Democracy is messy CPAC

So here's the thing. I'm not trying to defend Michael James for what he said that was deemed offensive to women at the latest meeting of the Central Project Area Committee.
I'll let him do that.
For those who don't know the story, James, a former member of CPAC and a critic of lots of things, was essentially kicked out of a recent meeting of the group that advises on how Redevelopment Agency money is spent.
CPAC is now considering whether and how to condemn James and his comments.
The group's leadership has made no secret it doesn't want to see James again. He can be disruptive, combative and flamboyant. He is seen as someone who distracts the committee from its mission.
But here's the thing. James was on his way to making a valid point in a discussion about how to properly memorialize the late Bob Lee, a CPAC member who James says was his friend.
James says those who oppose him jumped on him before he had even finished his opening remarks.
"What everyone assumed I was saying was wrong," he said.
Here's when things went sideways.
James' first line out of the box was, "Now, I have nothing against women ..."
James says that's when everyone jumped on him.
Now, it's several days later and James may be "remembering with advantages" as Shakespeare called it. But he insists he wasn't making a point about gender at all but one about artistic merit and media.
He says his comments were going to be, "Now, I have nothing against women designers and men designers who reach out and try to reach out and work in a new medium."
CPAC is considering memorializing Lee with a commissioned bench at a bus stop.
James thinks that's ludicrous, in part because Lee never used public transportation and was a major opponent of the Blue Line on Long Beach Boulevard, where Lee owned property.
As James said at the meeting, memorializing Lee with a bus bench "Is like putting a memorial at sea for a guy who never owned a sailboat."
James wanted to create a sculpture of one of Lee's beloved Cadillacs, rather than the painting of the bench by an artist, in this case a female artist.
Once the catcalls began, and chairman Annie Greenfield chastized him and city employee David White threatened to leave the situation devolved and James dug himself deeper into a hole when he talked about women being unable to design cars, and so forth.
But the tumult raises interesting questions about freedom of speech, propriety and the democratic process.
There's no doubt that James can be disruptive and distracting to some of the work the city and CPAC consider. He is like Albert poking the lion.
In the aftermath of the CPAC uproar, James says his boss told him to let it go and remain quiet. But James doesn't do quiet well.
So, here's the thing. Aren't the Michael Jameses of the world, lack of sensitivity and occasional boorishness notwithstanding, part of what democracy is about? Isn't it about the exchange of ideas?
Sure sometimes it's rowdy and bawdy and confrontational and even hurtful. But that can lead to good things. That's the whole point.
Sure, Michael James may turn over the cart and mess up people's hair. But sometimes he is making good and valid points.
Carol McCaferty, an activist and former CPAC member, said she left the group because she was tired of it "rubber stamping" city staff proposed projects, much of which she thought was subpar.
One CPAC member at the meeting suggested the group should separate the man from the message, saying he thought James idea was valid, but that was quickly dismissed.
In the aftermath of James' outburst, CPAC Chairwoman Annie Greenfield took the Press-Telegram to task.
"The story should not have been about inappropriate comments of one person - it should have been a positive story about how neighborhood people work, with Redevelopment staff, and are committed to making Long Beach a better place to live."
So, here's the thing. Love them, hate them. Agree, disagree. Democracy isn't meant to be orderly and kempt. It's messy. It was born from passion and revolution. Certainly there's a line between being politic and being boorish. Absolutely there needs to be a balance between conformity and anarchy.
Was Michael James inappropirate? Probably. Unfortunately, his worthy point got lost in the froth.