Profiles of the Shreveport Mayoral Candidates?

I don't take the print version of the Shreveport Times, so please tell me if I'm missing something.  They've been touting all week their upcoming profiles of Bryan Wooley and Cedric Glover which was to run today.

What I read online could hardly be considered a definitive profile of either candidate.  In the Wooley profile, I'm told that Wooley hits the gym at 6:30, we learn about his workout routine, his weight, that he eats a "hardy" breakfast (as opposed to a hearty one, I presume), that he likes The Wizard of Oz and that his dad used to check on him at night when he was a child.  The last paragraph gets down to any meat there is, and we learn then that he abandoned spiky hair, took an online speech class, and a quote from Wooley saying he wants to kill stereotypes.

Okay.  So we get to the Glover profile and we learn that he can write upside down, he's a little freaked out by social media, he left Grambling to care for his aging parents, sold cars, and still gets nervous in front of big crowds.  Again, the meat is supposedly in the last paragraph and we learn that after his mayoral life he will still be involved in civic affairs.

Wow.  What in depth profiles.

Nothing on the issues. 

Seriously, did I miss it?  Was there more in the print edition?  Because if this is all Shreveport voters are going to get from The Times to make their choices from, it's pretty weak.

The Shreveport Times Lets Their Bias Through

The Gannett owned Shreveport Times posted their article on yesterday's Tea Party protest with the usual bias and misinformation.  It's hard to believe Drew Pierson was at the same event that I was.  The headline is the first misleading fact in the post:

Hundreds Come Out for Tea Party

Hundreds?  I don't have a good crowd shot because there was no higher elevation for me to ascend to get one, so mine are all ground shots, and not panoramic, but I think we can conclude from the pictures that it was absolutely more than "hundreds" in attendance.

By 5:00 there were at least 800 there and that was thirty minutes before the event started.  By 6 or 6:30 there were easily 3000 there.  One security officer told me 4000 but even if you go with the more conservative 3000 broadcast by KTBS last night, it's still more than "hundreds." 

Pierson's bias comes through loud and clear in his reporting of the event itself when he writes of one of the speakers, Mike Johnson:

Johnson listed various offenses made by the current administration to Thursday evening's receptive crowd, gathered on the lawn next to the First Baptist Bossier and Bossier City Hall, such as the Thursday morning ruling by a federal judge in Wisconsin that the government-recognized National Day of Prayer, a Congressional act calling for the president to issue a proclamations urging the American public to pray on the first Thursday of May, was unconstitutional.What Johnson didn't mention, however, was that the lawsuit was filed by a non-profit atheist group, and was not only defended in court by the Obama administration, but Obama actually issued such a proclamation last year.

Besides misrepresenting what Mike Johnson was saying, Pierson misses the point and confuses the mission of the Tea Party.  Yes, protesters are angry and Obama, but it's not just Obama.  We're angry at all the liberal policies coming out of Washington and the disregard of the Constitution.  We're angry about the out of control spending.  The point Johnson was making was what he called the assault on religious values and the need for conservatives to defend their rights to prayer. 

Pierson makes no mention of the moving speech of Sharon McCullar; there would be little he could disparage there.  Sharon talked about, among other things, the military service of her sons and the sacrifices our soldiers make for us. 

It was a brief, token article and I suppose for that we can be grateful. 

More News is Good News

I was really glad to see that the Bossier Press is going to daily publication. I have long been disenchanted with the Shreveport Times (some folks I know call it "The Slimes" but you shall remain nameless) for it's extreme liberal bias and also because it really does not seem to have much real news. In fact, the material in The Living section is often a week behind and I've already read in either the USA Today or another online publication. While I believe in many ways the Times serves its purpose, I think that competition and diversity is a good thing.

I remember when the Shreveport Journal was still around and we had two daily papers in town. You got some diversity there (plus twice the comics!). My dad would get up each morning and read the Times before work and then come home in the evening with the Journal tucked under his arm (crossword puzzle already worked!). Each paper had its own slant and its own perspective. I can't tell you how many people I know that have canceled their Times subscription (myself included, years ago) or threatened to. In fact, some guys in front of Albertsons tried to sell me a subscription last week and I, rude self that I can be, told them "it's a liberal rag!" and declined. They were at least nice.

Shreveport-Bossier is a large enough community to support two newspapers and I'm glad to see the Bossier Press stepping up to the plate. After I've read that paper, small as it may be, I at least feel more in touch with my community. I enjoy the columnists in the Bossier Press as well - maybe it's just my politics. And Jerry Byrd! God love him, nobody can do sports like Jerry Byrd. So good luck Bossier Press, and godspeed!