Anthony Foxx earns Charlotte Observer endorsement

The Charlotte Observer editorial board announced yesterday that it is endorsing Anthony Foxx for the Charlotte mayoral race.

In the end, though, we back Foxx. We think he is a better fit for what Charlotte needs at this point in its evolution as a city.


We believe the next mayor needs to be unusually adept at connecting with residents and uniting a diverse community. He needs to use the mayor's office as a bully pulpit. He should set the agenda and tackle our city's toughest problems with new solutions. He must reach out to our neighbors in the region, in Raleigh and in Washington to seek collaborative approaches. He needs to imbue the city with confidence that we can navigate through this daunting time and emerge stronger than before. He should not do things the way we've always done them.

This is one of the few times lately that I find I agree with the Charlotte Observer editorial board.

You can read the rest of the endorsement here.


Charlotte Observer editorials

I agree, too, with the Observer's pick of Anthony Foxx over John Lassiter, although, in truth, the differences between them are minuscule. Both men are part of the political middle and both are likely to tiptoe gingerly around the issue of the banking industry wreaking havoc on Charlotte's employment situation. Foxx, though, has a more energetic mind and a willingness to color outside the lines a bit.
As for the Observer's editorial section, I wonder if Ms. Muse's general swipe at them is due to the paper not endorsing her mother for City Council. The editorial section has actually taken on a decidedly more liberal tone -- particularly on city planning and environmental issues -- since the retirement of former editorial section editor Ed Williams, due to the increased influence of liberal stalwarts Fannie Flono and Mary Newsom. I think they deserve to be recognized for that improvement, and encouraged to continue the trend.

Part of the reason peachy

I'm a big fan of Jim Morrill and a few of the other journalists, but not of too many on the editorial board. A tiny bit probably stems from their lack of endorsement, though it wasn't that as much as the dishonesty in some of their comments. I plan to go into that in detail at a later date, but I don't think this is the thread for it.

I also am a big fan of liberals....since I am one, but dishonesty and inconsistency on an editorial board can render its opinions irrelevant. I probably remain a bit idealistic about Journalism since I never really worked in the field after getting my degree from the J-school at Carolina. James and I both tend to hold journalists to a higher standard and that is usually very clear in our criticism of them. I'm always critical when a professional in my chosen field is lazy or sloppy with the facts, or in some cases ignores or distorts them intentionally.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.