Well, Wilmington “could” be called River City. We have the Christina joining up with the Brandywine, both dumping into the Delaware Rivers… (For those reading this under age twenty-three, the headline alludes to a scene in the Movie “Music Man” starring Robert Preston.)
The article is here and the headline reads: Occupy Delaware members vote to defy law, stay in Fletcher Brown Park
Well, yes.. and no. Yes they opted to stay in Fletcher Park Saturday evening after contact with the Markell administration promised no eviction would take place that night if they promised they would not be there for when the day care brought out the kids. In other words, if they left Sunday night…
Since the group had voted that they would leave Sunday night, upon finding that there was no reason they had to pack up and move, … they voted to stay camped in Fletcher for just that one night…
The headline, omits the fact that a vote was taken prior and that the group with the exception of three who voted, was emphatic that they did NOT want to be in the park and disrupt the children’s daily routine.
That is rather commendable. The reporter was present, and knew this.
Why did it not get reported?
The answer can be seen in the comments and at Delaware Politics. The head of that blog, a good man, jumped on the article and lambasted the Occupy Movement based on this articles faulty information… Based on the same faulty information I TOO WOULD HAVE LAMBASTED THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT. But the News Journal information is that: faulty, slanted, and misleading.
Likewise, the comments attached to that article’s bottom are all slanted against “the anarchists” who do not respect the rule of law. Some rather prominent people were at that meeting; some of whom have run for city office. Rather interesting is the fact that they would be painted as being against the rule of law.
The News Journal cannot plead it was a mistake. THEY WERE THERE. THIS WAS SLANTED PURPOSEFULLY.
If you want the facts, they are this. The group conducted an open forum style of democracy. The entire movement voted first (two straw polls had been taken so far) to leave that evening (Sat) and set up in the Brandywine Park to meet the specs of the permit. When that became difficult to do because of the late hour, it was announced that the authorities would waive the requirement to not camp overnight, but would not waive it the following evening because of interference with the nearby preschool…
So, based on the permit … the Occupiers overstayed their welcome. Based on the word of the administration, they would be allowed to stay that night.
Depending on your interpretation, you could call it breaking the law. I would not call it that. Just like if told by a police escort to follow him through red lights to the Emergency Room, I would not consider that breaking the law as well… I would do what he said.
So why did the News Journal bend over so far backwards to mislead? Only they can answer that. (Here is their subscription number;1-800-801-3322; wanting new revenue, they ALWAYS answer their phones) and they can transfer you to whomever they want: but someone will at least hear your message. If you want the reporter directly, Contact Esteban Parra at 1-302-324-2299 or eparra@delawareonline.com.
Shoddy Journalism. Tsk, tsk. Almost to the point of lying.
kavips 
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 6, 2011 at 7:33 am
What Kavips Said. : Delaware Liberal
[…] News Journal sounds like Delaware Politics today. The article is here and the headline reads: Occupy Delaware members vote to defy law, stay in […]
November 6, 2011 at 8:43 am
David Anderson
I want to note that I apologized and retracted my statement. Thank you for not being too hard on me and recognizing that I was dependent upon a legitimate news source for my confirmation. I also take the opportunity to apologize here where some of the Occupy Delaware movement may actually read. I apologize to them for jumping to judgement. Christ warned me to be careful of that and I failed him as well as myself and my readers or at least a few of them–thankfully the error was pointed out very quickly and it was the middle of the night. I still strongly disagree with the group on some issues and approaches, but let it be based upon truth not prejudice and misinformation.
I agree that the article especially the headline were geared to the sensational. I may not always agree with the slant out of the WNJ, but they are not geared to the sensational. This was more worthy of the NY Post. Shame on the copy editor for the headline. I have seen it before, but I usually catch it when I read the story. Sometimes the headline is sensational, but the stories are not usually that far afield. That is why I use the WNJ for so many posts. You take an emotionally charged issue and slant it then get the sales from the reaction. I guess that is what they were hoping and I fell for it. I have dealt with the media for two decades, I should have known better. I think I have to admit that I was prejudiced against the group and ready to believe the worse. The paper fed my prejudice. I am frankly ashamed of that. I don’t find your tone offensive. I find the fact that I was letting my prejudice get the best of me personally offensive to me far more than anything you wrote. I am grateful for the correction. I try to be beyond prejudice and judge each person by their actions as I have been taught from childhood. It is humbling to have to admit that I still have some and it is there to be exploited, but a real man confronts it head on and admits it. The Bible says a wound from a friend is better than the kisses of an enemy. In other words it is being more of a friend to help a person do right even if it hurts than flatter them and let them do wrong and ultimately hurt themselves. You and laffer proved yourselves my friends yesterday and I am thankful.
I am just glad that I could correct it before more than 20 or 30 people looked at it. That is what I love about the electronic media. Now a lot more will see it, but they will get an accurate picture and can disagree with the group like I do or agree with it like you do, but they will do it based upon the truth not emotion or prejudice.
I have no desire to denegrate a group of people wrongly for actions they did not take. For whatever tone you took, I accept the apology that you feel was necessary to post on our blog, I felt a whole lot worse. I could have just changed the post and edited or deleted the comments and had a fresh start, but i thought it better to apologize right up front then edit it. I left the comments obviously not only because that is my policy, but I think it is valuable to remind ourselves that each of us can do better.
I talk about how big media divides us, then I fall for it myself. Shame on me. That is my pentance for the day.
Time to move on and have the important discussion that you all were kind enough to participate in instead of focusing on bashing me when you had the right to do so. Let’s talk about the best way to the future and will this movement ever focus on issues and be a productive part of it.
November 6, 2011 at 10:18 pm
kavips
No worries mate, it’s all good.
Taking you up on that suggestion you gave in your last paragraph.
It’s not the cure all, but it is the silver bullet that fells the beast. The best way to the future, is to let the Bush Tax Cuts expire.
How many times have we overreacted to a situation either political or personal, and the medicine we took did more damage than the affliction?
I know many want to punish those who gave us this mess. But there are many who don’t. One has only to look at what happened in Russia 1917 or France 1789 to see what happens when the core of money is destroyed.
A 4% increase in the top marginal rate, won’t kill anyone. Keep the corporate rate as is (they made after tax profit of $1.7 trillion this second quarter; the current rate is not hurting them.
Between me and you, when things get too complicated, I use the analogy of coming home and taking my arm, wiping everything off the table….
Then I look a the blank table top, and say: What do I need. What is the one thing I want….. and answer that.
What I want is the middle class to make it.. I want them to stop going backward, I want them to reach the stopping point and again rise to where they are making it once again….. I want the opportunity for them to get rich if they pursue, but that is not my goal. I just want them to start making more money and having fewer expenses…..
Ok, so now that is decided, what, out of the mess on the floor, are the parts that will get me there? Obviously, since both the people and government are broke, and corporations and the top 1% flush with money, the answer hitting everyone in the face, is to transfer money from the corporations to the other two sectors.
How.
Chavez uses unacceptable methods. But a higher tax rate does exactly that, quietly…. At a certain point, it becomes more costly to build overseas (that even though it earns a higher margin, it still gets taxed a lot), than build here at home to lesser margins which are taxed less….
I’m pushing a tax break that writes off all construction-costs-for-expansion, against taxes owed that year. No depreciation.
Therefore one’s rates may go up 4%… but by building an extension to one’s factory, and writing off that cost in one year… one could actually drop their taxes paid. The beauty, is that the money you put into the economy, is taxed as it flows through every workers wage, every purchase in sales tax states, every gross receipts tax…. multiple times.
Every business raises prices when it’s revenue stream gets squeezed. The U.S. should be doing the same, but, since we are in such a dire unemployment scenario, offering a credit for construction, would be highly beneficial to the largest group of the unemployed. Builders and Construction workers.
This is so easy, quick and simple.
Over the past 3 years I’ve been trying to find negatives and looking for holes. Haven’t found them yet.
November 6, 2011 at 10:24 pm
kavips
And another clarification. The decry against wealth is not against getting wealthy. After all, these are Americans we’re talking about.
The primary bone of the Occupy Movement is this: the wealthy are not investing their money into jobs here in the United States; instead they are sitting on the money….. If the economy was roaring, we wouldn’t be having this discussion