Courtesy of today's Post-Gazette, we learn that the District Attorney is mulling charges in the great FOP press release hoax -- which led to a police raid we first reported on last month.

Coincidentally enough, just this week The New York Times carried a story on a similarly faked news release. Seems that some Internet pranksters issued a statement suggesting that the Koch brothers -- industrialists who have helped to bankroll much of the right-wing movement -- would fund climate-change awareness and research. 

The two cases are remarkably similar. The Koch release, like the hoax FOP statement, includes a trumped-up e-mail and other contact information. It falsely attributes direct quotes to company CEO Charles Koch.

And in both cases, media tumbled to the ruse very quickly, reporting the releases as a ruse -- rather than as a genuine change of position on behalf of either the FOP or the Kochs.  Times scribe Noam Cohen puts it this way:

As spoofs go, the fake Koch news release wasn't particularly spoofy. My colleague Tom Zerller Jr., who covers environmental issues, was among the reporters who immediately sussed out the release's bogusness, noting that its content was quite implausible ... His first reporting on the release was to note that it was a spoof, though he conceded the fake news 'might have caused some climate campaigners' hearts to flutter momentarily.'"

But there is one notable difference between the Koch case and the FOP matter. Koch Industries hasn't filed criminal charges but rather a civil lawsuit -- the legal remedy generally recommended by advocates of online freedom.  (The company is claiming damages that include the "costs associated with spending time and money to respond to inquiries about the fake release," and the effort necessary to investigate its origins.)

Even at that, the Times portray's the company response as heavy-handed. Cohen's article quotes a Harvard Law School professor arguing that, "There's no category of cases that is more clearly privileged than when you are using someone else's words as a way of criticizing." 

In fact, Cohen writes, because "parody is a well-protected form of free speech," the company "is resorting to an indirect legal theory in order to get private information" identifying the identity of the hoaxer. Rather than sue for defamation -- an offense that would invite First Amendment counterarguments -- the Kochs are alleging trademark abuse, hacking, and other commercial offenses. Those allegations "give the company the rationale for going after private information" kept by the Internet host used to post the release, Cohen writes. And that information, apparently, will be used to identify specific members of the group that has taken responsibility for the stunt, Youth for Climate Truth.

The lawyer representing the pranksters, Deepak Gupta, says similar actions are often filed just to unmask an anonymous accuser. Very often, cases are withdrawn once a hoaxer is identified. 

We'll see if the FOP hoaxers in Pittsburgh get off that easily. But really, if Koch Industries can handle a trumped-up press release through civil court -- where no one is threatened with jail time -- why isn't that good enough for the FOP? And a civil suit would have another benefit too: The FOP could spend its own money trying to settle scores, rather than carrying out a grudge on the taxpayer's dime.

Gonna bundle up a couple different races in this dispatch, with news from City Council Districts 3 and 9, as well as initial impressions of a new entrant in the county executive race. If that doesn't interest you, Dan Savage has some advice this week for married dudes who are bored with their sex lives, and lesbians who are ecstatic about theirs.

So, last night marked a "meet the candidates" night for Ward 16 committeefolk. That ward covers much of the hilltop communities in city council district 3 (though the event was held on Carson Street, in the South Side Flats). And its chair is none other than Jeff Koch, one of the three candidates challenging incumbent Bruce Kraus.

Koch has, by his own acknowledgment, been running a somewhat under-the-radar campaign, at least as far as voters are concerned. He appears to be much more focused on rounding up support for the party's endorsement: As he told the couple dozen people attending last night, "Right now, that is my main concern -- the Democratic endorsement."

Koch kept his own remarks fairly brief. Like Kraus' two other challengers, Koch faulted Kraus for what he portrayed as a divisive leadership style -- especially where quality-of-life issues in the Flats are concerned. Koch pledged to "rebuild some of the bridges that have been strained bewteen residents, some property owners, and restaurant owners."  He also intimated that he had some ideas for resolving parking pressures in the area, though he declined to discuss those last night. 

I hope to have more about those solutions -- and a full sit-down with Koch -- sometime soon. 

Neither of Kraus' other challengers were on hand to speak last night. But for his part, Kraus reiterated many of the legislative accomplishments he discussed in this space last week. And as in that discussion, he made no apologies for a "very hardline position" on the Carson Street bacchanalia. "Some might say that's acrimonious," Kraus allowed. "I say it's governing on a law-and-order basis." 

Kraus gave some signs of being in enemy territory last night -- this is Koch's committee, after all. But clearly, Kraus needs party support less than Koch does. Kraus won without the party's backing back in 2007.  Koch, who was then the sitting councilmember, after a special election in 2006 -- had the party's backing in both his previous runs for the seat.

Still, Kraus Koch has arguably missed a chance to press his advantage this time around. The ward he chairs has at least three vacant spots which, if filled, could have cast votes in the endorsement process. As ward chair, Koch could have recommended replacements -- and presumably padded his chances of carrying the endorsement. (Though final say rests with the party's county chair, Jim Burn, he usually defers to ward chairs in such cases, unless there are problems with residency or party registration.)

The deadline for Koch to pick fill-ins, however, expired Feb. 4. 

A number of other candidates also appeared at last night's event: including Rich Fitzgerald and Michael Lamb, who is running for city controller again -- and who told committeemembers that "Maybe the most compelling reason to support me is I don't have any opposition." 

But perhaps the strangest laugh came from Marc Daffner, who is running for Common Pleas Judge. Daffner introduced himself in part by saying he had one child "that I know of." I LOLed, as the kids say. But then it occurred to me that newly elected county judges typically end up presiding over cases in the Family Division. Not sure how well jokes about paternity go over there.  

---

Committee battles are also ongoing in city council district 9, where incumbent Ricky Burgess faces two challengers: Lucille Prater-Holiday and Phyllis Copeland-Mitchell. 

There's already been some outspoken support for Copeland-Mitchell from Ward 12. Chair Jacque Fielder sent out a Feb. 15 e-mail that simply read "PUT COUNCIL DISTRICT 9 'BACK ON TRACK' ELECT PHYLLIS COPELAND-MITCHELL."

Days before that, however, Fielder also sent out a somewhat puzzling e-mail to commitee members. It seems to suggest that Fielder doesn't want candidates soliciting committee members directly for their support -- a reading Fielder denies, as we'll see. 

The e-mail reads as follows:

PLEASE DIRECT ANY CANDIDATE TO ME THAT HAS CONTACTED YOU FOR SUPPORT.

I AM RECEIVING MESSAGES THAT CERTAIN CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES HADN'T RECEIVED RETURN CALLS FROM ME OR MY REPRESENTATIVE. THAT IS NOT TRUE.

I SPOKE DIRECTLY WITH RICKY BURGESS AND AGREED TO SIT DOWN WITH HIM. I ALSO SPOKE WITH OTHERS TO ARRANGE A MEETING WITH REV. BURGESS. SEVERAL MEETING REQUESTS HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE PAST BUT WERE NEVER CARRIED THROUGH ON REV. BURGESS OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE'S PART, NOT MINE.

NOT ONLY DID LINDA BEY-GRAHAM RETURN A CALL TO MS. PRATER-HOLIDAY, LET ME ASSURE YOU THAT I HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN TO MS. PRATER HOLIDAY AT ST. JAMES BAPTIST CHURCH ABOUT HER POSSIBLE RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL. I TOLD HER THAT I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS A GOOD IDEA FOR HER TO RUN BUT THAT IT HAD TO BE HER OWN DECISION. SHE WAS WELL AWARE OF THE 12TH WARD'S INTENTION CONCERNING CITY COUNCIL AND OUR SUPPORT OF HER CANDIDACY IF SHE DECIDED TO RUN. I TOLD HER THAT I COULDN'T SUPPORT HER AND I TOLD HER WHY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I WAS SHOCKED THAT SHE ENTERED THE RACE FOR CITY COUNCIL AFTER THE CHALLENGING INFORMATION THAT WAS DISCUSSED DURING OUR CONVERSATION. AS YOU ALREADY KNOW, MS. HOLIDAY HAS RAN FOR SEVERAL DIFFERENT OFFICES DURING DIFFERENT ELECTION SEASONS. UNFORTUANATELY, I AM NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT HER RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL-9 AT THIS TIME.

MS. PRATER-HOLIDAY AND I HAVE ALWAYS MAINTAINED A GOOD RELATIONSHIP IN THE PAST, AND I WISH HER THE BEST.

PLEASE BE AWARE OF CANDIDATES WHO ARE TRYING TO GET AROUND THE WARD CHAIR AND GOING STRAIGHT TO THE COMMITTEE PEOPLE. THIS IS ALWAYS DISRESPECTFUL TO THE COMMITTEE SINCE YOU ELECT THE WARD CHAIR TO REPRESENT YOU. TO THE NEW COMMITTEE PEOPLE, CANDIDATES SOMETIMES TRY TO MAKE YOU FEEL INTIMIDATED OR LIKE YOU CAN'T SPEAK FOR YOURSELF AND HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WARD CHAIR. THIS IS CALLED THE OLD "DIVIDE & CONQUER" GAME. THIS GAME IS PLAYED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BREAKING UNITY AND WEAKEN THE COMMITTEE. PLEASE BE POLITE TO ALL CANDIDATES, BUT DIRECT THEM TO ME SINCE YOU ARE NOT YET TRAINED IN THESE MATTERS. THE PHONE NUMBER IS BELOW. THANK YOU.

THERE IS STRENGTH IN OUR UNITY.

What's most striking about this -- at least to my eyes -- is that on the one hand, the e-mail seems to fault candidates who "make you feel ... like you can't speak for yourself and have to go through the ward chair." On the other hand, the first line of the e-mail seems to suggest ... that committee people insist on going through the ward chair. So does the last full-length paragraph there, which seems to warn committeefolk "of candidates who are trying to get around the ward chair and going straight to the committeepeople."

But Fielder says that's not the way it's intended at all. Asked by our very own Lauren Daley about whether she was trying to bar conversations with candidates, Fielder responded, "absolutely not. They speak with candidates all the time." 

Fielder says she sent the e-mail because she heard reports that candidates had complained that Fielder would not return their phone calls. And that is "not true," Fielder says.

---

Finally, this morning a new candidate saw another candidate entering the county executive race on the Republican side: D. Raja, a Mt. Lebanon businessman and current member of the township's board of commissioners.

Raja's entry as the third candidate for the GOP nomination was not unexpected. And at a Downtown gathering this morning, Raja positioned himselfaas a pro-business Republican. Raja runs an information-technology consulting firm, and says that what's keeping more such firms from setting down roots here is the county's "high taxes, aging infrastructure and inefficiencies." 

The talk was upbeat though, not surprisingly, short on specifics. Raja pledged to bring "fresh eyes" to government and to go beyond making "incremental changes." When asked afterwards what inefficiencies he'd be able to address, he cited "duplication of services" with the city.

"Part of the frustration," he added, is that while both the city's mayor and the county's executive are Democrats, "they have not accomplished the goal" of eliminating redundancies. 

Raja's speech urged that the county "make sure that Pennsylvania's newest industry, Marcellus Shale jobs, does not bypass Allegheny County. We need to make sure we address those environmental and safety issues so that these jobs can stay here." 

Afterwards, Raja told me that the county executive would "have to work with the state" on ensuring adequate environmental protections were in place for drilling to continue. Did he think current regulations and policing were adequate? "That's something we have to evaluate," he said. 

But there's lots of time for Raja to flesh out his views. His event was upbeat, and drew a mix of Indian Americans from the suburbs, business-suited GOP stalwarts, and a smattering of tech workers. He hails from Mt. Lebanon, which despite its reputation as a haven for cake-eaters has skewed Democratic. That suggest s he may have more appeal to moderates than, say, Tea Party candidate Patty Weaver.

And Raja has already racked up a big-name endorsement: state Senator John Pippy. 

You know, being an alt-weekly editor is all about presenting alternative points of view. And since Josie Dimon is being treated as the devil -- the paramedic most blamed for the death of Curtis Mitchell during "Snowmageddon" -- I'll be the devil's advocate.

Dimon does have her champions. But righteous anger seems like the more popular response to the news that an arbitrator says the city must give Dimon her job back. On a gut level, rage seems a perfectly understandable response.

But it shouldn't be the only one.

Disclosure: I claim no special expertise here. I've mostly followed the story as a reader. Which means I have no more, and no less, expertise than many of those calling for Dimon's head. 

And maybe I'm burned out. Years ago, I came to the conclusion that if you ever felt wanted justice for being mistreated by a public-safety worker, you better prepare for disappointment. It's very difficult, for example, to charge such people with crimes based on what they do "in the line of duty." Even if you fire them for misconduct, meanwhile, union arbitration rules often result in them getting hired back. Dimon's case is not unusual.

That's why when Mayor Luke Ravenstahl tried to fire Eugene Hlavac for an alleged act of domestic violence, I urged restraint -- even though Hlavac had been accused of similar behavior before.

Nor was I particularly surprised when Paul Abel was cleared by a court after he pistol-whipped an innocent guy who ended up shot by accident -- all while Abel was off-duty and out drinking.

Generally speaking, the only "justice" one gets in these matters comes from a legal settlement when somebody sues. That's how it was in Abel's case -- and I've gotta feeling that's how it will be in the death of Curtis Mitchell too. 

But Dimon's reinstatement, it seems, is generating much greater public outcry than most such cases. (Though some critics have also directed some ire directed at Abel, too.)

On the one hand, the stakes are much higher here: Somebody died.

On the other hand, somebody easily could have died in the Abel situation. And unlike Hlavac, Dimon's career prior to this incident seems relatively uncontroversial. Nor was Dimon the only person involved in the incident that led to her firing. Other ambulances also failed to come to Mitchell's door.

Dimon, of course, is the only person caught on tape using obscenity. And all the 9-1-1 personnel involved in Mitchell's case, only Dimon can be heard expressing the sentiment that "this ain't no cab service."

In fairness, however, Dimon isn't the only person who can be heard sounding indifferent to Mitchell's fate. During a prior recorded conversation also on the tape, you can dispatchers discussing the fact that, because of all the snow, they can't drive the ambulance to Mitchell's residence. And they, like Dimon, barely seem to contemplate the possibility of walking to his home.

"Oh well, he'll be fine," one says of Mitchell. 

"I hope so," the other replies. "If he's not, I mean, we did the best we could do."

Admittedly, Dimon's sentiments are expressed on a much different, more antagonistic, level. Listening to them, it's hard to imagining your own loved being taken care of by a paramedic who talks like that. 

But here's the thing: The doctors who treat the patients saved by paramedics? Not every word that comes out of their mouth ennobles the human spirit either. People in high-stress jobs sometimes sound like assholes, especially when talking to coworkers. Happily, most of us don't have those interactions recorded. 

Which raises another point. I think it's intriguing that Ravenstahl's office publicly released 9-1-1 tapes in the matter on March 24, just weeks after the incident. 

Compare that to the administration's handling of, say, its stonewalling about police actions during G-20. Or its ginger handling of the Jordan Miles incident, where despite early promises to release a report to the public, nothing has happened in more than a year.  

It's worth noting that in Pennsylvania, 9-1-1 tapes are not public records. Judges or other officials can release them if they decided "that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the interest in nondisclosure." But that's their call, and as far as I can tell, they are under no obligation to be consistent. (City Paper, for one, has had requests for tapes in unrelated matters -- but cases we'd argue are clearly in the public interest -- rejected.)

Could it be that administration officials were more willing to release material in this case ... because doing so could take the attention off their own sins? (Ravenstahl and his public safety director were, famously, out of town the night the storm struck, celebrating he mayor's birthday.) The case could be made.

I won't say Dimon is being made a scapegoat here. We generally think of "scapegoats" as being innocents. And Dimon was involved in the chain of events that led to Mitchell's death.

But is she bearing more than her share of the blame? That's a different question.

Just for the sake of argument: Let's assume that, as the arbitrator's report suggests more than once, Dimon has been a city employee for more than a decade, and has generally been a good one. And let's also assume that Dimon is telling the truth when she told her supervisors "[w]e physically walked calls both before and after this call."

If these things are true, can we judge her professional attitude by what a few seconds of tape? And if we set aside what she says on the tape, was her behavior any worse than that of other ambulance drivers who also didn't go to Mitchell's door? And hey -- at least all those paramedics were on the scene during a natural disaster. Not everyone in the chain of command can say the same. 

To some people, I realize, none of those arguments change the facts. For them, saying Dimon had a sterling career prior to Mitchell's death is like asking Mrs. Lincoln how she enjoyed the rest of the play. For them, Dimon should be treated purely on the basis of what she did, or failed to do. Nobody else's actions, or inactions, have any bearing on the question. You can't argue against a speeding ticket by pointing to how other people drive. And even if everyone else in this matter should be fired, that's not a reason for Dimon to keep her job. 

If that's your argument, OK. I've done my best devil's advocacy. We probably even agree that there is something deeply wrong with the arbitration process.

But such issues call for a broader conversation. And making Dimon the archfiend, it seems to me, here makes that conversation less likely.

Is Dimon being singled out? Sure feels like it. And maybe we ought to save some of our anger for a bigger fight.

Editor's note: With this edition of MP3 Monday, we welcome our new music intern, Bethie Girmai. She'll be holding down the fort on Mondays and adding to the music section this semester. Hooray!

Happy manic Monday, Pittsburgh!

If you’re looking for something to transform your Monday from manic to magical, check out Pittsburgh native Joy Ike’s new single, “Time.” The artist offers fans a new brand of mini-EP with the single. Ike produced "Time" in three tenses. "Time-past" is an acoustic ballad that rings with longing and nostalgia, while "Time-present’s" piano composition is more soft and feminine. But for your listening pleasure, today we have an mp3 of "Time-future," the last installment in a series of musical chapters. If you’re interested in Ike’s music, download the rest of the EP at Bandcamp … or read some of our past reviews of her work.

Scenic design is both the most concrete and often (except for maybe sound design) the least analyzed aspect of a stage play. But veteran designer Tony Ferrieri's work on Marcus; or The Secret of Sweet struck me as exceptional.

The play's a coming-of-age story set in the Louisiana bayou. City's thrust stage is set up mostly as a series of narrow boardwalks, backed by two stylized "houses": façade doorways, one accompanied by a set of stairs that rises to a little platform that serves mostly as Marcus' bedroom.

Ferrieri is possibly Pittsburgh's busiest set designer, a frequent contributor at City, Quantum Theatre and elsewhere, and this set makes it easy to see why. Though it's made almost entirely of unpainted wooden boards, it speaks volumes about playwright Tarell Alvin McCraney's theatrical world.

It's a play where the title character's growth has a lot to do with hidden pasts in his family and small town. The boardwalk, accordingly, curves its way just over top of the onstage pool of water the script calls for – a shallow mini bayou the play uses to symbolize a dream world, the past, or both. Ferrieri's boardwalk evokes this in such a way that you feel that the characters are always on the cusp of breaking through or tumbling into it (a warm-weather version of thin ice, perhaps).

More clever still are the stylized trees that loom upstage. These are silhouettes, but they too are made of those same boards, arrayed in short horizontal sections. This suggests a oneness of the natural world with both fencing and clapboard housing, which well suits McCraney's highly theatrical conception of dream sequences, quasi-Shakespearean monologues and characters who sometimes say their stage directions aloud (i.e., "Enter Terrell").

And oh, yes, the play is quite good, too.

The show's final performances are this weekend, concluding with the Sun., Feb. 13, matinee (www.citytheatrecompany.org).

Local filmmaker John Detwiler is set to premiere Pittsburgh Welcomes ..., a new take on the 2009 meeting of world leaders here that generated street protests, mass arrests and widespread curtailment of civil liberties.

You remember those wacky three days in September: What other event could have brought us both zero action on climate change (or any other important issue) and the ghost-town lock-down of half the Golden Triangle, with more out-of-town cops than you'll ever see again?

Fun times. We even got to experience that nifty "sonic cannon" police deployed -- from atop an armored vehicle on Bloomfield's Liberty Avenue, no less.

But remember, it was great publicity for Pittsburgh!

The screening is 6:30 p.m. Mon., Feb. 14, at Point Park's GRW Theater, located inside 414 Wood St., Downtown. The event is sponsored by the school's Cinema and Digital Arts program and the School of Communication Graduate Program.

The hour-long film comes recommended by veteran filmmaker and Point Park instructor John Rice.

When better than Valentine's Day, after all, to relive all those great G-20 memories?

Just learned of another screening, too. The Thomas Merton Center sponsors that one, at 7:30 p.m. Tue., Feb. 22, in the William Pitt Union (lower lounge), on Pitt's campus, in Oakland (www.thomasmertoncenter.org).

The Merton Center calls Pittsburgh Welcomes "[a] compelling, informative documentary set in our city about economic justice, global development, human rights, social protest, political power, and more."

The screening will be followed by a discussion with G-20 protest organizers and participants featured in the film, including Pete Shell (Thomas Merton Center Anti-War Committee) and Alan Hart (United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America), and Pitt students -- a bunch of whom were also arrested, many apparently just for being nearby during one of the Oakland protests.

For fans of all things John Fetterman, Sue Halpern's story on the mayor of Braddock is a must-read.

The story is online today in the New York Times Magazine. (The print edition will be available in the Sunday copy of the paper.) And when compared to the media coverage Fetterman has gotten elsewhere, Halpern's piece takes a more jaded view. (Full disclosure: Halpern interviewed me for this piece, though I'm not quoted in the story and -- as far as I can tell -- had very little impact on it.) 

Just for example, Halpern offers some not-unexpected criticism of that famous Levi's ad campaign:

Billboards with Braddock, Pa., along the bottom appeared in Times Square and across the country. They featured portraits of some of the finer-looking denizens of the town, like Dave Rosenstraus, whose company, Fossil Free Fuel, was the one new business in town (which recently spawned another, still with the same partners); Jack Samuel, a member of a straight-edge-vegan-punk-rock collective; and Deanne Dupree, whose boyfriend was the last homicide in town. They carried the affirming slogan "Everybody’s Work Is Equally Important," which had a touch of irony in a place where so many people cannot find jobs.  

The story notes that, for all the ink Fetterman has gotten for trying to bring artists and other pioneers to town,only two dozen have actually moved there. And some of them didn't know what they were getting into. One artist confesses to having been "a little blinded by the image of Braddock that has been portrayed by the media, that all this place is is an artist’s compound." Another couple, meanwhile, has spent $60,000 trying to rehabilitate a home they paid $5,000 for. They are now broke, and purchased a shotgun "because it is more intimidating than a handgun."

Some native Braddockers sound disillusioned as well. Of one longtime resident bemused by Fetterman's initiatives, Halpern writes:

Nothing that was happening in Braddock -- not the green roof on the old furniture store, not the screen printing studio run by members of a socially-conscious arts collective, not beehives, not the Shepard Fairey art installation on a nearby wall, not the Levi’s ad campaign -- has changed the most essential facts of his life: he is poor and without prospects. 

Some of these complaints aren't new. City Paper itself has reported on some of the discontent among residents. And when UPMC shut down Braddock Hospital, Fetterman has sometimes ended up squabbling with those trying to save it.

Even the glowing media coverage has been a double-edged sword. Magazines like Rolling Stone sometimes seem to bulid Fetterman up by tearing Braddock down -- by referring to him as the "Mayor Of Hell," for example. That coverage ain't Fetterman's fault, of course. But you can't blame residents for, as Halpern puts it, "resent[ing] that one man's vision is represented as their collective vision" -- even if that man's vision is genuinely doing some good. 

In fact, one interesting, and previously underreported, aspect of Halpern's piece is its implication that Fetterman has created his own pseudo-government. Fetterman has long been at odds with Braddock's borough council -- which holds most of the actual decision-making authority. And so, Halpern writes:

Fetterman built a back door -- he started a nonprofit organization called Braddock Redux, financed until recently primarily by family money. (His father is its largest individual donor.)

... By heading a nonprofit that is a major property owner, the mayor was able to advance what he calls his "social-justice agenda" without having much political power, or the burden of it, either. 

And I have to note this irony: Halpern characterizes Fetterman's experiments as "a sampling of urban renewal trends" ... including "championing the creative class to bring new energy to old places (an approach popularized by Richard Florida)." Take it from me, the guy who Fetterman once accused of writing a "slobbering rim job" about Florida ... this ain't exactly the company Fetterman would choose to be identified with.

In the end, though, Halpern's piece reads less as an attack on Fetterman, than as an attempt to question some of the adulation he receieves.

Braddock as a brand -- as a vision, or a viral idea -- has been a tremendous success. The Levi's campaign is just one example. At least in the national mindset, Fetterman has remade its image completely: Instead of a decaying steel town nobody cares about, it has assumed a role in the national consciousness far out of proportion to its size. But while Braddock's image has been reborn, the reality is proving far more stubborn.

Halpern's piece begins with Fetterman receiving ovations at a forum to discuss "how ideas can change the world." The story ends by showing how vacuous that kind of rhetoric can be. Braddock needs more than ideas, or brash "pioneers." It needs more money than Fetterman can bring. Its people need jobs and investment, as well as government officials at every level willing to help put the town back on its feet. 

But if Braddock ain't living up to its celebrity profile, that isn't Fetterman's fault. Nothing in Halpern's story makes me think he isn't trying his damndest. Really, you can only fault Fetterman if you assume one guy -- hamstrung by century-old governmental institutions and decades-old economic neglect -- can remake a community overnight.

The fault, if there's any to lay here, lies precisely with those of us who do make that assumption. Those who want to believe a guy like John Fetterman can pull off a miracle -- so the rest of us won't have to bother. 

Five years ago, when Bruce Kraus first ran for city council in a special election to replace Gene Ricciardi, I often felt he was campaigning by saying as little as possible. During one interview, I recall, he objected to my use of the phrase "bully pulpit" -- because he thought the word "bully" had negative connotations. 

Things have changed since then. Kraus lost that race, but won a regular election the following year. And now, three years into that term and facing re-election, no one can fault him for not speaking his mind. 

"Love me or hate me, no one will ever accuse me of not taking a position," he says. 

Indeed, Kraus now faces three rivals. And two of them, Gavin Robb and Jason Phillips, have complained already that he's been too divisive, that his strong advocacy has contributed to a communication breakdown among city leadership.

On one level, Kraus acknolwedges that he is "an independent voice, and I relish that independence." That stand has often put him at odds with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl. Even so, he says, "Part of the role we have as councilors is to advocate for our neighborhoods. So when I see things that aren't in the best interest of my constitutents, do I speak up? Yes, I do."

Moreover, Kraus can point to a series of accomplishments on council.

Kraus has been a core member of a council majority -- which includes Bill Pedtuo, Doug Shields, Natalia Rudiak, and president Darlene Harris -- that often lines up against the mayor. But that majority hasn't just sought to thwart Ravensthal's agenda; it's successfully pushed an agenda of its own.

Citywide, Kraus helped press the case for a campaign finance reform law, which limits the size of campaign contributions to city office-seekers. He also joined with the council majority to pass a prevailing-wage bill applying to grocery, hotel, and other workers whose employers get local tax subsidies. He's backed a citywide ban on drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale, and a measure requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms. 

Kraus says more than a third of the shootings that take place in the county happen in the poorer "hilltop" communities of his district. "It was huge for this council to take a public stand" in the face of opposition for gun-rights groups, he says.  (Though he stresses his own position was not about curtailing those rights, but insisting on "responsible gun ownership.")

Some of these measures may be more effective than others. As we've previously reported, for example, the gun ordinance has yet to be used by police. Kraus' opponents, meanwhile, seem likely to try tarring him with the council majority's less-than-inspiring performance on another issue -- financing the city's depleted pension fund. Council, which rejected Ravenstahl's plan to fund the pension with proceeds from leasing city parking garages, came up with its own solution: Fund the pension with a promise to devote future tax revenues to it. Essentially, council's plan is the equivalent of writing an IOU, and hoping the state will accept it as a cashier's check.

It remains to be seen if the plan will work -- and in any case, council's effort involved a series of 11th-hour machinations that ended only hours before a state-imposed deadline on New Year's Eve. But Kraus -- who notes that he played a comparatively quiet role in that debate -- bridles at criticism of council's handling of this issue.

"What you saw was a council that was dotting it's i's and crossing the t's to make sure what we were doign was 100 percent responsible," he says.

But ... wouldn't the responsible thing have been to complete all that due diligence before the final days of 2010? 

"It's an imperfect world," Kraus acknowledges. But he says his rivals have little grounds for criticism: "We had 19 public meetings on the pension issue, and there was ample opportunity to e-mail or call in to the offices of city council. Neither of the [rival candidates] you've talked to chose to do that." 

On the neighborhood level, Kraus also touts a series of initiatives, including a satellite office in Arlington to address neighborhood concerns. And new initiatives will be bearing fruit in the months ahead, he says -- like a "spray park" for summer use at the Warrington Recreation Center, and an off-leash area for dogs in the South Side's Riverfront park. 

But the issue getting all the attention, of course, is Kraus' ongong effort to clean up the Carson Street bar scene. 

Kraus has pursued a variety of solutions, including passing an ordinance prohibiting public urination and defaction -- and adding a seperate fine for those who "fail to clean or remove the material deposited immediately." 

It's not clear what impact such measures have had -- Kraus was unsure about whether anyone has been cited under the urination/defecation ordinance since the measure was passed in 2009. But at the very least, he says, "The positions I've taken have sparked a broader conversation about responsible behavior in the public space." 

And while rival Gavin Robb acknowledges not having a "silver bullet" to solve the problem,  Kraus boasts "I do have a silver bullet" -- and tosses a copy of an 88-page 2009 proposal onto the table.

Titled "Inviting, Safe and Cohesive," the document makes a host of recommendations, ranging from disount "sleep it off" rates for drunken partiers at area hotels to Breathalyzers in bars, police "party patrols," and the creation of a "community covenant" that bars and other businesses will agree to, in consultation with residents.

Kraus plans to continue pushing that initiative. Nor is he cowed by facing no less than three challengers in the May primary. His predeccessor, Gene Ricciardi, once gave him a bit of advice, he says: "Gene told me that if you aren't making a wave or two, you aren't doing your job." 

Late word here in the music department is that Titus Andronicus, the well-thought-of rock/punk/indie band with singalong choruses and Civil War imagery galore, is playing this Sunday night (Feb. 13) in a show put on by the CMU Activities Board. I thought I'd let you know that. Because The Monitor was one of the more acclaimed albums of 2010, and because what the hell else are you doing on Sunday night? The Super Bowl happened last week.

The show starts at 8 p.m. and takes place at the Rangos Ballroom, which is in the University Center, which is that big long building to the left of the cut if you're looking from Forbes Ave. right in front of that sculpture with the people climbing the big pole. If you can't find it, ask somebody. They won't bite. Probably.

I joined this morning's press preview of America's Best Weekly: A Century of the Pittsburgh Courier, which opens to the public Friday at the Heinz History Center. Much of it wasn't installed yet, but a tour led by curator Sam Black suggests the show will provide plenty for folks interested in African-American history inside Pittsburgh and out, and amateur historians and newbies alike.

The show grew from a 2005 meeting between Black, the Center's curator of African-American Collections, and representatives of The New Pittsburgh Courier, corporate descendant of the original, who wanted help managing the publication's archive. 

The exhibit on the pioneering African-American newspaper covers some familiar territory, including its crusading role in the anti-lynching campaign and the civil-rights movement, and other aspects of its national reach. 

But America's Best Weekly also touches on such little-remembered episodes as the paper's coverage of the Ethiopian-Italian War, in the 1930s: The paper sent a correspondent, with some resultant growth in pan-African solidarity. There's also a display about the paper's backing of Republican Wendell Wilkie for president, in 1940, against FDR.

Notable artifacts include a large-scale reproduction of photo of a 1920 Ku Klux Klan march ... in Wilkinsburg. The sports display boasts a pair of Joe Louis's boxing gloves -- from his 1936 fight with Max Schmeling, the one Louis lost. (Louis's Courier connections frequently brought him to Pittsburgh.)

Still, among displays available for preview, the most fascinating for me was the paper's oldest extant front page. Vol. 46 of the Courier ("Five Cents"), from late 1910, wasn't the paper's first. But its headlines speak eloquently of both another time and the paper's origins among members of middle-class black social clubs (folks like co-founder Earl Harlston, a former funeral-home owner who moved here from Atlantic City).

Headlines like "Young Lawyer's Fine Record," "Presbyterian Council Meets" and "Current Topics in Washington / Lively interest taken in many matters of public importance / Social scene approaching" stand next to "Atlanta, GA Whites Attempt to Restrict Colored Persons to Certain District."

And the motto on No. 46's masthead (in the years before the famous and proud "America's Best Weekly" slogan) might have been penned by Booker T. Washington: "Work, Integrity, Tact, Temperance, Prudence, Courage, Faith."