Friday, February 10, 2012

A letter from James Cannon Jr.

The following letter from James Cannon Jr. should clear up any confusion regarding the 2/8/12 Almanac letter.

I am James Edmund Cannon III and I live in Mt. Lebanon. There is another James Cannon who lives in Mt. Lebanon and he happens to be my father. Though I loathe to crawl into the same gutter in which he apparently resides, along with my sister/his daughter Josephine Posti, I do so only to ensure fairness. You see, recently, The Almanac, one of the publications serving the South Hills, posted a rather vitriolic and ridiculous letter from the senior J Cannon. Unfortunately, there was no indication as to his relationship to school board member Josephine Posti. After numerous phone calls to the paper and editorial staff, it was revealed they don't typically vet the authors of submissions to their letters section. Going forward, thanks to this episode, that will change. Quite simply, the editors were duped.

As for the details of the letter, let's say the first time I looked over it I thought it was a piece from The Onion. It's that far removed from reality. For instance, the author references "the hundreds" who attended the school groundbreaking. The problem for the author is, there's video of the groundbreaking and unless we're all using the metric system, I'd be surprised to physically count more than about 70 people attending many of whom were children who I'm sure had no say in whether or not to attend. Another example of the folly of the letter is contained in the insult lobbed at local blogger (recently recognized for excellence) and former commission candidate Elaine Gillen. The writer takes a cheap shot by using the phrase "would-be politician", referencing the fact Ms. Gillen was not successful in her bid for public office. Unfortunately, the author seems to forget he is also a "would-be politician," having made a bid for elected office in Minnesota several decades ago. Needless to say, he lost.

There is also the mention of "adults, living in an adult world". I'm not sure to whom he is referring but I assume it is not certain members of the school board, specifically Josephine Posti and Elaine Cappucci. If you're 43 and a member of a local elected body, and your father is holding together the last remaining tattered remnants of your base of support, why are you in office? Why not resign and just let him take the slot?

What we're seeing unfold is an attempt, albeit an amateur one, by two people to dominate the conversation and shut out any opposing views through intimidation, deceit and personal attacks. It's unfortunate and unnecessary. If people have to resort to those tactics, they've already lost the argument. We've already seen this behavior employed by Posti, Cappucci, Birks, Kubit and others. It's because none of them can honestly (and articulately) defend their positions.

Well, I have news for this tiny yet vocal collection of corrupt cronies--this isn't your town. It's mine. And it's Elaine's. And Charlotte's, and anyone else who has a different opinion regarding the school board. If you don't like those opinions, it's ok. You're entitled to your own. That's one of the basic tenets of our nation, principles I've spent years of my life defending. I find it both revealing and disheartening that we have someone on a public board who has no intention of serving the public, while her primary supporter--her father--lobs insults at people he doesn't know as a means of deflecting criticism from that very board. That's always the true sign there's something to hide.

Here's another message for the author: You're welcome to leave. I'm sure there is some town somewhere that will welcome you and your little cabal but you've all worn out your welcome. It is beyond reproach that you would routinely visit Elaine's blog for the sole purpose of writing a hateful letter castigating it. That's not rational. If you don't like what appears on the blog, stop reading it. But I can see why you might be attracted to it. At least Elaine's blog contains original material.

What a sad state of affairs for our community and what an incredible waste of time. I'm just thankful J. Cannon senior and his daughter aren't in actual positions of authority. Otherwise, things would be a lot worse than what we're facing in the near future.

I retain hope that residents will not be dissuaded from participating in upcoming elections. And I would submit we need to let this storm pass. Ultimately, the phoenix shall rise bringing with it transparent government, a community that melds instead of divides, and a collection of stronger voices to speak on behalf of residents, not in spite of them.

-James E. Cannon Jr.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've been waiting for the opportune time to check out of the blogosphere. Reading this post from a member of the township's Community Relations Board got me there.

Dave Franklin

Anonymous said...

Dave,

Before you check out, and this is not meant disrespectfully in any way, what do you think James Cannon Sr. expected in the way of a reaction from his own son when he published that letter? His son who stood up for what he believes is right and put himself out there as a candidate without attacking others and running a clean campaign in spite of the dirty deeds of others. I'll leave it at that.

I was lucky to have the father I did. We didn't always agree, but he would never have done something like that knowing how much it mattered to me.

Lastly, will you ever call Paula to talk with her? This is not meant as a poke either, but she really is passionate about her ideas and I think it would be a good start in ground-up community relations.

-Charlotte Stephenson

James Edmund Cannon III said...

Mr, Franklin,

Thank you for underscoring and highlighting the point of this blog and all the comments contained herein. In essence, if someone has a differing opinion, you take your ball and go home? Ok. Then go. I fail to see how any of lose in that scenario. Your schtick for some time now has been to lurk in the shadows, snipe at people to foment disagreement and then disappear. It's stale and boring now. While I'm sure you're the smartest person you know, I'm pretty sure other peoples' opinions are just as valuable. You're another one who seems to think free speech only applies when it's you doing the speaking.

You find my most recent post distasteful. Perhaps it was a different Dave Fanklin who was so adamant about the Almanac being entitled to its opinion and Cannon Sr being entitled to his? Please clarify for me. Because if that was, in fact, you, then I'm not sure I understand your problem this morning. Nor do I care.

Also, much like the handful of hateful pro-Jo folks in this town, you don't have your facts straight. I'm not currently a member of the community relations board. A little research, maybe two minutes' worth, would have given your post more credibility. And I would remind you (and the two people who keep trying start rumors) that I am not a public official. I'm a private citizen. The election has been over for three months. Let it go. Further, how exactly does my personal life have a bearing on how the school board behaves? You see, the hatemongers can't even get that right...

MR. Franklin, if you'd like to sit down and have a civil conversation in person, I'd be happy to do so. Unlike some people in this town, I don't have anything to hide. This offer is good for anyone out there. I'll state it again--if my personal life is of such interest (and God only knows why it would be) contact me and we can sit down over coffee or breakfast. I'll be happy to answer your questions. Heck, I'll buy. But here's what I ask in return--demand the same kind of transparency from the school board members. Then go ahead and start your judgement.

Anonymous said...

Oh no, Mr. Franklin is checking out of the blogosphere. "Oh the humanity!"

Sorry Mr. Franklin, for the theatrics... the exclamation point.
Wish you weren't because occasionally we seem to concur on some topics. Occasionally you shine a light on things I didn't consider. Do discussions here mean a hill of beans to our elected officials, apparently not. Justification for name calling and more to some I guess, yes.

If you don't like what you read-- don't, your perogative. Is checking out suppose to mean something more, Mr. Franklin?

So to use your own words: "hey, it's not a big deal."

Andy Bradford

Anonymous said...

I'm back only because someone called me about this post. This will be my last comment on any Lebo blog. I hardly lurk Mr Cannon. I'm on this blog more than most and I use my own name. I've taken more shots on this blog than most. Can you say the same about Giffen Good, Andy Bradford, Albert Brennaman or the gaggle of others who are permitted to comment anonymously so long a they tow the party line? I am and will continue to be active in our community. I've learned that there is no substitute for being involved. I'm simply choosing to remove myself from this form of participation as it has become unproductive and inappropriate.

However, this is not about me Mr. Cannon. And frankly, its not even about you or your personal life or even your sister. If you read the thread regarding the letter to the editor, you will see that my ONLY question was (and remains) what gives anyone the right to request the removal of a letter to the editor. Surely you didn't spend years of your life defending someone's one right to deny someone else an opinion. I don't agree with your father's comments (everyone just assumes that I do) but I thoroughly support his right to make them. If clarification as to the name is necessary, that's between you, your father and the Almanac. Not Elaine, Dave Huston or anyone else.

As for whether or not you are on the Community Relations Board and the sufficiency of my research, as of today you are still included on the Township website as being a part of this Board, together with a bio and a picture. I did my research. Apparently the source has it wrong. I'm not sure where else I would have looked forcible information. If you are not on the CRB perhaps you should tell them to remove your bio.

http://www.mtlebanon.org/index.aspx?nid=1022

Dave Franklin

Lebo Citizens said...

I wanted to comment on the fact that as of today, this blog has been read in 60 countries. It continues to gain popularity but more importantly, Mt. Lebanon residents are traveling or living all over the world. Yes, Giffen Good is commenting anonymously. I don't know all my readers. I guess you do, Dave. Interesting.

Don't be discouraged. Your "ONLY" question will be answered in time. Stay tuned.

Elaine

Anonymous said...

Mr. Franklin, I agree in the right to free speech. No I don't agree that here in a blog it is necessary to identify ones self and have no problem if you wish to do so or Elaine wants to change the policy.
The historical Mr. Franklin did it all the time and we seem to be the better for it.
On your point about Elaine allowing comments that tow the party line, I'm just curious as to why you didn't protest so vehmently when there was a call to silence a couple of board members that didn't tow the SB line. Why not when certain residents tried to stop a town hall?
When the PTA made defamatory comments about candidates families?
Why you didn't see fit to point out the falicies submitted by directors or Mr. Cannon Sr. as you often do here.
I wish you wouldn't check out, but that's your choice.
Oh, one other thing Cannon Sr. got wrong... Elaine's blog isn't dead.
Someone reads it and contacted you ("I'm back only because someone called me about this post.") it would appear looking at the times, rather quickly too.
Someone's reading it.

Andy Bradford

Anonymous said...

One other misconceived notion, Mr. Franklin.
You assume because one blogs anonymously that they aren't involved. Or at least that is what I think you are suggesting in this remark: "Can you say the same about Giffen Good, Andy Bradford, Albert Brennaman or the gaggle of others who are permitted to comment anonymously so long a they tow the party line? I am and will continue to be active in our community. I've learned that there is no substitute for being involved."
What makes you think they aren't? How do you know?

Andy Bradford

Lebo Citizens said...

Don't forget Capt. Anonymous. The "gaggle" may include friends of yours, Dave. I know that C. A. had nice things to say about you. Perhaps someone from the "gaggle" called you about the post. Ya never know...

In any event, you're welcome to stay, Dave. Think about it.

Without hesitation, I published this letter. I respect James Cannon Jr. He stands up for what he believes in. What you see is what you get. I have met his brother and he is the same way. Both are good guys.

Oh yeah, the Almanac letter does involve me, Dave.

Elaine

Anonymous said...

The is an important difference between contributing to a blog, that I believe escapes Mr. Franklin.
A paper comment cannot be instantaneously rebutted or debated. Blog conversation can be read and reread.
In the paper a submission gets by without any rebuttal. Let's take Cannon Sr's claim that "hundreds" attended the ground breaking. I'm assuming his intent was to suggest their was great support for the high school project, his daughters leadership and that the project opponents were a small cranky minority.
It's pretty much an accepted fact, that people will accept something as fact if they see it in print.
At least in a blog such as yours, that is the reason I see no harm in anon post. I or anyone can Be immediately rebutted or corrected.
Mr. Franklin never speaks of the anonymous replies to letters on the Almanacs website.
What is the difference? Why does the paper allow anonymous submissions?
I really wish that Mr. Franklin would stay, Lebo doesn'tlearn much if everyone thinks the same.
I believe it was George Patton that said: "if everybody is thinking the same way, then somebody isn't thinking,"
Andy Bradford

Richard Gideon said...

There is no question that each side in the high school "renovation" debate has surrounded itself with a core group of true believers, and snipes at the other side from within the safety of its circle of friends and supporters. In this respect Mt. Lebanon is simply a microcosm of the nation itself. But making outlandish, ridiculous charges against one's political foes has a long and rich tradition in the United States, and hot argumentation is the trademark of western Pennsylvanians, going back to the days of the Whiskey Rebellion and before. Abraham Kirkpatrick was one of the Federalist supporters during the Rebellion and husband of John Nevill(e)'s sister-in-law. A rich land speculator and money lender, he loved to argue, and would change sides if he found he was winning! (For those of you who have forgotten or perhaps never knew, John Nevill(e) was the Washington appointed whiskey tax collector for this "survey," and the object of local wrath for supporting the Federal tax after having opposed the Commonwealth's own attempt to tax whiskey. "I don't care for the good opinion of my neighbors," Nevill(e) is reported to have said. "I have an independent salary of six hundred a year." Sound familiar?)

On another thread I stated very clearly that I thought James Cannon Sr. had every right to fire off a letter to the Almanac, and that the Almanac had every right to select and publish those letters it thinks are appropriate. I also said that Mr. Cannor Sr. had muddied the waters, so to speak, because he did not identify himself clearly - a major blunder, since James Cannon Jr. is a local political figure with opinions diametrically opposed to James Cannon Sr. The opinions of each party in this unfortunate internecine debate may offend a large portion of the polity, but that is the price we pay for living in a country that permits free expression of ideas - and we should be happy to pay it. It should not be a cause for any particular individual with an opinion and a "clear pen" to take his ball and bat and go home. There are plenty of undecided people in this little bedroom town that have yet to make their minds about which side is correct, and they may need to do so before too long, as it is underlying economics philosophy that is the actual cause of the schism in Mt. Lebanon.

The Athenian statesman Solon is famous for stating that "..in any conflict no man may remain neutral and must perforce choose a side, if for no other reason than to become a moderating influence." It was this idea that animated Pittsburgh lawyer and writer Hugh Henry Brackenridge to associate himself with the "rebels" during the Whiskey Rebellion. Brackenridge, a supporter of the Federal government, nonetheless thought the tax on whiskey wrong; but he also thought the rebels were wrong in suggesting it be opposed by force of arms. It was largely through Brackenridge's efforts that a young America avoided civil war - for the time being.

A debate, even an ugly one, is often the catalyst for necessary change. We may not like the tone it takes - I know I don't at times - but it at least may draw in more of the undecided - which in this town is highly desirable.

Anonymous said...

I agree Mr. Gideon, but doesn't Cannon's Almanac letter, the "What the Kluck" protest, President Posti's commencement speech advising graduates to associate with people that think like you strive to stifle participation and discussion?
Does the name calling, the insults chase people away?
The district, the PTA are hot on the topic of bullying. Yet, isn't the very tactic they employ against their neighbors that happen to disagree with them?
Andy Bradford

Richard Gideon said...

Hello Mr. Bradford:
Ah, but you may only be stifled, name-called, or chased away if you permit yourself to be! I personally do not permit the other side that license. Even Mr. Kluck, during the famous "by invitation" meeting in the Municipal Building, and referring to the protesters outside, told the audience that it was great that we lived in a country that permitted such expressions of ideas.

The more the pro-tax side talks the deeper they dig the hole for themselves. After a while they become a caricature of the proverbial "wind bag."

PS: It's been my experience, as a former school teacher, that most graduating students couldn't tell you what some official said at their graduation; but they can tell you what the Valedictorian said because he or she is one of their "own." For the class of 2011 that was a good thing!

Anonymous said...

I never said to cave to the bullying or to prohibit protest.
Only reflecting on the fine between protest and bullying.
Yes, you're probably right on the topic of attentive graduates to speeches.
Regardless, that has nothing to do with speaker's advice.
Andy Bradford