Time to Take a Stand
I try to live according to a philosophy embodied in
two old sayings: “Live and let live,” and “Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you.” When someone attacks me, I usually turn the other cheek.
There are times, however, when something must be said, and this is one such
occasion For some considerable time now, Harry McGee,
president of National-Roses-Canada, which he organized to compete with the
CRS, has published numerous criticisms of the Canadian Rose Society in his
group’s newsletter, for which he also writes and edits. At one time the
editor of a CRS publication and a CRS member, Harry resigned in 1995 largely
because his personal opinions weren’t always accepted as gospel. Since then,
at N-R-C, he has gleefully reported on CRS problems, both real and imagined,
in his newsletter, always with just a grain of truth, and always with a spin
that distorts the truth and places the CRS and its people in the worst
possible light Harry’s latest diatribe appears in the September
2004 issue of his newsletter, entitled “Lucy, Charlie, & Humpty Dumpty.”
The article distorts much of recent CRS history, but I wish to point out just
one single example, among very many in the article, of Harry’s unique style,
in order to illustrate his approach. He writes “As for [the CRS’s] new
bi-monthly publication [the CommPoster], the fresh new editor was relieved after
only two issues, and following publication of an item by a contributor that
criticized CRS’s preoccupation with rose shows... Whereas reform was briefly
evident, it has been lost. Control is where it always was. Plus ça change!” The
“fresh new editor” in question, Richard Mitchener, responds: “I resigned from
being editor of the CommPoster for
my own personal reasons, despite urging from CRS board members to stay on. No
one asked me to resign, and no one ever spoke to me of any objection to |
|
my
printing a letter to the editor suggesting that knowledge about growing roses
is as important as showing them. This person is obviously implying that I was ousted, and that’s a false representation. “No
one from National-Roses-Canada ever asked me what happened or ever tried to
confirm what they wrote about me. The first rule of ethics
in professional editing is to confirm that facts, and especially accusations,
are true. I was involved in the CRS Revitalization Committee
for a long while and know something of the good things that have been going
on. This person is skewing things quite a bit. One would almost think he has
a serious private agenda, writing the way he does.” Richard later added,
“People who try to make themselves look good by vilifying others usually have
their own problems.” Harry McGee should realize that working together in harmony, in common purpose, is far better than deliberately trying to create division and hostility. By his calling a simple CRS vote an “inevitable contest for control” and a respected past president of the World Federation of Rose Societies “a confirmed establishment maven,” he demonstrates only meanness, and clearly indicates the level to which he has slid. Is this the kind of person that should be president of a “national” organization? (By the way, do N-R-C members ever vote for board members or officers? Wouldn’t that be a “contest for control”?) Certainly, when I was elected president of the CRS, there indeed were problems and shortcomings. Problems exist in any organization that has people in it! But CRS members and others have been working toward solving the problems, and it’s obvious that things are very different from conditions of 10 or 20 years ago, and even last year at this time. ……Continued on Pg3 |