With all the name-calling that’s been coming from Republicans upset at State Senator Chris Koster’s and now state senate candidate Chris Benjamin’s switching their party affiliations, we at PubDef.net would like to remind our Republican friends that switching parties is nothing new.

Discovering that your personal beliefs and the direction of your political party no longer match is not all that uncommon in American politics. In fact, the godfather of modern Republican conservatism, Ronald Reagan, himself, was a Democrat for the first 51 years of his life.

If it wasn’t for party-switchers, Republicans might be stuck quoting Richard Nixon in their debates.

While the parents, media and lawmakers look for someone to punish for the suicide of Megan Meier, others wonder how Internet postings could possibly drive someone to suicide.

“What if the boyfriend was real?” asked a friend of mine. “What if he dumped her, called her a [vulgar name] and she ran home and killed herself? Would they try to prosecute him?”

Good question. While the link to the popular social networking website MySpace has made this St. Charles tragedy a worldwide story, the media’s thirst for sensationalism mixed with politicians’ opportunism has really left common sense and any idea of personal responsibility at the roadside.

Shouldn’t a 13-year-old be able to handle “meanness” better than this? Or is this newly-coined “cyber-bullying” really a new, more menacing threat to young people, as an editorial in the Post-Dispatch claimed today:

“The pervasiveness of technology, including cell phones, e-mail and instant messaging, coupled with the anonymity it bestows, makes electronic harassment less escapable and more effective. Bullies no longer lurk only in school hallways and playgrounds; now, they slip right into a child’s bedroom, wreaking havoc even when school is out.”

Really? Are emails really more scary than three bigger kids beating the hell out of you everyday at lunch? Because sticks and stones can indeed break your bones. Words — well, they can be hurtful too, but at 13 years-old aren’t kids at least responsible enough for their own actions as to rule out the words of a faceless boy or girl as the reason for them killing themselves?

Ironically, at the same time newspapers, TV news, and the girl’s parents are arguing that 13-year-old Megan was not responsible for her own actions, a St. Louis County judge sentenced young Sherman Burnett Jr. to 60 years in prison for a crime he committed when he was — you guessed it — 13 years-old.

So which is it, Missouri? Are 13 year-olds responsible for themselves or not?

Because if they are, young Sherman should go to jail for a very long time for kidnapping, beating and sexually assaulting his 6 year-old neighbor. And young Megan was old enough to know what the hell she was doing when she decided to take her own life. No words from someone she never met caused her suicide.

Or is someone else really responsible for causing Megan to hang herself in her room, because as a child, Megan was manipulated and harassed to the point of her own suicide and, like young Sherman, had no concept yet how precious life — theirs or others — actually is.

So which one is it, Missouri? What are 13 year-old kids responsible for — your kids and mine?

“I am a great admirer of Paul McKee,” Slay writes on his blog. “He is a generous donor of time and money to a range of civic enterprises. He is a mainstay of several Catholic charities. In fact, until he decided to spend money acquiring privately owned vacant lots and empty buildings in north St. Louis, he has been either feted or unnoticed. For whatever reason, this particular good deed has earned him the enmity of the local newspaper.”

The mayor, who last year called for a group of local investors to buy the paper, goes on to criticize the Post’s City Hall reporter.

“The story, by political writer/blogger Jake Wagman, is a thin web of half-facts, rumors, and tenuous connections that would have benefited from better editing and less careless reporting,” Slay writes.

The mayor goes on to deny that he knows any details about what McKee has in mind for the 400-plus properties he has acquired so far – but, “I do know that he is buying properties that no one else has even looked at in decades.”

COMMENTARY

The editorial board of the Post-Dispatch told its urban readers yesterday that they don’t give a damn about what they think about the future of their public schools — and neither should the state.

“Let’s get real,” said the editors condescendingly. The editorial says that sure, at the first and only opportunity the public has had to let its feelings be heard about this matter, hundreds of people showed up to clearly, and often very articulately, express their opposition. But what do they know?

The Post says the public should not trust in the ability of the current superintendent, Dr. Diana Bourisaw, but rather in the wisdom of Mayor Francis Slay (who brought us such figures as Veronica O’Brien and Dr. William Kincaid) and the sensitivity of Gov. Matt Blunt (who’s said that nobody in their right mind would live in St. Louis City).

The Post says the parents, voters and taxpayers of the City should trust that what is being threatened will only be “temporary” and in ten years the politicians will give us our rights back. Kind of like state control of our police department was just a temporary action when the nation was gripped in civil conflict.

The Post joins its partner the American in asking the public to have faith in something for which their is no proof; that the State of Missouri or any three people it empowers can do what has, so far, been very difficult for us to do locally: get parents, teachers, school board members, political leaders, civic leaders, the business community, the general public, and the media to focus on the needs of young people in the City of St. Louis and help them, in all parts of their lives, prepare for a better future.

Just one problem: There’s nothing about how to do that in the Danforth-Freeman report. A takeover in no way guarantees success. In fact, no plan at all has been presented on how the state plans to improve the district. But Dr. Bourisaw has.

And the reality that DESE, the Danforth-Freeman committee, the Post-Dispatch, and the American never seem to acknowledge is that SLPS is just recovering from one takeover. From 2003 to 2006, the district was under the de facto authority of the mayor’s office. And during that time, things got worse.

During the same period, the Wellston school district was under the authority of DESE and the Governor’s office. And things got worse.

So what now, by bringing these two failures of leadership together, are the people and parents of St. Louis promised in exchange for turning over their power, tax dollars and children?

And as one speaker at last week’s public forum asked so appropriately: If ten years from now we find ourselves in the very likely situation of having a failing, state-operated school district, then what? Will they hand it back to the voters? What is the exit strategy?

There are few times in history that power is given up and given back without a fight. The editors at the Post-Dispatch and the St. Louis American must excuse us if we don’t share in their faith in the abilities or promises of politicians.

It is up to the people and parents of the City of St. Louis to make right our own house. The state can aid in that by: better funding public education across the state, passing Sen. Maida Coleman’s bill to allow for the recall of school board members, and respecting the rights of the citizens of this city as you do those of people elsewhere in this state by allowing our vote to mean something on April 3, 2007.

“Get over it, St. Louis. There will never be another Ozzie Smith,” said the Comedy Central pundit about our recently passed Stem Cell Amendment which allows for a certain kind of cloning.

COMMENTARY

When the balance of power shifted on the St. Louis City School Board back in April, the Post-Dispatch and its education reporter, Steve Giegerich, suddenly began to watch the district with a critical eye.

Before, when the board members were going through superintendents like Kleenex, thumbing their noses and the state’s Sunshine laws, and talking fiscal responsibility while voting in favor of budgets that actually added to the financial crisis, Giegerich and his paper barely printed a critical word.

But suddenly, after the new board took over, around the same time Pub Def first reported that Mayor Francis Slay and board members Bob Archibald and Ron Jackson began secret communications with state officials about taking over SLPS, the Post began its series of attacks on the district and members of the new board majority.

As a matter of fact, the “good reporting being done by P-D education writer Steve Giegerich” (as Mayor Slay notes on his blog) is actually used as evidence in the Special Committee on SLPS’ report calling for a state takeover.

Just today, Giegerich writes under the headline “Bourisaw slapped over wage issue at school board meeting”, that one board member attacked the superintendent last night for him not knowing what he was doing when he voted against her recommended budget amendment last week.

Nowhere do Giegerich or his editors inform their readers that this particular board member, Robert Archibald, was the first public official to call for a state takeover of the district, a complete abdication of his own responsibilities, and therefore has an invested interest in attacking the superintendent.

And nowhere does the Post note in today’s article that the majority of other board members did not blame the superintendent. They either voted for her request in the first place or acknowledged that maybe they just weren’t paying close attention at the last meeting.

The fact is that many (if not most) of the reporters and editors at the Post-Dispatch do not live in St. Louis City — and neither do their readers. Maybe that is why they seem to have no problem actively destroying the image of our public schools — especially now that the mayor is leading the charge.

In fact, our crisis seems entertaining to their suburban readers who have their urban neighbors’ education and crime problems to discuss until the new season of “American Idol” starts.

But for those of us that do care about this city, and deeply resent the constant attempts of outsiders to take away our power in the name of fixing our problems for us, I have to say that the Post is indeed disgraceful in its cheerleading for our disenfranchisement.

Is St. Louis poised to be the only American city with no control over its police force or its public schools?

UPDATE: Click here to download the Special Advisory Committee’s report recommending state intervention in St. Louis Public Schools.

In his final American speech as the leader of the United Nations, Secretary General Kofi Annan spoke in Missouri yesterday at the Truman Presidential Museum and Library in Independence.

“The US has given the world an example of a democracy in which everyone, including the most powerful, is subject to legal restraint. Its current moment of world supremacy gives it a priceless opportunity to entrench the same principles at the global level,” said Annan.

“As Harry Truman said, ‘We all have to recognise, no matter how great our strength, that we must deny ourselves the licence to do always as we please.’”

Annan often referred to Truman, who some call the father of the U.N., in his speech.

“The Security Council is not just another stage on which to act out national interests. It is the management committee, if you will, of our fledgling collective security system.

As President Truman said, ‘The responsibility of the great states is to serve and not dominate the peoples of the world.’

He showed what can be achieved when the US assumes that responsibility. And still today, none of our global institutions can accomplish much when the US remains aloof. But when it is fully engaged, the sky is the limit.”

Click here to read the full speech.

COMMENTARY

We observed back in January that the 20% increase in St. Louis’ crime rate coincidently matched the proposed pay increase for Police Chief Joe Mokwa. Perhaps now that St. Louis has once again been crowned the most dangerous place to live in America, the Mayor and his fellow police board members will pay more attention to how and where Mokwa assigns St. Louis’ finest.

St. Louis is more than just downtown. There are places in our city that have been completely left out of the revitalization occurring just a few miles away. And it is no coincidence at all that these are also the places where most of our young people are dying.

Also back in January, Mayor Francis Slay wrote on his blog, “as most of you know, many neighborhoods in the City are very safe places today. However, as the stats make too clear, a few neighborhoods are not.”

Wouldn’t it make sense then in the 10 months since those words were written that those “unsafe areas” would have seen a surge of police patrols, a strong and permanent presence of officers to show both residents and criminals that crime would no longer be tolerated?

But ask anyone who lives in the 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th districts and they will tell you that has not happened.

Maybe it’s as they say in national politics: We’d rather fight them over there than over here.

Could it be that the spirit of the Team Four Plan still exists in St. Louis? When faced with limited resources, protect downtown and the southern neighborhoods first?

True or not, when it comes to politics, crime, home-buying, home-building, and property values — perception is reality. And the numbers don’t lie.

What remains to be seen is who will accept responsibility and if the problem of “a few neighborhoods” will be seen as the problem of the entire city — and indeed the entire region. Because it is.

UPDATE: Police Chief Mokwa was on the news Monday night responding to this “Most Dangerous” label. He said if you asked his officers, they would tell you St. Louis was a safe place to live.

Maybe he’s forgotten those public meetings earlier this year on the issue of lifting the civilian residency requirement. Just behind the city’s schools and affordable housing, “crime” was one of the most cited reasons Police Department employees gave for wanting to move out of the city.

From today’s St. Louis American:

“Reed’s running for aldermanic president opens up his 6th Ward seat. It was rumored that Reed was ready to hand the job to lobbyist and perennially defeated candidate Patrick Cacchione (who, so long as we’re keeping track of apples and oranges, is a white male). Then here comes Kacie Starr Triplett…

“…if you want the political support of folks old enough to be your father or grandfather, next time talk to them about your candidacy before you quit your day job.

Triplett also may not have a pitch-perfect ear for friends, as she is close friends with an avowedly independent local journalist [Antonio French] who seems to have at least one leg in the Republican Party, if attracting exclusive ads from the Jim Talent campaign are any indication.”

St. Louis American editors,

What the hell is wrong with you folks over there?

Have you completely forgotten how to build young people up, so now all you can do is take anonymous shots at us every week? Me, Kacie, Jamilah, Talib, Rodney, Yaphett…

What is you guys’ problem over there?

At least be man enough to sign the rubbish you write. I have about as much respect for your editorial board as I do an anonymous blog commenter that jabs politicos on their rumored sexual orientations or the number of “baby mamas” they’re supposed to have.

In the absence of any kind of real reporting (have you broken a single story this year?) you’ve turned a once-great newspaper into a gossip rag, something people pick up just to see which local African-American you spit at this week.

And to editor Chris King in particular (”who, so long as we’re keeping track of apples and oranges, is a white male”), how do you feel so comfortable tearing down black people, telling us how we are supposed to think politically, when you hide your own race from your readers? I see everyone else’s picture in the your paper but yours.

I don’t know what you guys think you’re doing over there, but it is not journalism. If it were, you might have mentioned in your latest shot at me for allowing Jim Talent to advertise on my website that he has spent much more money advertising in your paper during this campaign.

The American used to be the tool with which blacks on the bottom of the economic and social ladders told their stories to the world up top. Now it’s the tool elites use to tell poor and working-class blacks what to think and who to vote for.

And it’s a shame. We sure could use a newspaper we trusted in these times.

Antonio D. French
Pub Def Weekly
www.pubdef.net