Brunner’s choices for CuyCo BOE
We were close on who we believed would be Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner’s picks for the Democratic representatives on the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections. The initial inklings of a labor attorney (Eben “Sandy” McNair) and a female African American attorney (Inajo Davis Chappell) were correct, but it looks like the original female AA attorney Leslye Huff got bounced after we (and others) pointed out her shortcomings.
As has been rumored and discussed here (and elsewhere) it would appear that Rob Frost is a liar and has chosen to officially seek the remaining soon to be vacant seat of Republican Bob Bennett.
Wendell, thanks for this post and harkening back to what we predict or others say is one of the things I love about blogs.
However, one thing in what you’ve written rankles me a bit, and it stems from the fact that I actually knew Sandy McNair a little bit. Yes, he’s a labor lawyer, and I can only guess that you’ve ID’d him as “a labor attorney” because you think that there is relevance for your audience in doing so.
But Sandy is far more than that and frankly, I just wish, if we are in fact starting with four new people, or at least three for now, that you would ID him as something other than a moniker that might, in your main audience’s mind, be a very loaded descriptor - do you know what I mean?
How would you like Jeff Hastings to only be ID’d by a left of center blog as “that appointed judge who lost” or I don’t even know what? Shouldn’t we be highlighting the strengths they’ll bring to the BOE, even if there are also liabilities you want to ID?
I’m not saying, of course, that there aren’t plenty of blogs that would refer to him that way. But I hold you to a bit higher standard - because you seem to like to take the higher road most of the time. It just reads as though your labeling Sandy as a labor attorney is intended to MEAN something more than just describing some of the clients he represents.
I hope you’ll think about this. Thanks.
JMZ:
Leave your suspicions at the door, the only reason I ID’d McNair as such is that I felt it necessary to say he was the “labor attorney” and Chappel was the “AA attorney”.
You make a good point though now my concern is about something tangentially related but different… how politically correct should we be in IDing someone when the descriptive characteristics have already presented themselves?
That IS a great question and I don’t know the exact answer, other than to say we each decide. If we’re coming at it from a partisan perspective, then we may color it that way. If we’re saying that we want the reader to make his or her own judgement, we might try to be less colorful. I’m not sure but again, since I have personal knowledge of this individual, I’m able to say that I think he deserves a bit more time for readers to decide about him, based on performance. Ideally, wouldn’t we all prefer to be judged based on our performance?
Watch out on typing “AA” Wendell… Jill might also misread that and think you are implying Chappel got into law school or was offered job thanks to Affirmative Action! And from what I know of you, you are not a Don Imus.
And once again, Jill, as Robert Frost (the poet, not the GOP hack) said, is being too broadminded to take her own side in a quarrel.
Personally, when I hear someone is a labor attorney and a Tubbs Jones crony, that all the information I need to make a judgment call. And no re-wording would change that.
And since when are labor attorneys ashamed of being “labor attorneys?” Is there a more polite description? Maybe a “labor pettifogger?” haha
You really don’t know how to learn anything about people from what they write or say, do you Matt? Or you don’t listen. What a surprise.
When I see AA, if I didn’t already know from the conversation what Wendell meant, I would have thought Alcoholics Anonymous - because I’ve got a social work degree and worked at a mental health agency for eight years.
Second, this is no quarrel - you are seeing or framing it that way, and I have no interest in taking sides (again, a failure of your ability or desire to listen or read carefully).
That you make snap judgements about people based on two to four words again is no surprise and is very sad if indeed the Ohio Republican structure wants you to be its representative to the blogosphere or anywhere for that matter.
Last, who said anything about shame? I’ve never seen the word pettifogger in my life and haven’t a clue what it means.
But thanks for engaging.
I understand where Jill was coming from - as a Republican was I using conservative code to paint McNair as a bad guy by associating him with big labor?
Not really, but I think Matt makes a good point in asking what else was I supposed to call him?
Regardless of whether he goes to church on Sunday (insert synagogue and Saturday for Jill) and volunteers at the local homeless shelter, his professional background is what it is. I could have gone into more detail as today’s PD did including his ties to LABOR LEADER Loree Soggs as well as his activities with his party, but I didn’t.
The real purpose of the post was to continue on the story line of the BOE and put some names and titles to the new appointees.
I get all that, Wendell, and it’s fair - I’m not saying it’s untrue. I’m just saying that it’s narrow and, if we’re starting from scratch, and we’re taking the breath to say, this is being done for the voters and the reputation and the integrity of our county and elected offices, then for goodness sakes, how about approaching the descriptions - of all the new members - by highlighting what they’ve done to benefit county residents, who, yeah, also use these lawyers (Hastings is one too), already? Again, using Hastings as an example, I don’t anything about the kind of clients who hire him - has that been referenced? It may very well have been and I need to go back, no problem.
It just seems unfair. Again, I know who this person is and yeah, he’s made his professional life about labor law. SO WHAT? You should see some of the letters my husband received when he worked with Sandy from elderly folks he helped get a couple of hundred dollars owed them from an employer.
I’m no friend of unions - when given the chance, when wooed, for three years many years ago, to join a union, I refused for several reasons. But to not acknowledge the need for such expertise and simply categorically say it’s all bad, or imply such - come on. You can do better than that - on behalf of our county’s voters. Do you really want to start them out by poisoning them?
If that’s your tactic…blech. Makes a lot of what you say disingenuous. Let’s give them ALL a chance - you want us to give Hastings a shot, yes?
Come on.
Jill:
My hope is that this board will be able to start with a clean slate, but they are who they are. Republicans and Democrats. State law is set-up so that the majority (independents) have no voice on the board (makes you want to change the law, but since Republicans and Democrats run the show, it’ll never happen).
You might have noticed I’m not exactly pleased by the potential of Rob Frost getting the nod, so I’m an equal opportunity annoyer.
As for Jeff Hastings, I think I listed his resume bonafides as well as posting his letter asking for support from the GOP Executive Committee that more than explained his partisan background.
The phrase “labor attorney” may have gotten under your skin because you know McNair on another level and you explained that nicely in your last comment. He sounds like a solid guy and I hope he’ll do well.
I’m sure you are right re: when you know someone in a variety of capacities. I just believe that if and when we do in fact know people to have a variety of facets, we shouldn’t pick and choose the ones we want to emphasize that further a particular image, without at least giving some lip service to what else we know. That’s all.
Thanks.
pettifogger is defined as “a lawyer whose methods are petty, underhanded, or disreputable; a shyster.” or “A person who quibbles over trivia.” I fit the 2nd definition, as I love to quibble.
Again Matt, please provide the basis for which you believe labor lawyers are categorically “petty, underhanded or disreputable” because your implication is that anyone who practices labor law is such a lawyer. Then provide evidence of how you know or have come to believe that McNair is such an individual.