of whom don't seem to like each other much. And I've heard from folks inside the campaign that they're having a hard time getting along with each other. Now, if all that seemed to be playing out in a positive way for the city ... maybe it would make sense. But it's not looking that way. At all.

Just remembered this one: What did you think of Melton's minority set-asides answer? That struck me as perhaps his most Republican answer of the eveningónot just that he doesn't support them, but the condescending way that Republicans use of telling people of color just how affirmative action is an insult to them. He nailed that tone. Sounded right out of the Karl Rove playbook.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 8:15 pm

It did, but FWIW I think Melton has always been a little iffy on affirmative action in general. It would be interesting to have a searchable archive of old "Bottom Line" segments...

I'll give Johnson another point, BTW: His answer on the churches question was much better than Melton's. In fact, I think I heard Melton second him after he was finished--which was a little strange, since what he said directly contradicted what Melton had just finished saying. (Melton was saying nobody should drag politics into churches; Johnson pointed out that if King, Evers, et. al. did so with great effect.) The only thing I didn't like about Johnson and churches is that in the context of a political debate he referred several times to Jesus and turning one's life over to Christ and so on and so forth, and that always sets my teeth on edge no matter which side of the aisle it comes from. Also didn't understand why I was supposed to care whether or not Melton was a Presbyterian. (And who the heck is St. Lutheran, anyway? Is there a St. Methodist, too?)

Your impression of the Meltonian chaos matches mine. One silver lining for the Melton campaign, though: If he's being supported by a bunch of people who aren't getting along, doesn't that make it rather unlikely that he's a plant for conservatives? Sounds to me exactly what would happen if a beloved but hotheaded local figure with an independent streak and a wide range of disparate views decided to run for office. I'm sure some of the AFL-CIO folks are annoyed over his minority contracts comments, some of his Republican supporters are annoyed over his rather bold statement during the MBN question that he doesn't necessarily think arresting more black folks is a good way to handle crime, and so on.

Even when I was a huge Melton fan, I never agreed with him 100% of the time--but I felt like he was honest. The unspoken vibe I picked up years ago when he showed no interest in running for mayor was that he thought he would alienate too many constituencies on both sides of the political aisle to ever get elected. Judging from what you're hearing about his supporters, maybe my sense was a little more prescient than I thought. Then again, he might just be really bad at running a political campaign.

One thing that is beginning to tick me off is the lack of poll data. Shouldn't the Clarion-Ledger have some numbers by now? We don't know if it's 50-50, 60-40 in one direction, or 80-20 in one direction. Either candidate could be polling in the single digits and we'd still have no idea. As I said in an earlier post, my sense has been that Johnson is leading, but I don't really know for sure. (Of course I'm sure that if my name were in the poll, I'd have a triple-digit lead. The digits would all be zero, but hey, that's what decimal points are for.)


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 17, 05 | 11:24 pm

I'd be interested to hear what both candidates had to say re: minority set-asides.

Also, can we expect the endorsement of a candidtate by the JFP soon?

  Posted by: buckallred on Apr 17, 05 | 11:49 pm

Yes, what is St. Lutheran anyway? Is that the name of a real church? It doesn't pop up in my online phone book. Is the point that Melton doesn't go to church? That's his business, but making up the name of a fake church doesn't seem appropriate somehow. Someone help us out here on this one, so I don't make any more assumptions without good info.

Ah, polling data. There's something rather refreshing about not having any polling data going into the election. That way, everyone would be on a level playing field. I know the mayor's campaign employed a polling firmóthey gave me the name when I asked, but it escapes meóit's a big, reputable operation out of D.C. I checked it out. (And it doesn't seem to have a history of push-polling; by the way, whatever happened to all the evidence the Lange-o-sphere was going to reveal about that? I'd really like to see it all if it's there.)

I sure don't believe that 80-77 stuff that the Melton folk have been pushing for months. It doesn't make sense, and sure doesn't match the anecdotal evidence out in the neighborhoods. And when I asked Robert Johnson about it, he made no effort to make it sound real and was so angry about me asking that I assume they made it up. In fact, Carolyn Redd told me she thought the numbers were based on WLBT TV polls. Now, that's scientific! (Although, remarkably, someone you and both know Tom tried to tell me the other day that Melton could have 77 percent of the black community behind him because the ratings of him on WLBT were so high. <whistles at the flaws in that logic>)

It's also tough to imagine that Melton's awful campaignóand last two weeks of misstepsóhaven't brought his numbers down. It can't have helped with the undecideds out there. I think Johnson currently would get the nod of many of them, or they won't voteóunless like you believe this debate tilts some toward Melton. I'm not quite buying it, though, although I understand your arguments.

Agreed that Johnson answered the church question brilliantly. It was just weird for Melton to say he had been in three churches today, and then say he doesn't believe in politicking in churches. Ahem. We didn't just fall off the turnip truck here.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 17, 05 | 11:56 pm

The JFP will run the newspaper's endorsements (which are unsigned and based on a number of people's views) in the last issue before the primary (April 28). I am writing this week about what I personally think about the campaigns, and how the candidates and their supporters, have conducted themselves to date. That will be out Wednesday.

Minority contract set-asides: Johnson for them, Melton against them. I don't have the transcript, yet, but will post when I do.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 18, 05 | 12:00 am

Well, in all fairness to Melton, the three churches could have been St. Lutheran, St. Mennonite, and St. Episcopalian. (Perhaps yesterday he could have been invited to St. B'nai Israel and St. Masjid Annur.) But I'd like to know who would have canonized St. Lutheran. Presumably not a pope...

I have to believe I misheard him. A Google search turns up a few churches named "Saint Lutheran" in other cities, but yellowpages.com shows nothing resembling that name in Jackson. I can't believe he'd be stupid enough to make up the name of his church. Maybe he meant to say St. Philip's or St. Paul's Lutheran Church and just shortened it so he wouldn't get pestered on Sunday mornings, which I can understand, though I would think one of the things mayoral candidates have to do is sacrifice some of their privacy.

Our mutual friend isn't just whistling Dixie; he's whistling the battle hymn of the Sumerian monarchy. No, if Melton wins it won't be with any 77 percent, I can tell you that right now. Maybe he would get 77 percent against Whitlow in the general election, but if the incumbent was so bad off that he was polling at <23 percent, even execrable liberals like us would know it.

My perception that Frank Melton won the debate could be because I'm a sucker for Frank Melton. I just like to hear the guy speak. If he loses, I hope he stays in the public eye.

I think one thing he did do is come across as tougher on crime. None of his policies necessarily scream that he is, of course, but he sounds tougher in the usual intangible way and I think that will resonate with some undecideds. The lesson of the 2004 election is that in the face of fear, a lot of folks want somebody with a little John Wayne in their step. The $64,000 question is whether Melton's conservatism on some issues--minority set-asides, for example--will alienate enough Democratic voters to make up for the undecideds he brings in.

I continue to suspect that turnout for the primary will be prohibitively skewed towards Democrats; I think most independent and Republican voters will wait for June. If my hunch on this is correct, then Johnson comes into the primary in a very strong position. If my hunch is wrong, then Melton stands a good chance of winning. You remember Melton's crack about most folks showing up to the debates being city employees, though; what does that tell us about who is likely to vote in the primary? (Maybe nothing, but at the very least it says something about who's out in the trenches shaking hands and kissing babies.)


Cheers,

TH

P.S. to Buck: Johnson supports minority set-asides; Melton opposes them.

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 18, 05 | 12:22 am

Did you Google Tyler, Texas? ;-) I dunno, I'm pretty sure you heard him right. That's what I heard, too. We may both be execrable, but I don't think we'd both make that up.

I hear you on the "crime" oneóbut I'm thinking that's not going to win any "swing" voters who aren't already with Melton on the crime/perception issue. It's not like he said anything he hasn't been saying already ("crime isn't a perception"óno kidding). And he didn't offer any specificsówhich he strikes me it would take to get the "swings" on the crime issue. If they're not decided by now, aren't they probably holding out for specifics?

No doubt, lots of white Repubs are going to go ceremoniously vote for Melton (for reasons I'm not sure they're clear onóthe ABH factor). But they're not the swing vote (which someone told me they were the other day, I kid you not). It's about what people think in the neighborhoods (and churches) throughout Jackson that will decide this election, not the folks having sushi with the N-JAM Club. Thus, the reason for this thread in the first place; and I still say "wow" re last Thursday's forum sideshowóconsidering who was hosting it.

Also, have you heard that one of Melton's campaign staffers is also a convicted felon. I think that's fine if trueófelons are people, tooóbut it casts the whole Covington outrage in a disingenuous light. I'll check it out and get back.

BTW, I think Johnson handled his end of <I>that> question extremely well. One of my big turn-offs of the last few days was to see how the Melton folks dragged Covington over the big-media coals for no apparent reason that I could see. Stringfellow's question about that was good.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 18, 05 | 12:34 am

Now that I think of it, agreed. That was a gutsy moment--"Let me tell you something about my friend... Yes, he's a convicted drug dealer, yes, he's been in prison, but he has turned his life around, and I'm proud of him." Thinking back on that, I think Johnson's defense of Covington was his best moment in the entire debate. It kind of demonstrated to me that he does deserve to be mayor, as a human being. Not that Melton doesn't, but that showed a lot of heart on Johnson's side of things.

And Melton, to his credit, backed down and refused to criticize the man further. Didn't go quite as far as an apology would have. (And really I think that would help Melton more than anything else right now--something to the effect of "Look, I'm not very politically astute, I shoot off my mouth, but when it comes down to brass tacks you can trust me to make the right decision." He hasn't said that yet. It's like he doesn't want to appear vulnerable, but what he doesn't realize is that he's already made himself appear vulnerable and he needs to acknowledge that and move on.)

I don't mean to sound cynical, but I doubt many voters are holding out for policy specifics. I think most folks vote based on how they feel about a candidate on a gut level, which doesn't always result in the candidate with the best policies getting elected. The folks who care about policy are likely to be the folks who already know enough about each candidate to make a decision. I thought a focus on truancy/dropouts was closer to a specific policy platform than Melton has come so far, but extra emphasis on one specific problem, and firing the police chief, does not a comprehensive crime policy make. He sounded like the stronger anti-crime candidate in the debate, but the fact that he doesn't actually have much of an anti-crime platform yet hurts his cause...at least with the minority of voters who are actually paying close attention to things like specific policy platforms.

And anybody who thinks Republicans are the swing vote in a Democratic primary should apply for the job of Iraqi Information Minister!


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 18, 05 | 1:05 am

Tom's comments, as usual, are dead on. This whole race hinges on Republicans crossing over and voting in the primary. Historically, northeast Jackson turnout has not been very strong against Harvery, which I interpret as a backhand endorsement of his candidacy. This will be interesting to see.

To me the pivotal moment was when Johnson answered the who is '"them" question from Stringfellow. My take on Johnson's answer is that "them" is anyone who doesn't support Johnson. That's kinda Nixonesque to me. Twelve years is a long time to give someone who views anyone who is against him as the "enemies of Jackson." By the way, the WJTV on-line poll shows 80 percent thought Melton won the debate. That's a huge margin even for an on-line poll.

  Posted by: Wyatt Emmerich on Apr 18, 05 | 8:46 am

Tom's comments, as usual, are dead on. This whole race hinges on Republicans crossing over and voting in the primary. Historically, northeast Jackson turnout has not been very strong against Harvery, which I interpret as a backhand endorsement of his candidacy. This will be interesting to see.

To me the pivotal moment was when Johnson answered the who is '"them" question from Stringfellow. My take on Johnson's answer is that "them" is anyone who doesn't support Johnson. That's kinda Nixonesque to me. Twelve years is a long time to give someone who views anyone who is against him as the "enemies of Jackson." By the way, the WJTV on-line poll shows 80 percent thought Melton won the debate. That's a huge margin even for an on-line poll.

  Posted by: Wyatt Emmerich on Apr 18, 05 | 8:46 am

Tom wrote:

>But why is he talking to white little old ladies? And what's this business about Rankin and the Convention Center? Dunno. Some of his best friends are probably white little old ladies, but I have to agree that the way he's running his campaign right now is a little mind-boggling. Melton needs to work on defining what he stands for. I think his strong performance in tonight's debate helped, but it will take more than that to >earn my vote.

Here's my take on that Tom. It's just the same as great song lyrics. Make them as vague as possible so people can interpret them personally and relate. This vagueness of Melton's is deliberate. He is appealing to as meaning people as possible while alienating as few as possible. This is a formula he honed over the years as he led WLBT to its huge ratings lead. What you're seeing is Melton transitioning this from TV into politics--a very easy transition. Melton is a natural politician who can appeal to the little old white lady and the young black radical at the same time. It is fascinating to watch. I think we are seeing the emergence of a real player on the political scene. Jackson is just the first step.

  Posted by: Wyatt Emmerich on Apr 18, 05 | 8:58 am

"By the way, the WJTV on-line poll shows 80 percent thought Melton won the debate. That's a huge margin even for an on-line poll." -Wyatt

It's only 365 people at the moment that have voted. That's not many and I'm strongly suspect of the results.

It's not entirely shocking that Melton would lead when you think of who is supporting Melton and how those organizers have been utilizing the Internet to spread their message moreso than any other media format. This is their domain. Johnson's used the Internet but does not rely on it nearly as much as the tech-savvy Melton campaign (in my opinion).

You won't go to West Jackson, Washington Addition, Midtown, and even South Jackson and see homes with one or more computers. So, in theory, I'd assume you're seeing MORE Melton supporters for a reason on this particular poll/question. The stats are very similar to the unscientific poll results on a "non"-anti-Johnson site.

But that's just speculation. Hell, I know plenty of people in middle-class Fondren that do not have computers. So, an online poll is not a good representation.

Wyatt, you should know that. ;-)

Hell, if you give weight to online polls, I have poll results that show 96% of Mississippians are in favor of gay marriage. Now, we know that's not accurate. It's about how the poll was promoted, who was promoting and pushing the poll, and so many other factors including economics, class, and what else was on TV that evening.

Now, I'm curious if anyone else was outraged by Melton's use of Catchings' death in general. I think this was a move that hurt Melton more than it helped. My SO (significant other), who is not political at all, even gasped when he heard that and expelled a little "uh uh" that was filled with disdain. I think the death of this officer had NOTHING to do with inter-city communication systems and Melton STRETCHED the murder into his agenda for political gain. There are 1000 other examples he could have used that would not have burned the family and friends of this fallen police officer.

As far as a winner? Ick. Frankly, they both turned me off somewhat. The jabs were distracting and nothing more than grandstanding. The issues were skirted but never really addressed. I was certainly hoping for a better performance from both and especially would have appreciated a debate between Melton, Johnson, and Whitlow...

Overall, I enjoyed the debate only because I got a good laugh out of it. It seemed more like an SNL skit than an actual debate over a political position for a city with serious problems. I didn't care at all for the childish attacks. I left the TV feeling as if I learned nothing new from either candidate but can say I trust Melton a little less in a position of that much power simply because of some things he said that offended me as a sibling of a police officer.

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 18, 05 | 9:15 am

Knol: "Now, I'm curious if anyone else was outraged by Melton's use of Catchings' death in general."

Absolutely, this was Melton's lowest point. Especially after you see what some of his most vocal supporters say about our men in blue. See above post about Larrry and Alan. Melton was so out of line to even bring it up and then to say the Sheriff's Dept could have saved the day. What is this guy drinking? Sad, sad, sad!

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 18, 05 | 9:25 am

"To me the pivotal moment was when Johnson answered the who is '"them" question from Stringfellow. My take on Johnson's answer is that "them" is anyone who doesn't support Johnson." - Wyatt

Wyatt, I don't think that's the case... At least from my position.

Throughout my life, I have witnessed bitter individuals and groups that seem to be anti-Mississippi and anti-Jackson. I'm not sure exactly why the hell they live here or what specifically they dislike since they seem to avoid making clear defined gripes... Just a lot of them rather than a specific problem they feel passion about...

There is an US vs THEM going on and there are certain people that won't agree to disagree and move on... And you have to admit, the Rove machine has used this tactic ENDLESSLY with NO COMPLAINTS from conservatives. So, it's evident it's a common practice in a dominated, two-party and two-class system.

Anyway, some call them anti-Johnson but I call them anti-Jackson. These anti-Jacksonians live in and around (including other states) Jackson and you'd be hard pressed to get one to say one nice or good thing about Jackson. They do NOTHING to help the city or the problems they nag about. They are simply naysayers. They exist... They group in flocks... And they won't be happy until they or someone they know can push whatever agenda they've been sitting on for so long.

In hip-hop culture and gen X/Y, they're called haters.

What's their agenda? I'm not sure there is a specific one shared by any of them.

But, some speculate it's a Republican running the city. Some speculate it's "a white Jackson, AGAIN." Some speculate it's for Jackson to collapse entirely and the suburbs to flourish. The speculations go on but these people exist and they'd rather see it all fall apart than help the city in any progressive manner possible. They seem spiteful and bitter about Jackson and I'm sure we all know at least one of THEM.

The "Thems" in this case are the people that actively and repeatedly complain but do nothing to proactively make Jackson a better place for whatever reasons. They are the "THEMS" that criticize and criticize but do nothing proactive to establish a resolution. They are the "THEMS" that complain about Jackson being a ghost town but do not support Jackson's businesses and head out to Wal-Mart in Madison or Flowood or Pearl. They are the "THEMS" that think crime is CAUSED by blacks and it is that simple and cut and dry without looking to the greater problems that influence this epidemic. There are many of the THEMS and they have done nothing but hold this city back because it is not EXACTLY what they want it to be... So, they sit and complain rather than getting out and changing the community one development, community meeting, neighborhood cleanup, mentor, Habitat project (etc) at a time.

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 18, 05 | 9:39 am

... the emergence of a real player on the political scene. Jackson is just the first step. -- Wyatt

You must define "player" more like "playa:"
I'm running as a Democrat to get the black vote, not because I am one;
I want the Convention Center in the suburbs;
I was told he'd be late but I wasn't told he would be late, so I won't debate;
We should give confused young men a second chance (before I bring a swat team into their school), but I won't sit on stage with a convicted drug dealer who has turned his life around and become a roll model.
I want a training program for Jackson youth to be in the suburbs.

If this is how a future political player acts, I'm glad I left my activist days behind me.

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 18, 05 | 9:42 am

Truth Watch
"I can get more done in 45 seconds than he can in eight years," Melton said.

Fact Check: Can Melton really get more done in 45 seconds than Johnson can in eight years? Please provide specifics, facts and data. No opinions since this is so matter of fact.... ;-)

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 18, 05 | 9:48 am

FYI:
WJTV has the full debate on its website for view/review.

Click here to view @ WJTV.com

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 18, 05 | 9:58 am

The question I would have liked asked is about cooperation with others who have the political/policy making authority to help Jackson. Maybe some of these individuals fit into that "THEM" category....

I'm still perplexed why Harvey wouldn't pick two business people out of the four nominated by the Chamber. I would say Bill Farmer with Time Warner would have been a great choice, but according to the Mayor's Office PR Person he's not "broad enough?"

This to me causes concern. For the first time in heavens knows how long the Hinds County delegation came together, worked with Harvey and his lobbyists, and agreed upon getting the convention center project on the referendum. It was clear that Harvey would pick two of the nominees from the business community...NOT that he would look them over, say "no thanks go pick someone else and let me look over"...but choose two from the business communities nominees.

What I've seen is a man who asks people to work with him, then when he has what he wants, he's through with them...doesn't need them anymore. That's not leadership in my book. It doesn't hurt Harvey, it hurts the customers he suppose to be working for - the taxpayers.

Jackson had the perfect opportunity to nab the large arts, music hall of fame project that Meridian has...however, Harvey and his team missed the proposal deadline and then wanted the deadline extended just because he and his team were so much more important that the process. But deadlines are not Harvey's strong suit.

Does everyone know that a bill passed this session, right in front of Harvey and his staff, that strips the City of financial control of the Telecommunications Center (SB 2645)? Yes......now Jackson has the financial responsibility for the Center but someone else has control of the maintenance and operation...money goes to them. Where was the screaming and shouting, the communication on Harvey's part to collaborate with the Hinds County delegation on having this bill stopped. There's faith in leadership for you.

There is a bigger picture than the issues raised in this past debate. Collaboration, how to give and take and work with others who are in positions of power to bring progress to Jackson, is one of those areas. How to concede one's personal preferences to truly build large coalitions. If there are "THEMS" then Harvey is partly responsible for creating them because he snubs everyone. You can't keep asking people to work with you and then ignore them afterwords. The Legislature in SB 2645 sent a pretty loud message to that end and while the Republican delegation for Hinds County may not be to everyone's liking, they did collaborate and worked just as hard to see this project through...something that just may never happen again. That's a shame.

The debate to me was a draw. Would like to see a second debate, carried by all three TV stations and have both Wyatt and Donna on the panel.

  Posted by: JenniferGriffin on Apr 18, 05 | 11:28 am

JFP: "I'm still perplexed why Harvey wouldn't pick two business people out of the four nominated by the Chamber."

The Mayor is on record as saying of the 4 individuals the Chamber put up; one was the Chairman, one was the co-chairman, one was the future chairman and one was the ex-chairman of the Chamber. The Mayor thinks that since there are over 200 business members in the Chamber, maybe they could have gone outside the 4 top positions on the Chamber and found someone else who is more representative of the business community. It wasn't personal, and the Time Warner guy has made it personal by threatening to leave Jackson, so why would you want him on the board? And then, some of Jackson's best naysayers will claim the Mayor only put him on to keep TW in the city - must be some kind of back room deal. I don't think Jackson needs its business people making threats and posturing like that for a seat on a board. He should remember many of his Jackson customers can get DLS deluxe too! Some people can be so silly about these kinds of things!

BTW, it is extremely common to have private companies come in and "run" a convention center whether it private or publicly financed. They have the resources and connections to manage convention facilities. They will still answer to the CVB, C/J, Chamber, and the State. But, I doubt if this bill puts it in the control of the State It must allow for "management" of the facilities. I would think you are going to have bids for who are the prime vendors for Food and Beverage, Room/Booth Set-up, Audio Visual and clean-up. They will have a staff of Sales and Convention Services, etc. separate from the city. So, what! If it makes any money both sides benefit. If it loses money over a period of time you switch out those vendors and bring in new ones. I've been there and done this for a long time in some of the countries largest convention centers and hotel facilities in the USA!

And the last I checked Jackson has an Art Museum, Planetarium, Music Hall and a Zoo. It's OK it spread the wealth around MS. Or maybe they could bring Faulkner's house to Jackson?!!

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 18, 05 | 12:54 pm

I like the "spreading the wealth around"....I think Jackson has done a great job of that as seen by the growth of Madison and Rankin County.

The Time Warner guy didn't make it personal, it was professional...a business decision. They too can "spread the wealth around." However, with a 15 year contract signed by Harvey just months before the last election, I would say there is a commitment and investment in Jackson. If there wasn't, Harvey sure wouldn't have signed it.

No problem with a private management company for the convention center. Infact, would rather have a private company run it. The bill, as I read it, states that the State Tax Commission will control the money. That only $25,000 shall be available from the "Mississippi Telecommunications Conference and Training Facility Reserve Fund" to defray the costs of operation of the facilty and that amounts remaining in the fund in any fiscal year after the debt service payment, may be used by the commission (and the only reference to commission in this bill is State Tax Commission) to provide funds for the maintenance of the facility and renovations, improvements and additions to the facility.

The only mention of Jackson is in declaring its intent and then publishing the tax increase.

I could be reading the bill wrong and have just called a Senator in Jackson to ask for clarification.

  Posted by: JenniferGriffin on Apr 18, 05 | 1:53 pm

Wow. First, thanks for the kind words, folks.

Wyatt, the online poll numbers are impressive, but Donna has a point re: the digital divide. Also worth considering is the fact that WJTV's audience includes the suburbs; if Jackson's voting district also included the suburbs, then of course Melton would win the primary in a landslide and Whitlow would stand a viable chance in the general election. That said, if 80 percent of Jacksonian viewers actually did feel that Melton won the election, it wouldn't surprise me a bit. The main objections Donna and I have to his campaign have to do with policy issues, and voters, by and large, don't pay enough attention to politics to notice--which is why so many candidates win on vague platforms. Agreed on Melton being a major new player on the political scene; if he wins Jackson, he could even pull a Coleman and run for Trent Lott's vacant seat in 2012. But I agree with your comments regarding northeast Jackson turnout and I think Johnson will probably end up carrying the day, though he'll have to sweat for it.

Re the "them" question: Knol, I think you're absolutely right about what Johnson probably meant, but Wyatt, I think you're right about how he probably sounded to most viewers. He is Jackson's first black mayor, and he is talking about not giving "them" back the city, and that's what most people are probably going to hear. I'll say the same thing I said when Richardson ran against Graves with the "He's One of Us" slogan: Voters are going to see racial overtones whether that's what the candidate had in mind or not. The message the "them" style campaigning sends to me is that Melton is the favored Democratic candidate of the northeast Jackson conservative whites, which he probably is, and this might actually help Johnson in the long run. But I don't like it when campaigns send that kind of message, intentionally or otherwise.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 18, 05 | 2:01 pm

If 80 percent of Jacksonians felt that Melton won the debate, rather, not the election.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 18, 05 | 2:18 pm

i attended the debate on sunday. frank melton did not come across as a 'genius.' rather, he seemed defensive, edgy, and rude. i hope i was seeing things, but he seemed to be rolling his eyes and smirking during some of mayor johnson's responses. it all smacked of dubya's spoiled brat/cowboy attitude, and if there is a town in america that does NOT need that sort of leadership, it is jackson.
we've come way too far in recent years for this expat cowboy to come in here, lie to us, pander to the masses who would gladly dance on jackson's grave, and jerk the carpet of progress out from under us.
love him or hate him, mayor johnson needs another term. melton needs to stick to hobnobbing with the naysayers and spend some more time in tyler.

oh, and his voting record ALONE should have him laughed out of town. sadly, it won't.

  Posted by: Jay on Apr 18, 05 | 3:04 pm

"The Time Warner guy didn't make it personal, it was professional...a business decision. They too can "spread the wealth around." However, with a 15 year contract signed by Harvey just months before the last election, I would say there is a commitment and investment in Jackson."

Donna, help me here. Anyone? Even you JPF, you seem to read everything - if you know he said it don't discount it. Where is the article where it points out Bill Farmer may be taking TW out of Jackson? I'm not paying the C-L for archives past 7 days - what a bunch of yahoos! Mr. Farmer can do what he wants - contract or not; but, he did say he may move TW out of Jackson. Would this violate the current contract JPF? And, once again, there are many other Chamber members that they could have nominated. I'm sure there are several memebrs who would have loved to have been on that board. I can think of one for sure!

Whoever wants to control the money for the telecom center - Can. Who cares? But, if who ever is managing it doesn't work with the CVB, the Chamber, the cities, and the State then they will fail in attracting meetings/use. And, if this bill is "oh so bad" for Jackson then how did "our" congress people vote on it? I'd be curious?

Did anyone else notice that out of all of our local congressmen, Jim Evans is the only one who voted "No" to extend the session? Did he have a vacation to go on? Even the speaker voted Yes.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 18, 05 | 3:27 pm

Tortoise, I'm too busy to blog todayómoonlighting as a newspaper editor. ;-)

However, try Google or Google Newsóit usually turns up old Ledge stories. Yes, I hate their archives, too. Someday the mass media are going to figure out what the Internet is really there for. And it's not to help the corporates gatekeep and charge for information.

I don't think your point about Jim Evans is correct. I'll get Brett in on that one.

Y'all be good.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 18, 05 | 3:47 pm

I have the C-L spreadsheet from the other Sunday. I'll check it soon. It was confusing because it didn't line up well. I meant the local rep's not all of 'em from the state.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 18, 05 | 4:06 pm

Jay, Melton isn't some carpetbagger who got picked by the Republicans to knock out a prominent Democrat; he is a devoted community activist with 20 years of experience in this city, and someone most of Johnson's supporters would have supported 10 or 15 years ago. I don't believe Melton should be mayor, but there's no point to underestimating his appeal. He's the biggest challenge Johnson has faced since the Democratic primaries of '97.


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 18, 05 | 4:23 pm

tortoise: Jim Evans is the only one who voted "No" to extend the session?
ladd: I don't think your point about Jim Evans is correct.

I'm pretty sure it was Erik Fleming, another Jackson representative, that was the lone "no" vote.

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 18, 05 | 4:36 pm

Actually, you can give a "Yes" vote to Fleming from Clinton. But, Ellington didn't vote, and Evans was the only "No" vote out of the metro area Rep's. And that included Denny and Reeves! The Senate was strong! Reason why I bring this up is that Evans is a host of "Frankly Speaking" with Melton, so his lack of desire to stay in session and try to solve our budget problems should be of concern to voters. I wonder how Melton feels aobut his vote to end the session? Seems contrary to Melton's management style.

Stats from C-L. 4/10/2005

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 18, 05 | 5:47 pm

I got this...if you live in Ward 1 or Ward 7 this could be fun.



From: "Sam Begley"

Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:12 PM

Subject: Fw: breakfast tuesday 7:30am,university club


I have been asked by the hosts to extend you an invitation to a

breakfast meeting on tuesday morning at the University Club for

Mayor Johnson and Downtown businesspeople and property

owners/residents in Wards One and Seven. The meeting is not directed

at campaign supporters but hopefully will include folks on the fence or

with an open mind.It is anticipated that a free discussion of problems

and concerns will ensue. Hopefully any misconceptions about the

Mayor's positions will be remedied.This is a private meeting(no press)

and it would be helpful to know in advance if you can make it and to let

the hosts know of who you might bring with you or who might also need

to be called to invite.

  Posted by: JenniferGriffin on Apr 18, 05 | 7:59 pm

Harumph on the no-press part. That sounds like the Melton campaign. Thus far, the Johnson camp gets credit for openness.

Too early for me anyway, I must say. If Melton had spoken to the ladies of North Jackson before 8 a.m., no one would have ever been the wiser about all those humdingers he dropped. ;-)

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 18, 05 | 8:16 pm

BTW, good post in the spirit of Truth Watch, JPF. Thanks.

BTW, I've got a boatload of new Truth Watches coming as soon as this issue is to bed. So, y'all get ready to dig and Google on a fresh round of proclamations by the candidates. Hopefully, I can starting posting it all Tuesday afternoon.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 18, 05 | 8:19 pm

Donna:

Can you get Truthwatch to see if there is a St. Lutherans church anywhere in Jackson. I do not believe there is. There is a St. Luthers near Jackson State, but I would be willing to bet that a check of the membership rolls there would not reveal Frank Melton's name. While I do not believe that church attendance should be a requirement for mayoral candidacy, if you do not regularly attend, then honesty would dictate that you say so, especially in a televised debate. I am just going on a hunch here, but I believe that this is just one more area where Melton has told a fib when the truth will do just fine.

  Posted by: Angry Democrat on Apr 19, 05 | 2:26 pm

Angry Dem, on one of these threads, someone has been posting info on it. You're right: there's not a church by that name. Personally, I don't care where or if he goes to churchóthat's a personal thingóbut I could be concerned if he pulled something out of thin air. It's kind of like the homestead-exemption thing, or Clinton's Lewinsky cover-up: It's about the truth, stupid, and whether a candidate or elected official has the propensity to tell it or not. So far, Melton's not doing great on this front, at least so far this month.

Anyone else have church info? One thought I had, to give him the benefit of the doubt: Is there a church here with the nickname, "St. Lutheran"? Maybe the members call themselves that or such.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 19, 05 | 6:24 pm

Ah, just saw this in Eric Stringfellow's column today:

Some of Melton's wounds on Sunday were self-inflicted. He twice said he was a member of St. Lutheran's when he actually meant St. Luther Missionary Baptist Church. He linked Jackson police officer Thomas Catchings' killing to the city/county radio feud, which was inappropriate. And Melton said he didn't care if city employees lived in Afghanistan. City workers should live in Jackson.

I guess Melton garbled the name of his church.

Here's the part of the column I found more interesting:

Johnson attacked Melton's voting record and his tenure as Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics director and questioned Melton's leadership credentials. This strategy may play well with staunch Johnson supporters, but it is risky.

Voters are more interested in Johnson's interpretation of his eight years in City Hall, how that fits into his vision for the city and how it is all connected to a third term. The mayor should start talking more about his record and his plans instead of making this election all about Melton.

Ah, gotta love the civic journalism evident here. For the record, Adam and I and Ayana before have been dragging our butts all over this city to events, invited and univited, listening to what both candidates have to sayóand a not insignificant part of that has been Johnson articulating his "vision for the city." You know what? I haven't seen Stringfellow at a single one of those events taking notes in the audience, not even at the neighbohood forum last week that Melton walked out of and Johnson and Smith spent a whole lot of time talking about issues and vision.

Stringfellow shows up to be a panelist on TV to ask the candidates for 60-second sound bites (no more!) and then complains about candidates not articulating their "vision"???

Please.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 19, 05 | 6:35 pm

So, the real question is: Had any of the candidates articulated specifics and "vision," would The Clarion-Ledger have been anywhere nearby to hear it? You know, the whole tree falling in the woods conundrum. If the tree falls, would The Ledge be there to report it. They certainly wouldn't report the effects of it falling. ;-)

Even I didn't think we'd get this close to the primary and their campaign coverage be so bad. Especially not after all the crime hysteria of the last couple years. Truly, truly amazing.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 19, 05 | 6:47 pm

Donna, you and I both know that someone from TCL has been at every event. I've personally seen and spoken with them, something I try and do with all te media people at these events.

Just because Eric himself didn't come, I don't think you can rule out that he hasn't been keeping up with the goings-on. I've been to all the events and still haven't heard Harvey explain what vision he has that he hasn't yet had a chance to get to.

  Posted by: hmg on Apr 19, 05 | 10:26 pm

One name I never hear much about is Annell Smith. I know she's a dark horse, but can't find a good biography of her anywhere; this is all I can find, and I'm not even sure it's the same person. The few sound bites I've seen from her sound pretty articulate. What's her story?


Cheers,

TH

  Posted by: Tom Head on Apr 19, 05 | 10:50 pm

Harvey, no, someone from The Ledge certainly has not been at every mayoral event we've covered. Neither have you, for the record. ;-) And the other night at the forum, Jack did not arrive until after the dust-up because he was covering the mayor's other appearance, as he and I talked about afterward. That's fine, and he did a decent story anyway, but I do wonder why The Ledge doesn't seem to have someone covering each of the major candidates. We do, in a fashion. And, yes, I think that Eric should be showing up at more of these events. His column indicates today he's not up at all on what's being said on the campaign trail. A debate that only allows 60-second sound bites does not offer any forum for real discussion of issues. In fact, it plays to quippy sound bites. The media who sponsored it sure shouldn't make fun of the fact that the candidates used that formats for quips. I can't imagine what else it would be good for.

As for Annell, Tom, we've done an interview with her, which will appear in next week's issue. She seems quite delightful. She even hugged me after the forum last Thursday. ;-) Is that a qualification for mayor at this point? Probably not. But she showed incredible class and composure under difficult and stressful circumstances created by the Melton folks that night.

Just saw where WJTV is re-broadcasting the entire debate Wednesday. They made a big point of saying that it will include the ENTIRE closing statements. So that's good.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 19, 05 | 11:32 pm

At least she isn't insulting the other candidates. (And the voters.)
Anell for mayor!
Anell for mayor!
Anell for mayor!
Anell for mayor!

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 20, 05 | 8:07 am

Word just came from JSU that the mayoral debate there has been cancelled. It sounds like it's because Melton wanted to send a stand-in. Here's the short statement:

Due to scheduling conflicts and possible substitutions for one of the mayoral candidates, tonightís 7 p.m. debate at Jackson State University has been cancelled.

This is all so sad. We're also cancelling our youth forum Saturday as well.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 21, 05 | 4:54 pm

Uh... When do we get to hear the candidates actually discuss the REAL issues?

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 21, 05 | 5:12 pm

This is very sad. A little too much "handling" over on the Melton side.

  Posted by: tortoise on Apr 21, 05 | 5:14 pm

Marcus Chanay at JSU left a message explaining why tonight's mayoral debate at JSU was cancelled:

"We found out about 3:30 this afternoon that Mr. Melton was not going to be able tp participate in the debate, and he was going to send Mr. Doug Anderson, Supervisor Doug Anderson in his place. We felt that was not what our students wanted to hear. They did not want to hear Mr. Anderson; they wanted to hear Mr. Melton and Mayor Johnson. Because of that, the debate was cancelled.

  Posted by: ladd on Apr 21, 05 | 7:13 pm

According to WJTV's report, Mayor Johnson did go to JSU and visit with the students who came despite the cancellation of the Forum. You would not really know the true facts surrounding the JSU episode based on their coverage because they are too busy gloating over having the only debate of this campaign. Blogging does have a future and a mission: It will help get the video media honest. We are seeing this on a national level often; now let's keep it going locally.

  Posted by: ChrisCavanaugh on Apr 22, 05 | 5:34 am

Did I hear that the Melton campaign has stated that their candidate will not participate in any more debates prior to the primary?

  Posted by: GDIModerate on Apr 22, 05 | 8:36 am

Was the one Saturday really a debate? Looked more like children throwing sand on a playground...

I'm still waiting for all of them to speak to the issues in a formal debate rather than acting like children and slinging mud.

  Posted by: kaust on Apr 22, 05 | 8:39 am

"Then as Mrs. Smith was giving her opening remarks, Mr. Hickingbottom walked up to me at the podium and started saying that they refused to "sit next to a convicted felon." And he wanted the mic to tell the audience that! OK, being that I had no idea of Mr. Covington's record, I wasn't going to give Mr. HIckingbottom the mic to do launch an unsubstiated tirade! So I looked at him and said, "No, that's inappropriate." Somewhere in there, during other candidate's opening remarks, Melton and his supporters got up and walked out. When it got to his turn for an opening statement, I asked on the mic if Mr. Melton was coming back to give his statement. Someone yelled that he had to leave for another commitment. MORE ... - Ladd April 2005

Fast forward to today's story in the C-L: Dec 22, 2005

  Posted by: pikersam on Dec 22, 05 | 11:35 am