@ P. T. Otis - right on. I would add, "there is A LOT the Beacon has yet to learnn about being a respectable newspaper." Oh well, they will be gone in a few years.

P.T. Otis. I also agree. God forbid a Republican is innocent until proven guilty. This city is just chock full of Republican haters and is led by one crazy Mayor.

@Bill. Plusquellic cheated to win in the last election by taking donations far in excess of that allowed by our local law. His taxpayer funded dining and travel account exceeds the cost of a recall election. A recall could cost as little as $75,000--not $500,000. The Beacon misled the voters on the cost by not checking its facts. Please go to www.changeakronnow.com to see the facts that we are relying on. We need your help to stop the abuse.

I made the same point made by Otis when this paper published its rediculous editorial condemning UA for not jumping the gun as like this paper. Thanks Mr. Otis for not joining the typical Akron feeding frenzy enjoyed by so many of our community's anti-education hicks.

that's ridiculous - sorry

Mendenhall is lying about the campaign contributions and he knows it. Is this how desperate he has become? He is also now backpeddling reagarding the cost of a recall election. Wonder what other lies he is willing to tell to get his rear-end in the mayors office?

Mendenhall is lying about the mayor's campaign contribution. he was allowed to take a cedrtain amount for the primary and a certain amount for the general election - which he did. Mendenhall is also backtracking on the cost of the recall election. looks to me like someone is getting desperate.

It's not bad enough that he lies, he is also incompetent, word. Mendenhall doesn't have the skill to pull off a one-car funeral procession, yet he has the audacity to challenge a mayor who has done more for this community than anyone in history. Mendenhall and his fraudulence is getting too much attention.

I think what we are missing here, politics aside, is Mr. Morrison did not use good judgment in getting involved with this transaction as a bystander or otherwise. He and his son had to know this would not look good for them to purchase a piece of property they knew the University would be interested in. When you serve as a Board member you should put your self above all this and be squeaky clean. Donating the property would have been a great gesture. To try to sell it to the University legally or not is going to be perceived in a good light. And shame on the rest of the Board for not stepping in and saying so. This was just a bad idea and I hope it does not go on to reflect negatively on the University of Akron where good things are happening.

I think what we are missing here, politics aside, is Mr. Morrison did not use good judgment in getting involved with this transaction as a bystander or otherwise. He and his son had to know this would not look good for them to purchase a piece of property they knew the University would be interested in. When you serve as a Board member you should put your self above all this and be squeaky clean. Donating the property would have been a great gesture. To try to sell it to the University legally or not is not going to be perceived in a good light. And shame on the rest of the Board for not stepping in and saying so. This was just a bad idea and I hope it does not go on to reflect negatively on the University of Akron where good things are happening.

Jayco, That is for the court to decide and not this paper or its readers.

@Y'All: Unfortunately, since the O.J. trial, prosecutors and defense attorneys now use the media to potentially taint a jury. It's shameful, unethical, but that's the current playing field. You're right on Jake that it should be for the "court to decide" but without media encroachment so a citizen and the people can get the fairest trial possible. Clarence Darrow: "There is no justice, in or out of Court."

What is more galling is that this newspaper called upon The University of Akron to join in on the injustice when it ridiculed UA for doing the responsible thing in keeping quiet regarding Morrison's indictment. Yes, "the official word is mum at UA" as it should be.

From what I hear, David Black, the owner has plans for this publication and it ain't pretty. I can see it now, the largest bird cage in history will be lined with The Anti-University of Akron Speaking Urinal and will be its new purpose and home. Ba bye!

@WormerMendingnaught: Regarding--
"Please go to www.changeakronnow.com to see the facts that we are relying on."

It seems you're not absolutely sure of your facts if you're merely "relying on" them. Ponder this Bob Dylan line: "And there are them that say 'Don't hate nothin at all except hatred'.."..I feel your utter hate and contempt for the Mayor dripping from this site. You will not succeed in a recall, you're merely pi**ing in the wind. You need to mount a campaign and run against him in the next election, instead of playing the sniper role. But that means you'd have to garner resources and support, wouldn't it? And you know you can't. You've become the very thing you hate, that's why people don't take you seriously. Why don't you drop this personal vendetta and channel your energy into a positive, worthwhile cause.

@ wannabemayor: If you can not or are unable to follow Robert's suggestion, then just give it up and devote your time, energy and funding to something positive. If you need a suggestion or two, just ask.

What I don't get is how reporting on an INDICTMENT regarding fraud by a UA board member is a person, political attack. Is the ABJ the one indicting Morrison? NO. They are reporting on what the state is doing regarding a local university board and the sale of property that is being investigated by the state, not the newspaper. It's called freedom of speech folks, and I for one am glad the ABJ isnt brushing this under the rug as UA seems to have. Watch out, I said SEEMS-I understand the whole reasonable doubt thing.

What I want to know is how many of you will comment and defend Morrison if he is found guilty? And will you blame the ABJ for that too? And what if UA is found somehow during the trial to have been culpable in some way.....will that be a political attack too? Or will the paper simply be doing their job by reporting on the outcome of a legal trial?
The election is over folks, not everything is about politics. Sometimes a crook is just a crook, no matter which party they choose-and just because someone has been a good citizen for most of their life doesn't mean they can't commit fraud.
Let's all just sit back and see what happens and keep the claws in for now, shall we?

Thanks Pope - well said.

"Let's all just sit back and see what happens and keep the claws in for now, shall we?"

@shorty, you need to make that statement to this paper and yourself. You conveniently ignore the fact that the letter writer is referring to a Beacon Journal editorial and not a reporting of the facts. Freedom of Speech is not the issue here. No government entity is trying to shut the Beacon up. If you want to yell freedom of speech, fine then yell it for everyone and not just this paper which you blindly support.

Also, you forget that it was UA that called for this investigation in the first place and it was this paper that publicly called for the university to show its claws by joining this rag in its premature condemnation of Morrison before the trial has even begun. The letter writer and I already made your point to let the court decide and not this paper or readers like you. Thanks for your support of our position albeit unwittingly. This paper made its political attack when it went further than reporting. It condemned a man and the university before the trial even started. An editorial is not a story.

By the way, The National Enquirer has freedom of(speech)the press too. That doesn't make it a respectable newspaper either.

No, an editorial is not a story, but its still free speech, man. I am taking neither side in this debate, I'[m simply stating that the paper has a right to present this kind of writing, whether you think its reporting or an opinion. Do you think they let editors write about any old thing they want, and that they can make stuff up? The opinion, whether you agree with it or not, is free speech, and was based on the facts of the case and investigation.
Let's ask this-is an editorial discussing Richardson's decision to withdraw from his possible cabinet post due to an investigation also a political attack? Or is it simply more indepth reporting? We don't always get to agree with the news and issues in our community, but we should be informed about them, and some stories carry more weight with the community than others. I would agree it was a political attack if the editorial had anything to do with politics, but it didn't. It had to do with discussing criminal matter. I never even knew Morrison's political affiliation until the commentors on here brought it up, and I have kept up with the story.

I hope you all would agree on here that there's a HUGE difference between the Nat. Enq and a "respectable newspaper", like say the WSJ or NY Times or the Wash Post. Just because you don't like what someone put in a daily newspaper editorial doesn't make it incorrect or even un-respectable. It just means you live in the USA and can shout your disagreement from the rooftops, or the keyboard, if you like.

The Akron Reekin Urinal is exactly what the name implies! Michael Duoglas is best friends with the Dems in charge of the city and he panders to them every chance he gets. The ABJ is a joke. They can not even spell the word 'respectable'-let alone try to be a respectable newspaper. Soon the internet will bring an end to this rag-hopefully!

Shorty, you don't read well. No one is advocating that the ABJ not have free speech. The fact is exercising one's 1st amemdment rights does not automatically make one respectable. You also contradict yourself. Be a man and admit it. In one post you call an editorial "reporting of facts" and then turn around and admit it is an editorial and imply that we don't feel it has the right to state an opinion. This is not about rights, shorty. It is about responsibility. Again, this paper should not place itself in the position of being judge and jury. Again, you make our points but act like you are disagreeing with us. We all have the right to free speech, Shorty. Your problem is that you don't relize that free speech is not the topic here. Put on another record or unstick the needle.

shorty masters in missing the point, changing the subject, putting words in the mouths of others, contradicting himslef, rambling on paper, jumping from topic to topic without completeing a thought, talking in circles and back peddling all in one post. And yes, shorty you have the constitutional right to do all these things. It's called the right to be an idiot. And allow me to be the first to defend your right to idiocy.

For those who doubt Mendenhall being able to recall Akrons arrogant Mayor you may think twice about that. First Plusquallic never cheated, he just got the rules favored too keep others from beating him. His Election reform came after he already had a tiddy little sum in his War Chest (Campaign fund) which discourages others from wasting the money to try and beat him including Republicans who would love to run in a city full of many of the lower educated voters. Mendenhall, if he sets his strategy correctly would have a excellent opportunity to get rid of your ARROGANT Mayor. Since Plusquellic has been in office only a portion of Akron has had a choice because only Democrats have been voting in Primaries for him and the Republicans have been shut out in having a say in who controls the city. Add in Republican votes to what Finley started last election and Plusquellic is toast. I don't live in Akron nor does it appeal to me to live there because of the voting record but the thought of ousting Plusquellic seems quite appealing to someone from the outside. He is arrogant and a complete little Hitler who really should go. I would even consider helping Mr Mendenhall myself.

If Plusquellic wasn't worried about the recall he wouldn't be running to the other side trying to cut deals!!!!!! He's doing it now....

From Mr. Otis's letter:

"The reason I think this information should be out there is that the Akron Beacon Journal needs to stop dictating the outcome (as in the editorials, 'Father and son,' Dec. 12 and 'The University of Akron says nothing,' Dec. 31) and let the process play itself out.

We should all hope that we can have a fair and equitable system look at the facts, and then that will decide the outcome."

Another way of saying, "Let's all just sit back and see what happens and keep the claws in for now, shall we?"

The mayor isn't cutting deals with anyone. Stop being a liar.

Oh Jake, I see you'd rather attack me than answer some of the questions I posed regarding an editorial on a criminal investigation being a political witch hunt. Instead of debating the merits of the editorial as a personal attack on Morrison, as Mr. Otis sees it, you turn your opinions into a personal attack on me. Way to have an intelligent debate about the reasons behind the editorial and Otis' letter-just call me an idiot and proclaim yourself to know it all.

Otis said politics should not overshadow facts in this case, and I happen to think he's assuming too much about the newspaper and their decision to write about the investigation into Morrison. I do not see the editorial as a political attack, and I do not see the ABJ as having evil intentions about swaying this case and attacking Republicans. Those are my main points, but you'd rather call me stupid than debate the merits of Mr. Otis' assertion of this as a political attack. By going after me for supporting the paper's decision to cover an important issue to our community, you are in essence no better than the paper you denounce.
Have a nice day!

Shorty, I'm just expressing my freedom of speech. BTW, no one used the word witch hunt but you and no one is calling a partisan editorial a personal attack except you. As I said you ramble and keep changing your position. I believe I provided sufficient proof and data to prove that you are just foaming at the mouth. And I didn't call you stupid. I called you an idiot and I maintain that position.

Jake, why don't you go back and read what Mr. Otis really wrote? He implies in his letter that the ABJ is launching a personal political attack on Morrison.....I never accused you of calling it a witch hunt, I simply used a synonym for "personal attack". You have provided no such data to this comment site as you claim, and you still refuse to answer the questions I posed. Why is the editorial partisan? Would an editorial regarding a fraudulent Democrat on the UA board also be a partisan editorial, or do you reserve that charge for articles written only about Republicans? I keep trying to bring you around to an intelligent debate about the rights and responsibilities of a local newspaper to report/write on important community issues, and all you seem to want to do is attack me. My position hasn't changed, just like your ability to understand what I stated hasn't changed. But go ahead, keep calling me stupid and avoid answering the questions I asked, since that's all you seem capable of comprehending.
My point has always been that the ABJ has a right to write whatevre they want within reason (the limits of the law) and they SHOULD report on issues like this one. I believe Morrison's political affiliation has nothing to do with the ABJs presentation of this fraud case, which puts me in disagreement with Mr. Otis. Its got nothing to do with you, but you sure seem ready to attack whatever I state. Have fun with that!

BTW, don't be so quick to assume I should "be a man" or that I'm an idiot-I've already got more education than the average American, and I know a troll when I see one online.....but keep picking on me for having an educated opinion if it makes you feel better about yourself.
Name calling is really immature, Jake, but you do have that right, just as the ABJ has a right to print an editorial about a fraud case involving the board of our local university. Mr. Otis shared how he feels and why in a rational way, and I shared why I disagree with his assertions. All you've shared is your ability to attack others online who have opinions you don't like. Just because you don't agree doesn't make me an idiot or the ABJ a rotten paper-it just means you don't like what we have to say. Perhaps you should take your own advice and "be a man" instead of whining about how idiotic other people are.

I agree with you Shorty! Jake has a real problem with people saying bad things about his idol Mr. Morrison. I think that is his Daddy!!!! Jake is good at calling people names look at everyone of his responses.