Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The posted NYT article was written by Mike Stanton; who loves to write about Buddy. Another of his RI obsessions. He's especially fond of his 'Prince of Providence' classic.
Shocking!!!
I won't even go look at the article as I refuse to give any traffic to the NYT website, but I should have guessed that anyway.
Let's just say the NYT is notorious for cherry picking what select news they want their naïve target audience to be privy to. Does the article say one thing about how he transformed a once dying city and what a talented/amazing leader he was? Yet I have a slight suspicion that this same rag will not hesitate to run a feature on Providence as one of it's new "up and coming cities" and its "revolutionary arts and culinary scene". Not one credit to the man largely responsible raising the city from the ashes!
So you were criticizing an article you did not read? That's crazy.
Yes, of course it spoke of those things. If you read instead of pre-judging it, you would know these things. It's important these days to keep an open mind and read a variety of sources rather than only receiving information from pre-approved cherry picked sources. Too many low information voters do that, unfortunately.
So you were criticizing an article you did not read? That's crazy.
Yes, of course it spoke of those things. If you read instead of pre-judging it, you would know these things. It's important these days to keep an open mind and read a variety of sources rather than only receiving information from pre-approved cherry picked sources. Too many low information voters do that, unfortunately.
The OP quoted bits and pieces of it. So are you saying he (the OP) cherry picked from a non cherry picked article? I do find it hard to believe Mike Stanton writing a non-biased article about Buddy (never mind anything on anything printed in the New York Times).
I fully agree with the rest of your post, though. I always seek from as many sources as possible when gathering info, there are just certain ones I will not patronize (even so much as clicking on their website, as they benefit from that as well).
I guess the question is, what is your version of a non-biased article?
This article is titled "Good Buddy, Bad Buddy".
If you don't think there's a bad side of Buddy, maybe you consider that biased. I just don't know how anyone could maintain that viewpoint after all these years.
I think Stanton is much fairer than you give him credit for. I realize you prefer to dwell on the prettier side, but that doesn't make a statement about the uglier side biased or untrue.
"Hailed as a savior, condemned as a sinner, the 73-year-old is a fractured city monument who could steal the epitaph from H. P. Lovecraft’s tombstone at Swan Point Cemetery: I am Providence."
That has always been Stanton's depiction of Cianci and it's an entirely accurate one.
Edited to add: But I'm not sure what your dispute is with even the bit Alfie posted. You've acknowledged the "I know a guy" culture in Providence before, but say you're willing to overlook it if it gets results. Do you no longer believe that was the culture during Cianci?
I guess the question is, what is your version of a non-biased article?
This article is titled "Good Buddy, Bad Buddy".
If you don't think there's a bad side of Buddy, maybe you consider that biased. I just don't know how anyone could maintain that viewpoint after all these years.
I think Stanton is much fairer than you give him credit for. I realize you prefer to dwell on the prettier side, but that doesn't make a statement about the uglier side biased or untrue.
"Hailed as a savior, condemned as a sinner, the 73-year-old is a fractured city monument who could steal the epitaph from H. P. Lovecraft’s tombstone at Swan Point Cemetery: I am Providence."
That has always been Stanton's depiction of Cianci and it's an entirely accurate one.
Edited to add: But I'm not sure what your dispute is with even the bit Alfie posted. You've acknowledged the "I know a guy" culture in Providence before, but say you're willing to overlook it if it gets results. Do you no longer believe that was the culture during Cianci?
The problem is that much of Stanton's dirt on Buddy is unsubstantiated. I wonder if I go to him with some made up sob story about being shaken down by Buddy's mob, will that get published in the Journal as well? Listen I know how these reporters work. No ethics, no fact checking, and worst of all no accountability for the damage they cause people through their slander and inaccurate reporting. I understand the 1st Amendment and the importance of free speech, but sometimes the lack of journalism standards goes a little far. I'm talking this "some random businessman at the train station told me...", don't tell me we can't do better than that. It's an embarrassment. No one said Buddy is perfect, and yes the "I know a guy" culture certainly existed during Buddy's tenure. But was it any better/worse with other administrations, I really don't know how one could say that with a straight face? It's Rhode Island, don't kid yourself that it will change by not electing Buddy. It certainly hasn't the last two mayors. And due to how much Buddy will be under the microscope this time around, I'd bet you Providence will be much safer from that than with this Elorza character.
The problem is that much of Stanton's dirt on Buddy is unsubstantiated.
Of course, up until a couple of weeks ago you thought the claim that Buddy had admitted to affairs of his own was just an unsubstantiated Stanton assertion. Are we sure that is the _only_ claim of Stanton's that *you* consider unsubtantiated, but which turns out to have documentation that you simply haven't found (or tried to find)?
The problem is that much of Stanton's dirt on Buddy is unsubstantiated. I wonder if I go to him with some made up sob story about being shaken down by Buddy's mob, will that get published in the Journal as well?
Unsourced doesn't necessarily mean unsubstantiated. There are very good reasons to avoid going on the record when saying anything about Buddy. That doesn't mean there weren't fact checks and second sources. Still, Stanton's book also had lots of cited sources, more than anonymous but you just dismiss the whole thing out of hand.
The payments made for jobs, that's established fact. The exorbitant costs to rent dilapidated buildings just to register students at - that's established fact. The 6% COLAS and disability pensions are fact, the 'pay to play' ethos is fact. The cocaine and the gold going missing from evidence rooms are fact. The no-show jobs for cronies are fact.
None of that benefits me as a resident. I'd rather be able to call a policeman and be sure he didn't pay for his job or pay for a copy of the officer's test. Wouldn't you? You're going to tell me that type of corruption isn't Cianci's fault, but it is his responsibility. Instead, Cianci just shrugs his shoulders and says 'hey, that's the way it is'. NO, and it's his job to make sure it isn't. He understands the credit stopping at his desk, but not the buck stopping at his desk.
I'd rather the next mayor do absolutely NOTHING to 'revitalize Providence' - private enterprise is a better option anyway - than trade revitalization for what Buddy will bring. Corruption is expensive.
I'm not sure what's in the pipeline that he could take credit for anyway; I guess he could take credit for Kennedy Plaza if he were re-elected, just like he took credit for moving the rivers even though it was in the works long before he took office.
I wouldn't say "long before" he took office. The river relocation plan was originally conceived at RISD in 1972 and published in 1974 in Interface: Providence, the same year Buddy took office. However, the plan didn't exactly get a warm reception at City Hall and succeeded because of the efforts of Bill Warner, the Providence Foundation, Gov. Garrahy, and Sen. Chafee. Cianci coincidentally changed course and announced his support for the project the same day of his first indictment in 1984. The actual infrastructure work happened during the Paolino administration, and much of the new development that followed happened under Cicilline.
He can legitimately take credit for making WaterFire what it is. And for ending the garbage strike .
He still has his old "Three Cities" plan which, like the mall, would focus new development on the outskirts of downtown and leave the core to rot again. No thanks.
Have there been any polls done this month? The last one I can find is from 09/25.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. It's an embarrassment. No one said Buddy is perfect, and yes the "I know a guy" culture certainly existed during Buddy's tenure. But was it any better/worse with other administrations, I really don't know how one could say that with a straight face? It's Rhode Island, don't kid yourself that it will change by not electing Buddy. It certainly hasn't the last two mayors. And due to how much Buddy will be under the microscope this time around, I'd bet you Providence will be much safer from that than with this Elorza character.
.
