Ellington

The Jackson Free Press has a tradition of endorsing candidates in our election issues. And considering that we never, ever endorse based on who we think is going to win, our success rate is pretty good—well over 50 percent. Not bad for a progressive newspaper in the heart of Mississippi.

Usually, our editorial board decides who to endorse, and then we write an unsigned editorial, giving the reasons for our picks. That's what we'd planned to do this year, too. Until.

Until we repeatedly saw candidates like John Arthur Eaves and Jamie Franks try to out-Republican the Republicans. In recent weeks, staffers and visitors alike have expressed dismay with the tenor of many of our political campaigns—by both parties. And because we (stupidly?) expect a slight bit more out of them, we are most disgusted by the Democrats at the top of the ticket.

When Eaves first started waving his Bible around in his ads, I thought, "Cool. The Republicans don't own religion. Democrats should talk about their faith, too."

But Eaves' crusade soon morphed into a bizarre wingnuttier-than-thou campaign to convince Mississippians that he wants to singlehandedly put Christian prayer back into schools. Eaves is an attorney, and supposedly a good one. Does he really not understand that, uh, we've been down that road, and the reason that the government cannot put prayer in public schools is to protect the Constitution-guaranteed freedom of religion?

Sure, kids can pray in school anytime they want—I must pray 77 times a day, at my desk, on my morning walk, anytime Brees throws the football—but politicians don't get to tell me when, what, why, how or to whom.

Sincere or not, Eaves has been determined to beat Barbour at his own radical-right game. In a way it's funny—I mean, to watch a Makers Mark-swilling, corporate-hugging lobbyist pretend he's the arbiter of everything moral in order to get votes for the GOP has been hysterical, and tragic, over the years.

But it is sobering when I found myself almost rooting for Barbour during the first debate when he haltingly explained why he isn't on Eaves' school-prayer bandwagon—because it might, well, lead to the courts restricting prayer even more, he said in essence.

True. Of course, a better reason for a leader to avoid the school-prayer wedge issue is to help instill a sense of civics and understanding among the electorate about what our Constitution really means—to get above and beyond the anti-intelligent "other" politics of division on such issues as school prayer, gay rights and immigration.

Speaking of gay rights and immigration—that's really where both Franks and Eaves lost our endorsement (which was theirs to lose, considering what they're both running against). I personally—and our staff collectively—have been mortified and embarrassed to watch the bigotry displayed on these two issues by both parties. Eaves is complaining on his new anti-Barbour Web site, Barbour's Record, that Barbour promised Latino immigrants help getting driver's licenses. Driver's licenses—so they can get to work, that great American pastime.

I fully realize that GOP machine politics is tough as hell—but I hate to tell Democrats that they're not going to beat the machine at its own game. (And if they happen to, how are they going to then sleep at night?)

Worse, they are turning off potential voters in the state who might just pull the lever for Dems, especially in a time when being a Republican ain't what it used to pretend to be. But when you grow up young and educated, and even a tad progressive, in Mississippi, you don't get choices. It is assumed that a candidate has to run stupid-conservative—not in a smart libertarian way, but in an uneducated hate-the-"other" fashion—in order to win.

So the candidates all vie for the same angry, scared votes, and the rest of us—which may well be the most of us—either don't vote or have to hold our noses as we slink into the polls to vote for dumb or dumber. Thus, in the state that led the South (including Florida and Texas) in the percentage of the under-30 voters who chose Kerry over Bush in the last election (63 percent), we have to drown in ignorance-pushing TV rhetoric on hot-button issues from candidates who ought to be smarter, and act like we are.

Why can't the Dems focus squarely on red-blood populist issues of health care, poverty and education that appeal to a wide cross-section of Mississippi voters and stay out of the constitutional quagmires that some rich yokels aren't going to change anyhow?

I don't mean not to "go negative" on a man like Barbour—yes, talk about his lobbying background, his love affair with corporations (and moving manufacturing abroad), his rewards to his friends and families and cronies after Katrina. Damn right: It's about time we talk straight about Barbour in this state.

I will endorse a candidate for doing that.

But I will tell you where I, and my paper, and many smart Mississippians will draw the line: We are not going to vote for a return to our bigoted past, whether it is Barbour's 2003 rhetoric about "attacking our flag" or Eaves' 2007 whining about immigrants taking jobs on the Coast.

I am done with that Mississippi.

I've spent many years in pain because people in my state went along with race-baiting (and worse) of the past against African Americans. I cannot in good conscience endorse anyone who would stoop to such depths in today's state against people with different sexual preferences or Latino immigrants who worked so hard to help this state recover from Hurricane Katrina.

And I don't give a damn if it's just another Democratic trick to get the GOP machine out of power. Remember "Republican" Mitch Tyner and how well that one worked, Dems? And get this: Ronnie Musgrove invited Alabama's "10 Commandments" stone to come live on public property here, and he didn't even get re-elected for doing it. Imagine.

Could it be that the Mississippians of the 21st century expect more than the Democrats of our state can give? Might we expect our leaders to be real and show some backbone and courage when it comes to what is right?

There are some clear good choices on the voting slate this year. Attorney General Jim Hood has withstood a vicious campaign by the national GOP, staying focused on his record (which includes getting attorneys to recoup a bunch of corporate back taxes without it costing the state a dime). State Auditor candidate Mike Sumrall has proved his ability to connect with everyday people and focus on what he loves: auditing. Secretary of State candidate Rob Smith has talked more about registering new voters than kicking phantom ones off the voting rolls as his opponent Delbert Hosemann has done. There is no doubt that Insurance Commissioner candidate Gary Anderson prioritizes Mississippians above the desires of insurance companies, or Barbour.

Rep. Cecil Brown is an amazing legislator who is devoted to public education and popular with voters of all stripes (but tragically targeted by the Barbour machine, anyway). David Blount has his head on straight, and we sure do need to send radical-righter Richard White to the showers. We like Adrienne Wooten, but our board still voted for John Reeves due to his devotion, over all, to the city and for his seniority in the House—and because he's a Republican willing to defy King Barbour. (We encourage Wooten to keep at politics, though, and look forward to endorsing her in the future.) Locally, we like Robert Graham and believe his many years with JPD will benefit the Hinds County Supervisors.

Please vote for the following candidates on Nov. 6. And then send a message to both parties in Mississippi that we are not the state of old, and we would appreciate not being treated like ignorant, uneducated bigots in future campaigns.

JFP ENDORSEMENTS

Attorney General: Jim Hood

State Auditor: Mike Sumrall

Insurance Commissioner: Gary Anderson

Public Service Commissioner: Lynn Posey

Secretary of State: Rob Smith

Agriculture Commissioner: Rickey Cole

Hinds County Supervisor, District 1: Robert Graham

Senate, District 29: ENDORSEMENT OF DAVID BLOUNT RESCINDED DUE TO IMMIGRATION RHETORIC

House, District 66: Cecil Brown

House, District 71: John Reeves

Previous Comments

ID

75512

Comment

What a surprise! One Republican, who is a grassroots incumbent. EP

Author

**Previously Banned Member**

Date

2007-11-01T14:20:37-06:00

ID

75513

Comment

What a surprise that you're whining about it. And good job sneaking back onto the site!

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-11-01T15:10:54-06:00

ID

75514

Comment

Whine all you want EP-aka-PMB, but I can see all but 2 of these JFP endorsements coming true next Tuesday.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-11-01T15:44:38-06:00

ID

75515

Comment

Personally, I wish y'all had given some attention to the Central MS Transportation Commissioner's race as well.

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-11-01T15:50:18-06:00

ID

75516

Comment

I'm saddened to report that David Blount is also on the anti-immigrant bandwagon, according to a mailer someone just e-mailed us. I wish I'd known before I wrote the above column. Sigh.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-11-01T16:08:55-06:00

ID

75517

Comment

We would have, Jeff, had we had time and resources. Sorry.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-11-01T16:09:26-06:00

ID

75518

Comment

I've heard Rudy's been put up by Madison's Mayor Mary. I'll stick with Mr Hall, seeing as how Butch(er) Brown hates his guts.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2007-11-01T18:39:46-06:00

ID

75519

Comment

I've heard Rudy's been put up by Madison's Mayor Mary. I'll stick with Mr Hall, seeing as how Butch(er) Brown hates his guts. Agreed. I've never cared much for "Rudy" from his role in Madison County politics. I just noticed that the JFP chose not to make an endorsement in the State Treasurer's race. Is endorsing incumbent Tate Reeves (R) that distasteful to you ladd?

Author

Jeff Lucas

Date

2007-11-04T08:38:00-06:00

ID

75520

Comment

We didn't look closely at that race, jeff, being that Reeves is a shoe-in. With our small staff, and the crazy city news cycle, we have to make choices about where to put our attention. In other words, we just didn't get to it. I know we have trained people to expect a lot out of us, but we're just human.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2007-11-04T21:19:38-06:00