Omar Joins Stewart in Going Negative
From the beginning, I've had a problem picking a candidate for Richardson City Council for Place 7. The race is between the incumbent Dennis Stewart and challenger Amir Omar. I couldn't support Stewart because of his negative campaign tactics. I couldn't support Omar because of his call for a senior citizen property tax freeze. I ended up not making a recommendation at all for Place 7.
As the campaign unfolded, I began liking Amir Omar. In the forums, he came across as an intelligent, informed, composed politician. He did not emphasize the property tax freeze. He refused to get drawn into the mud by Stewart's personal attacks. There was one question at one forum that showed the kind of positive campaign Omar was trying to run. When asked to name one good thing about his opponent, Omar had no trouble saying nice things about Stewart, after first saying the question made him violate one of the pledges he made to himself, a pledge to campaign on his own merits and not talk about his opponent at all. There is a lot to like in Amir Omar.
So, what are we to make of Amir Omar's latest campaign mailing? There, in big, bold print, Omar accuses "our Place 7 City Councilman, Dennis Stewart" of being one of "those." "Those" are "elected officials who talk 'conservative' during a campaign, but fail to vote that way when in office." Omar implies that Stewart, being one of "those," doesn't share the same values as the rest of us. Omar closes with "it's time to defend the values we share."
In one mailing, Omar reneges on his public pledge not to criticize his opponent. He makes the unsupported charge that Dennis Stewart is not conservative. The claim is questionable at best, laughable at worst, but still may play well in conservative north Texas among voters who are not familiar with Dennis Stewart. And Omar again makes the senior tax freeze the centerpiece of his campaign. This is bad public policy. It distorts the tax burden, discriminating based on age rather than ability to pay. It's pandering. It may be good politics in the short run, but it's bad public policy in the long run.
Now that he, too, is guilty of making negative attacks on his opponent, a recommendation to vote for Amir Omar is even harder to justify. D*mn. I really tried to like him, too.
Racist Campaign Fliers In Dallas
Just when one begins to despair of the negative tone in the Richardson City Council race, one comes across news like this to remind one of what nasty political campaigns can be like. Come on, y'all. Stay classy.
Preparing For the Pandemic
The World Health Organization has raised its swine flu pandemic warning level to 5. Rod Dreher, in The Dallas Morning News, tells how his family is preparing. He's pulled his child out of school and has stocked up on hand sanitizer and food. Is that all? I'm surprised the decline of Western Civilization didn't lead him to do all that and more long before now. In the past, news of Dan Brown releasing a sequel to Da Vinci Code would have been enough to cause Dreher to pack his truck and move his family back to Louisiana. Now, he's not evacuating for a level 5 pandemic. Kudos to the new calm, collected, unflappable Rod Dreher.
P.S. To be clear, this blog item is about Rod Dreher, not swine flu. A swine flu epidemic is nothing to joke about. Rod Dreher, on the other hand, is fair game. He asks for it. ;-)
10 comments:
I couldn't agree with you more on Omar. Where does he get his information? Dennis is the kind of pragmatic conservative that we need in city government, and his votes show it. Sure, he probably should have kept his toughts about Omar to himself during the 2nd forum, but Dennis learned his lesson and hasn't gone negative since. Honestly, I was glad that Omar finally played his hand publically. I appreciate your openmindedness on him, but my hope is that, after he looses, he'll just move on to another city and be "Omar for (fill in the blank)"...
Ed,
I have to drum in as someone who got Amir omar's flier in the mail and I who is tired of negative attacks.
My conclusion is that you are a bit silly here, Ed.
I have Amir Omar's flier. I read it many times like I have all of the campaign literature.
When I read your piece I thought, "dangit. I must have missed some campaign literature because nothing I read in the flier I had is negative."
I hadn't missed any. It was the same piece from Amir Omar I had previously. I'm sorry but one has to really stretch (and I do mean reeeeealllly stretch) to perceive it as negative. It didn't come off as negative then and it doesn't know.
The only thing Amir Omar is guilty of is stating the difference between him and his a opponent. One can disagree but that doesn't make it negative. In a race where most forum questions were about non issues or invented ones that candidates would agree on, it is refreshing for a candidate to state a perceived difference with his/her opponent. Its not negative. It's positive!! I interpreted it as nothing more than that.
Here is the exact text.
"Do you agree that across the country, too many elected officials seem to talk 'conservative' during a campaign, but fail to vote that way when in office?
Among other things, they're failing to stand strong on issues like capping government spending and protecting our senior citizens from tax increases. Unfortunately, here in Richardson, our Place 7 councilman, Dennis Stewart has become one of those. That's why i am running for City Council. Because it's time to defend the values we share."
Let's let the readers decide if its a negative attack. I have little doubt many will say yes in comments because the "we are against everything" crowd is in full swing here.
I think it's fair to show the full text to counter your chop and block strategy of argumentaion. Your comments about blogs and stories often quote parts of single sentences and groups of words instead of larger expanses of text and that distorts the meaning of the original source. I think that is true here where your incomplete description distorts the intended meaning.
Your chop and block method of cutting out the word "those" (and using it twice I might add when Amir Omar used it once) distorts the impression of how the piece reads. He describes someone who claims to be a conservative but doesn't behave as such when in office. He says Stewart is such a person. He is general in the first part, a little more specific in the next, and the very specific up to the point he makes his claim. It might not be true and there can be differences of opinion about whether it is true, but its a fair line of discussion. On my grandmothers grave, I can't see what's negative with that.
You call it unsupported but Amir Omar does support it. He gives specifics of capping spending and the senior tax freeze where the latter was one of Dennis Stewarts's platform claims last election. Now Dennis is against it apparently.
Its not in "big bold print" as you say but its in the same size descriptive type face as most of the rest of the flier.
Ed says, "In one mailing, Omar reneges on his public pledge not to criticize his opponent."
He did no such thing. He critisized his opponents record. That is completely fair game. It certainly could be negative but I don't think it is here.
Ed says, "The claim is questionable at best, laughable at worst, but still may play well in conservative north Texas among voters who are not familiar with Dennis Stewart."
Ed makes an unsourced negative attack...
I have heard a few people say they aren't happy with Dennis Stewart because he didn't do some of the things he said he would. I think those people would be "familiar with Dennis Stewart" if they believe he hasnt done some things he promsed. On a hunch I might say Amir Omar got the idea from people he talked to.
Ed says, "Now that he, too, is guilty of making negative attacks on his opponent..."
Honestly Ed I just don't see it. I think you are stretching big time here. Highlighting differences is not a negative attack. More candidates ought to do it instead of this "ethics" junk we are hearing.
If the kind of difference Amir Omar is highlighting (whether true or not) is impermissible in public debate and disqualifies him then there is hardly any way to have a debate about the substance of record. Such a policy would for the most part put such debate in a box and make debate useless.
"Anonymous" #2, thank you for your feedback and for posting more of the text of Omar's flier. You claim there is nothing negative in it. To me, it reads like Omar is accusing Stewart of not being conservative, of not defending the values conservatives share. You don't consider that negative?!? We'll have to disagree on that.
Even if you consider it a legitimate comparison, not a negative attack, you have to admit Omar is reneging on a personal pledge he told voters about during one forum, a pledge not to discuss his opponent, but to make his campaign about himself and his own credentials and not his opponent's shortcomings. It seems to me that any mention of Dennis Stewart at all is a violation of that pledge. Maybe it was an unrealistic, naive pledge to make. Maybe he's come to realize it now. Still, I found it jarring to read, as I took him at his word during the forum and was favorably impressed by that word during the forum. I was disappointed. You might have different standards.
I nearly fell out of my chair when I read the Anonymous #2 posting above. It reminds of a time when we had to define the meaning of the word "is". Why is it a problem when Dennis contrasts in a forum his 20+ years of Richardson residency with Omar's one year residency, etc., and it isn't one when Omar makes his statment in print (to 5000+ homes). The residency comments are factual (and undisputable) and the opinion comment(s) are, well, opinion. Sorry, Anonymous #2, you might as well have signed your posting as "Richardson Coalition member".
The reason this is an issue is because Amir, himself, made such a production out of the fact that he was "breaking a rule" by saying ANYTHING (even positive) about Dennis at the 3rd forum.
What he put in him mailer was in no way egregious, just in light of his previous comments it did stand out.
He has every right to point out short falls in Denny's time served on the council and I personally feel that was all he did in this instance. I truly believe it would be a non-issue had he not made those previous remarks at the mosque.
I was stunned when I read the information about the cap on elderly taxes. How exactly will the city offset the 'lost' income from these caps? Cut spending? Most likely it will be increase the taxes on everyone else.
From what I have seen in my 6 years of residence in Richardson, this town already caters to the older segment of the population. One would think that growth means bringing in younger families. I don't see increased taxes as an incentive for that to happen.
All I want is equal treatment of all property owners, regardless of age, color, religion, etc.
Destiny, thanks for the feedback. I agree that Omar's criticism of Stewart is by no means exceptional in political campaigns. What made it stand out for me is not what's in the mailer, but how it contradicts what he told voters in the forum, that he had pledged to himself not to talk about his opponent, only his own credentials for office.
Andy, I, too, am concerned about the proposals for expanding age discrimination in Richardson's property taxation. The trouble is, Omar and Stewart are both offering variants of this bad public policy. Omar wants a senior tax freeze. Stewart wants a senior tax cap. Tomato-tomahto.
I did not receive the mailer (or any city council election mailer thus far) so thank you for the post of the text.
I agree with Ed on this one. Omar's was a reasonably gentle dig but a dig nonetheless. Destiny's comments on this matter are insightful and accurate; Omar brought the heightened scrutiny upon himself. I say this as someone who voted for Omar and shook his hand outside the civic center.
I also agree with Andy with wanting homeowners to be treated equally, but I don't think place 7 presents much of a choice there. Both seem to be pandering to the aging (voting!) citizenry.
Post a Comment