Guest columnist says Vice-President was correct in calling Iraq a quagmire

The safety and security of our nation is the reason we are still in Iraq,” writes a reader of the Livingston County Daily Press and Argus in a August 5, 2007 Letter-to-the-Editor entitled “We need to pursue national safety”

I have a different take, 1,575 days after " Mission Accomplished.”

The incompetent Bush Administration unilaterally invaded a country with a 40 percent unemployment rate, dismantled an army of 500,000 trained troops, neglected to guard the weapons (can you say insurgents), eradicated the state and civil service (de-Bathification) took out the infrastructure (Shock and Awe) brought in outside contractors to rebuild it (Haliburton) and continues to spend $12 billion per month, heavily borrowed from Red China. They admit, "mistakes were made.” Ya think?

The sad fact is that this administration from the beginning wanted to go to war with Iraq in the worst possible way and apparently did. Using 9/11 as an excuse, the neocons set out to spread Democracy and free markets by force in the Middle East. The President told us our troops would be greeted as liberators. Instead, we are bogged down in a Civil War with no end in sight.

There is currently circulating on the Internet a film clip showing (Vice-President Dick) Cheney in 1994 expounding the reasons the U.S. did not proceed to remove Saddam from power after the first Gulf War. To proceed toward Baghdad, would have got us involved in a “classic quagmire.” The bi-partisan commission on 9/11 found no link whatsoever of Iraq complicity in the attack. Cheney maintains that Iraq was involved, as if he knows something the rest of us don't.

Richard Clark, Bush's former National Security Advisor, said invading Iraq after 9/11 would have been like invading Mexico after Pearl Harbor. Sad but true. We are in Iraq not because of our safety and security. We are there because George Bush is to the Federal Government what he was to the Texas Rangers, an inept front man.

(Mike McGonegal is a Green Oak Township resident in Livingston County and a former Democratic candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives for the 66th District)

Fluff YIR story continues to push false assumption on dual roundabouts

The dual roundabouts on Lee Road in Livingston County’s Green Oak Township at the new, $100 million Green Oak Village Place mall is the No.2 story of 2006, according to the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus. This is the time of year when newspapers recap the past year with year in review stories. Reporters and editors love these because they provide copy when news is slow, sources and reporters take time off for the holidays and they are easy to write.

My problem with this particular story is it again skimmed over the bigger story on how the roundabouts were financed, and the newspaper continues to advance the false assumption that there would have been a better interchange if an amendment to the 1975 Downtown Development Authority act introduced by Chris Ward in the state House had been allowed to stand. It’s simply not true, and it’s disappointing that a talented and professional reporter continues to let that false assumption stand. The fact is if the law passed for just one person had been allowed to stand you and I would have paid for the road improvements instead of the developer who is profiting from the mall. The exact same interchange would be there, and the only difference would have been the taxpayers would have paid for it instead of Quadrants.

Officials from Quadrants had hoped to get approval to use tax money through a downtown development authority to help pay for traffic improvements for the mall.
The issue came up again in 2006 during a campaign for state House, when incumbent Republican Rep. Chris Ward of Brighton Township defended his bill that would have made the DDA easier. The bill was approved and then deleted once it became law by another bill authored by Ward.
Ward's Democratic opponent, Mike McGonegal, tried to use that episode to his advantage. Ward defended the original bill, saying a more complete intersection could have been built with the DDA money.
Regardless of that debate, arguments continue to rage as to whether, in the words of one letter to the editor in the Daily Press & Argus, the roundabouts are "idiotic," "goofy" and a "monstrosity."

Ward defended the bill by basically lying. If he had not been caught trying to sneak an amendment by that that would benefit the very thing the original DDA act was designed to help failing downtowns compete against - huge suburban shopping malls with plenty of free parking and uniform store hours – taxpayers would have been stuck with a huge bill.
Luckily, the Livingston County Board of Commissioners rejected establishing the DDA, and one of the major reasons was because the developer did not and would not have to provide any money toward the $9 million project cost. The county was already struggling to replace $3.6 million in lost state revenue sharing payments. A 20-year bond would have been sold to finance the project and taxpayers would also have had to pay an additional $200,000 a year in interest for the next 20 years. This is confirmed by veteran county Commissioner Jack LaBelle, who has been a commissioner for more than 30 years.

Another respect elected official, former Brighton Mayor and current Councilwoman Kate Lawrence, took the time earlier this month to write the paper to say the legislation “was bad policy” and it “could have caused severe negative consequences for the downtowns of all Michigan cities.”

Despite all those facts by respect elected officials the newspaper refuses to change its position on the financing on the roundabouts.

Newspaper Editorial Board needs to practice what it preaches

I find it a little disingenuous to for the Daily Press & Argus to editorialize that the Livingston County Democratic Party should begin early recruiting “creditable candidates” for the next election. The obvious question is will the newspaper’s editorial board treat them like credible candidates?

One way to accomplish that is to start building capable candidates early rather than scrambling for them at the last minute. It's hard to win an election as a Democrat in this county but there are plenty of nonpartisan venues — planning commissions, school boards, city councils — in which individuals can build a record of accomplishment.

During the last election cycle, Green Oak Township Democrat Mike McGonegal ran for the state House for the 66th District. He knocked on doors every evening, went to many events and spent what little money he had on advertising. Sounds like a creditable candidate to me. However, in October the newspaper endorsed the Republican candidate without the benefit of the traditional endorsement interview.

Now, you may say this is nothing but sour grapes on my part because I volunteered for McGonegal, and you would be partially correct; it is sour grapes on my part. But it’s much more than that. Anyone I see treated unfairly it bothers me. Executive Editor Rich Perlberg gave me a lame song and dance about how he knew enough about Mike through the blog I maintained, press releases and the lone debate Mike participate in. He apparently knew enough about our opponent because of his record, but if you truly went by that you would never have endorsed him.

The problem was Mike was the only Legislative candidate not interviewed. That included both candidates for 22nd Senate District and the 47th House District. That’s makes zero sense because the Senate incumbent, Valde Garcia, has been a lawmaker for more than seven years compared to Mike’s opponent who has only been in office for four years. Seven years wasn’t enough that you had to interview Garcia?

The answer is no. You should have interviewed all of the candidates.

It’s hard to recruit quality candidates who know the odds are long they will win, and even when they do put up the good fight and try and make the incumbent accountable to the voters again they get that kind of shabby treatment from the newspaper.

The Press & Argus editorial board simply needs to practice what it preaches. If it wants to be creditable on endorsements it needs to do the homework.

Editorial continues to misrepresent the facts in defense of lawmaker’s tax giveaway

I try hard not to be cynical, but when I see another attempt by the local newspaper to defend sate Rep. Chris Ward and his attempt to give $9 million of taxpayer money to Quadrants, the developer of the Green Oak Village Place mall, for necessary road improvements it’s quite easy. The latest attempt to defend the indefensible appeared in today’s paper, and it makes you wonder why now? Why are you still getting the facts wrong?

We know that the executive editor of this newspaper contributes to the Ward campaign, but this piece is worth more than the cash he gives to the campaign. All it really costs is the integrity of the editorial board, and we know that’s long been compromised.

Here’s some background. The DDA law was established in 1975 to halt the decline of property tax values and deterioration in downtowns. It was also intended to give downtowns a weapon to fight huge shopping malls, like the $100 million Village Place Mall, that were just coming on line in 1975 that had uniform hours, lots of free parking and everything within walking distance. In other words, the law was made to combat the very thing Mr. Ward wanted to pervert the law to benefit.

In 2004 Mr. Ward changed the law – for just one person mind you – that allowed a DDA to expand its boundaries if it was a $100 million project and it did away with the requirement that the property had to have declining property values.

Only when the ruse was called, and it was clear that Livingston County Board of Commissioner would not approve this tax giveaway to a rich developer, did Ward rescind the law made for just one person.

The newspaper got the facts completely wrong, and they should talk to Livingston Country Commissioner Jack LaBelle for the facts. The chair of the Commission and a member for more than 30 years also saw it for what it was, a tax giveaway.

The road, the roundabouts and the bridge would have looked exactly the same if the con had gone forward. The only difference would be the taxpayers would have paid for the improvements that would have benefited the developer instead of the person who would see the profit paying for it. In most other states of the union they have what are called “developer impact fees.” That means the developer must pay fees for the infrastructure and other improvements his development will cause and require. Apparently, here in Michigan the exact opposite is true, and we have taxpayer impact fees, meaning we have to pay for the improvements the developer’s project will require.

Although both the city and county voiced legitimate concerns, the fact remains that the loss of the DDA option did not stop the mall construction. But it does mean that the traffic system is not as good — or as safe — as it could have been.
That's too bad. Despite some misconceptions voiced in the last political campaign, the DDA was not a scheme to cut taxes for the developers of the mall. The developer pays exactly the same property taxes with or without the DDA.

That’s completely untrue. Mike McGonegal, Ward’s opponent in the last election, made it a campaign issue. However, he never once said it was a “scheme to cut taxes for the developers of the mall.” It was a scheme to have the taxpayers pay for something the developer should pay for. There was never any intention from the developer to pay for anything or pledge any money for improvements.

We are still not sure why it's OK to use a DDA to build an expressway ramp in the city of Brighton, but it's somehow not appropriate to use the same funding mechanism to improve the road system just outside the city limits.

I’m surprised that the editorial board is that misinformed, or is that they just think the readers are stupid. DDA’s were developed to keep downtowns healthy, and the law was introduced because many downtown storefronts were being boarded up and abandoned in favor of suburban shopping malls. The law was approved to fight the very thing that the new bastardized DDA law would have helped, huge suburban shopping malls. The fact is townships can form DDA’s, they just have to do it under the law instead of having some friendly lawmaker pervert the law just for them. To form a DDA all you really need is to have some kind of central business district, and property values must be falling. That’s the rub here. They did not have the latter. Enter Mr. Ward.

Perhaps when you are in downtown Howell tonight watching the Fantasy of Lights parade or in downtown Brighton watching the Holiday Glow you will be thankful that things like the DDA Act was passed to protect these jewels we call downtowns. If not, you will be watching parades in some huge, ugly strip mall.

Editor that contributes to Republican majority in Livingston County crows about the numbers

It seems ironic that Rich Perlberg, executive editor of the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus, writes a column in today’s edition saying that Democrats have as much chance as getting elected in Livingston County as Kevin Federline has of becoming a successful rapper. Mr. Perlberg is part of that problem, and it makes you wonder why an alleged unbiased journalist would prefer people just vote straight Republican ticket instead of reading newspapers and other sources to individually examine the candidates and their views.

I was the Communications Director for Mike McGoneal, Democratic candidate for the 66th District House seat, and the newspaper endorsed our opponent without even the courtesy of an endorsement interview. I would like to know if that decision came from Gannett HQ in Virginia or further down the chain of command, but we know it was not a local decision. The lack of critical coverage of our opponent’s ethically challenged record did not help our cause either. The numerous press releases we sent to the newspaper were filed in the circular file, but when Chris Ward sends out a ridiculous press release chiding the governor for signing a bill that his party, the majority party, introduced and passed is front-page news.

When we endorsed the Brighton Republican for his fourth term in the U.S. House of Representatives, we got some e-mails from people who said we were crazy to say he represented Livingston County values.
But look at the results. Rogers took about 55 percent of the total vote, which was his closest race in six years. But he dominated in Livingston County, with a 48,000-26,000 advantage over Jim Marcinkowski.

Again, a lack of critical coverage of the Gannett paper did not help, and we saw from the endorsement decision from the Lansing State Journal, another Gannett product, that the decision to endorse Rogers did apparently come from Gannett HQ.
It’s sad that because of gerrymandering our politicians are no longer held accountable by anyone, and it is next to impossible to unseat an incumbent, at least in Michigan, unless you have a ton of money and your opponent is a child molester. Only one of the 15 Michigan incumbents in the U.S. House were beaten, despite an anti-incumbency and anti-Republican feeling sweeping the nation, and that was a Republican defeated in the primary. The only instrument that can at least try to hold them accountable is the media, but it’s a little disturbing to see Perlberg's name show up in the campaign finance reports of both Rogers and Chris Ward.
The 8th was once a swing district that had Democrat Debbie Stabenow representing us. While she was our Congresswoman she kept a district office in Genoa Township on Grand River Avenue, and she was responsive and accessible to constituents because she had to be. Why would Rogers bother? The little constituent work he does is only the kind that gets publicity and his photo in the official Mike Rogers news, AKA the Daily Press & Argus. After Livingston County helped Rogers win the this seat in 2000 with a paper thin margin of just 111 votes he promised to open a district office in the county. We’re still waiting, and the P & A again gives him a pass.

Some folks are trying to say that the county is becoming more liberal and more receptive to Democrats. I've heard that argument for more than 30 years, but the numbers still don't support it.
In fact, Democrats in Livingston County have about as much chance for success as a Britney Spears marriage.
Republicans took more than 62 percent of the votes across the county and more than doubled their opponent's totals in some races. The closest race I could find was a county commissioner race in Hamburg Township where the winner, incumbent Republican Dennis Dolan (who never campaigns), took 55 percent of the vote from challenger Dave Buckland.

Again, someone has to hold politicians accountable, and so far the voters have not and the P & A will not. There is one guaranteed time that politicians pay attention to the voters and that’s at election time. Not in Livingston County.

GOP smear campaign against journalists is alive and well

This piece of trash hit my mail box on Monday the day before Election Day, courtesy of the Michigan Republican Party, and even though I have been the victim of Republican smear campaigns against the media in the past I was still amazed that this still goes on in this simple a form

“The Liberal media is pulling out all the stops to help the Democrats win on Election Day.” How? The real problem is the consolidation of media, and soon one huge mega corporation is going to own every media outlet in this country. We had a perfect example of it in the past election. I worked for Mike McGonegal, a Democratic candidate for the 66th District House seat, and the local newspaper endorsed our opponent without an endorsement interview with the decision coming from Gannett HQ in Virginia.

“They will say anything to discourage you from going to the polls this year.” Does anyone really believe after the Amway Guy pumped some $36 million into TV commercials that these very same corporate-owned TV stations are going to bite the hand that stuffs them and discourage voting. Get real.

This is typical of the Republican smear campaign against professional journalists that has gone on for years and is still going on.