reality bites  by James Norton

Political advertisements and mailers are meant to make an impact on voters ‚Äì to get  them interested enough in issues to get them to actually go and vote, which is difficult to do these days, especially in a special election.  They are created to make statements ‚Äì about one‚Äôs own record and ideas/ideals and then there are those that point out the shortcomings of their opponents.  That‚Äôs the nature of the beast – get over it.

Is it right that Marty Martinez‚Äôs recent mailer made it seem like the entire police union voted to endorse him and not just the executive board of the union, as I have come to understand happened?  One would think not.

Is it right that Connolly‚Äôs recent mailer attacked Martinez‚Äôs stance on the anti-gang ordinance and referenced the Boston Globe article from 2003 that stated that he invited members of a local gang into the Youth Center when he was Director of Youth Services?  At first glance, one would think not, but maybe if you took a minute to understand the bigger picture, you might agree.  I‚Äôll explain later on‚Ķ

I was going to stay away from this whole issue, since the paper is endorsing Jack Connolly, but what moved me to comment about this was an email that was sent out by Senator Patricia D. Jehlen the other day calling on her supporters to fight the “negative and deceptive” mailer sent out by Jack Connolly and a telephone campaign by Bob Daut “attacking” Marty Martinez and his “efforts” to reach out to “at-risk” kids and turn their lives around.

I find that email to be negative and deceptive at best and this is why:

While it is laudable for someone like Marty to reach out to kids and young adults that are “at-risk” or involved with gangs, as Director of Youth Services, Marty should have thought more about the totality of the circumstances surrounding the effort and taken into account the emotional wreckage caused to a young teen upon either seeing or knowing about a gang member inside the Youth Center, for whatever reason.

Now I realize I may have just lost you with that one sentence, so let me break it down for you in terms most rational people can agree with.

Take a minute to remember when you were 12 years old.  I don‚Äôt care how smart you think you were or how ‚Äústreet-wise‚Äù you thought you were at 12, at the end of the day, you were an emotionally developing child.  You couldn‚Äôt process things or events or pretty much anything like an adult would ‚Äì intimidation and misinterpretation were both on the daily menu.  That‚Äôs natural, that‚Äôs life.

Now you, as a 12 year old, walk into the center and see a gang member or maybe you just heard from someone that there was a gang member there.

Do you think you would go back?  As an adult, would you send your child back?

And that‚Äôs what it all comes down to ‚Äì great efforts are only as great as their totality.  Reaching out to ‚Äúat-risk‚Äù teens and young adults is admirable ‚Äì but at what cost?