Political Targeting of the Wrong Council Members in Greensboro

We learn from Ryan Shell that there is a new PAC organized in the city of Greensboro ostensibly intended to influence the composition of the City Council.  We are told that the principal involved with this PAC is Andrew Murphy, with whom I am not familiar.  

But it appears this PAC has several objectives.  First, it apparently seeks to reestablish on the City Council a pseudoprogressive approach according to the ground rules of the old machine politics.  Second, it seeks to vilify and demonize Mary Rakestraw and Trudy Wade, and remove them from office.  Third, it seems to claim that unanimity is necessary on our City Council-- and if we don't have that unanimity, it is inherently a very bad thing.  A shot is taken at some "overheated rhetoric" and divisiveness among the council members targeted.

A couple of things are interesting.  First, the news of this PAC became known after Mitchell Johnson was removed from his former position, suggesting the creation of this organization may have been in reaction to that development.  Second, the website claims to be non-partisan, but conspicuously refrains from any criticism of Mike Barber-- choosing instead to lob its missiles at Rakestraw and Wade.  It does not target Groat or Matheny, both of whom ultimately voted against Johnson.

But most interestingly, Mr. Murphy and his PAC seem to ally themselves with Goldie Wells and T. Diane Bellamy-Small, both of whom have sometimes seemed to want to enforce unanimity among council members.  Some of us, however, have had an opportunity to listen to the audio from the closed session when Mitchell Johnson was fired. Wells and Bellamy-Small were the council members engaging in overheated rhetoric.  They were the ones who were bickering, even though it seemed nobody really wanted to bicker with them.

The News and Record has often expressed sentiments similar to those Murphy asserts.  It wants unanimity among council members also.  But debate is the essence of democracy.  If a political environment is maintained in which debate cannot be conducted by the people's representatives, then you have an oligarchy.   But that is what some people want, in service of a certain political agenda-- and ironically, in service of various pools of self-interest in which various leaders wade.

The emergence of this PAC is a sobering reminder that Greensboro's machine politics usually wins; and the events of last week were an exception to the general rule.  Candidates who oppose the machine are at risk in various ways; and it is very difficult to beat it.  In Greensboro and Guilford County, the wrong side oft prevails.

Comments

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

All I can say, Joe, is that you/others have to keep the heat on.

The people are not well-served by this PAC control-freak/machine politics BS.

And the council dialogue reported in the N&R's featured article online today was just pathetic.

1979 is an issue/has power ONLY if the Council allows it to remain an issue/have power. I just don't understand the focus. I spent four years in school in GSO back in the 80's (attending UNC-G - and taking some classes at A&T). I had black friends and white friends and yellow and red ones and "1979" just wasn't a part of the daily discourse amongst ordinary folk going about living their lives. We got along. We respected one another. We lived and let live.

It's time to start dealing with the here and now.

[Roch101]

We'll see what develops, but I get the feeling this is not part of any machine.

[Joe Guarino]

Mary, you are right. Raising 1979 was absurd.

And Roch, while it may not be "part" of any machine, its stance serves to perpetuate it, and allow it to continue to do the things it would want to do. Sometimes we have to listen to the music. Look at who it opposes, and who it remains silent about.

[E.C. Huey]

I'm planning a post on this "PAC" and the tapes before day's end...all I can say is I got through 20 minutes of this tape, this drivel, and then I needed a Pepcid AC. The word "disgusted" doesn't even begin to describe how I feel about our city's leadership right now.

[Roch101]

What "it?" As far as I can tell it's a "he."

[Sue]

This is a little more about the organizer:
Andrew Murphy
3611 University Dr.
Apt. 12D
Durham, North Carolina 27707
amurph22@mail.nccu.edu

I'm curious as to what he (perhaps a college student) has to do with politics in Greensboro? GSO roots? Whatever his interest, the organizing members of the PAC do not appear to be listed on the web site. Intriguing if an omission.

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks, EC and Roch.

Sue, does this suggest to you that he is a student or staff member at NC Central University?

[Spag]

Why do Democratic PAC's have to lie about who they are? I read the website for this one, and it was the same old hide the ball garbage about a "multitude of criteria" used to select candidates without admitting that the first criteria is that the candidate be a Democrat.

Don't we see enough of this pretending not to be partisan on the blogs?

Although they claim to want to get rid of Wade and Rakestraw for lack of leadership, the site contains issue statements like these:

On Smart Growth

"Greensboro has suffered for years from bad development practices."

On Transportation

"Greensboro's air health has been declining for years"

On Professionalism

"Sadly, the tone of debate in council chambers has often turned divisive and disrespectful, with many council members choosing to put their self-interests and egos before the needs of Greensboro and its people...council members should always promote our city in the most positive light, beginning with their own demeanor. Negativity and dissension only breeds more negativity, jeopardizing our city's ability to attract new residents and quality, good paying jobs."

The first two are interesting because Rakestraw and Wade were just elected in 2006, which means that the problems that are related to smart growth and transportation "for years" should be blamed on someone else.

The last one is interesting because of Sandra Anderson Groat's revelation on the just released tape of the City Council private session that Mitch Johnson told her he was "arrogant" and had a "big ego". It's also interesting because it was Mitch Johnson and his public statements painting Greensboro as having a racist and corrupt police force that have done more damage to the image of the City than anything else.

Johnson is the one who engaged in the negativity that the PAC wants to end, yet the PAC wants to get rid of the people who were instrumental in getting rid of Johnson.

What B.S. Unfortunately, because of the "hide who we really are" nature of the PAC, enough people may be fooled by their name and not realize the disconnect between their stated goals and the actions of those that they will support.

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks, Sam, for a great post, and I agree. Groat's comments were also interesting because she seemed to be conveying that Johnson had little insight regarding the degree to which he contributed to his own problems-- that he would not "take responsibility". This was a remarkable turnabout for Groat and Matheny.

It could be that this PAC may turn out to be less than it appears. It has a very professional-appearing website. But I don't know why there would be a NCCU connection, or a NCCU interest in Greensboro politics. Is this a young Greensboro male resident away at school;, or a faculty member who resides in Greensboro and commutes?

[just saying]

I totally agree - unanimity is actually the last thing we need in government. The political process is about the debate and exchange of ideas, as you say.

Greensboro's old-line elite (of which the N&R is a part of) suffer from the "textile mill" mentality. In the old mill system, the mill owner - the "Big Bossman" - called all the shots and the rank & file employees said "Yes, sir." Many of the old guard feel that's how the city should be run, and that's how Mitchell Johnson tried to run things.

What we need are more people like Wade, Rakestraw and Barber who are willing to stand up and think for themselves, even if that means debate and disagreement.

[Juan Valdez]

Barber es un imbécil de tomo y lomo.

[Roch101]

Oh, that Andrew Murphy. He's a student, or was when he donated $349 to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. He was identified as a former resident of Greensboro in a letter to the editor of the N&R, but the same company currently hosting the PAC web site also temporarily hosted a site for Andrew Murphy for Greensboro At-large City Council (now offline.)

I sent an email to the contact address listed on the PAC web site with a few questions about its organization and principals. I'll post the answers on my blog when they arrive.

Let me add something. Let's not make the mistakes we readily condemn others for, primarily jumping to conclusions. This PAC looks suspicious off the bat. At worst, it could be a front to further the political ambitions of Mr. Murphy, it could also well be a young and enthusiastic (albeit inexperienced) person dipping his toes in the waters of local civic involvement.

We may or may not agree with his political perspectives, but if it is the later, let's not be so mean as to smother a young person's passions before they even catch fire -- I don't think any of us would want to try to inflict that on a young person's enthusiasm, Democrat or Republican.

[Bubba]

Nevertheless, it behooves us to pay close attention, and to report new information as soon as it becomes available.

Sunshine is always good for this type of thing.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, I don't think we are trying to be mean or to smother a young person's passions. If this is indeed a student, he will learn that, once he enters the arena, he will need to defend his beliefs. This is just a discussion.

And Bubba, I do think it is a good idea to pay attention. We have a number of forces locally that try to influence the process, and we need to understand who they are; what motivates them, and what influence they may have.

[Roch101]

Bubba, you and I agree about once a year, this was it.

Joe, I was primarily thinking of the "hiding who we are" accusation." It could be a conscious effort, or it could be the error of a novice who hasn't yet grasped the significance of transparency. It raised my suspicion, I admit, but I'm not ready to make it part of a condemnation of the guy's beliefs. We'll know shortly.

[Beau D. Jackson]

We learn from Ryan Shell that there is a new PAC organized in the city of Greensboro ostensibly intended to influence the composition of the City Council. We are told that the principal involved with this PAC is Andrew Murphy, with whom I am not familiar.

A seemingly unknown coming forth with a new "organization" ASKING for donations, could it smell like a Hinsom CBO! Also,it attacks two Conservative members of the board, could it also be an agumentation to the Simkin PAC. Beau

[Roch101]

Hey Beau, I am curious. Do you not use quotation marks because you do not understand their significance or because you intentionally like making your comments cryptic?

[Sue]

Joe, I see the "is he a student" question has been answered; as for sunshine, I'd like anyone who can do so to provide a link to where NC PACs are registered in the state. Is there an online repository? (cellphone post; can't search easily now)

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, I looked on the State Board of Elections website for campaign finance, and there was nothing found when I searched "Stand Up Greensboro" or Andrew Murphy. I do not have direct knowledge of where else to look. Perhaps others do.

[Roch101]

According to the Guilford County Board of Elections, the PAC submitted their organizational report yesterday, but it had errors and was returned for corrections. I was told that it will be posted online soon after it is received properly completed.

Although the links refer to "candidate" reports, PACs operating in Guilford County are also listed here:

http://gcms0004.co.guilford.nc.us/elections_cms/reports.html

[Tony Wilkins]

Sue, there is also an Andrew Murphy in Adams Farm. Where did you get your info? I haven't been able to find that online.

[Ryan Shell]

Good discussiong going on. I've emailed Andrew and asked him some of the questions mentioned in this thread. I'll share any info I receive.

Have a good one.

Ryan

[Sue]

Tony (as I told you on the phone :), it's the name and address/email associated with the domain (also called a "whois"). If you google "whois," you'll get what you need.

[delow24]

One of the first of many "community based organizations/organizers" sent out by the Obama Democrats. This worked to get him elected and they are going to work to get all of the power everywhere in order to promote the Socialist agenda.

[Brenda Bowers]

delow24, This was my very first thought also. I do know there are other organizations seemingly from out of nowhere forming around the country.

While full time RVing Lew and I made a lot of friends with whom I still keep in contact at least weekly via email. A good many have been following the "Greensboro Soap" as they have dubbed it. Many are also somewhat involved in watching their own local politics. This is how I have been hearing of these groups. All are very liberal in their aims and all seem to call for the ouster of conservative politician while almost demanding total loyalty to groups agenda and allowing little information out as to who and what they are.

Before reading Joe's post and the comments I went to the link to Shell and the his link to the PAC site. I stated my initaial reaction as being, "this sound like what ---and --- are talking about in their town. Hmmm, interesting". Then I came back and read the post and the comments and again,"Hmmmm, interesting."

[Tony Wilkins]

Ryan, your one day knowledge of a PAC registering is incredible. Are you on some kind of e-mail list to notify you of such? I'd like to be on that list if you can share the info.
You scooper you.

[Ryan]

Tony, I received a heads up via email last night that the PAC was launching today. It was not info that was sent to the masses.

Joe,

I hope you don't mind me posting a link to my site in a comment, but Andrew responded to a series of questions that I thought folks might want to read.

http://greensboropolitics.com/?p=789

Have a great night everyone.

Ryan

[Joe Guarino]

Ryan, I had the opportunity to read his comments. I think his premise is flawed. I don't know to what extent we can believe some of his statements. And I think it is obvious that there is some element of partisanship.

And I wonder if he would have felt the same way about the city council that existed in 2006-7, which was horribly failed in certain respects. The net effect of his message, by inference, is that he would have preferred that previous status quo, which, according to his logic, Rakestraw and Wade later messed up. Those two council members, we are to believe, are the problem; and things must have been much better before they arrived.

But we again need to take note of the fact that Mike Barber is not identified as the problem.:)

[bILL]

" Is this a young Greensboro male resident away at school;, or a faculty member who resides in Greensboro and commutes? "

He's a 2nd year law student from Greensboro - greensboropolitics.com

[keith]

let's see how far he wants to get rid of wade and rakestraw, at least I will give him an a for effort on web site. Let's see if he can make a difference in the fall.

For me it would be great to see as many developers off of Greensboro City Council as possible like Matheny, Groat and Perkins with a logo
"DUMP THE DEVELOPER PARTY ON COUNCIL"

SO with the PAC and me there goes 5 off of council and with Wells not running again that makes 6 off of council.

That might make for a great day in Greensboro come fall.

Who's with me?

[Joe Guarino]

Keith, your comment makes one take notice of the council members that the new PAC, which claims to be progressive, would leave in office.