Councilman Mike Kennedy
Dear Newsletter Readers,
It’s been a busy week, with the governor, legislators and congressmen in town, and some important citizen rights issues in question. I see in this morning’s Press that the Idaho Attorney General has decided the identities of citizens bringing questions to their legislators are protected information. That’s a relief for everyone advocating for responsible government!
Below you will find my column from the CdA Press yesterday. (It’s now a once-a-month offering, since the downturn and cutbacks) Yes, it is a straightforward and somewhat bold piece, but someone had to say it. I took care to only reference the official behavior of our elected or appointed leaders in their official capacities. These are not statements about their personal lives or choices. As citizens of this community, we deserve to have a respectful, responsible government. Any attempts by our officials to limit citizen voices is wrong.
I hope you have a great weekend and enjoy the beginning signs of Spring.
Go Zags! –Mary Souza, March 21, 2009
*****************************
Fear Factor, part one
Intimidation in this town has got to stop! I’ve heard stories galore detailing the long history of harassment and cronyism in this city, and it is well past time for these deplorable methods to end.
The latest example is Charlie Nipp of LCDC condemning Senator Mike Jorgenson for representing the concerns of taxpayers. Mr. Nipp threatened legal action because the senator asked the Attorney General’s office if state disclosure laws were being followed properly. The AG found reason to investigate and concluded there were indeed violations of the law by Mr. Nipp, but not to a criminal extent.
Mr. Nipp did not apologize for his failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest, nor did he acknowledge the public’s right to question those who handle taxpayer money. Charlie Nipp chose, instead, to denigrate Sen.Jorgenson and hunt down anyone who asked about these matters. Charlie wants a list. Unspoken message to community: Don’t even think about questioning the LCDC!
At the first meeting of the Coeur d’Alene City Council after the AG’s opinion, I respectfully asked the mayor and council to call for Mr. Nipp’s resignation. My request was based on the AG’s findings as well as the fact that Mr. Nipp, though fully informed, did not file any disclosures required by law for almost 10 years as Chairman of LCDC. Another citizen, Jim Brannon, spoke publicly to ask for more diligent council oversight of the board.
From their perch, high above the audience, the city council had no comments while I was standing at the podium. It wasn’t until I sat down and could no longer respond, that they started to attack citizens, by name, for speaking out. Councilman Ron Edinger sarcastically reprimanded us, saying we were “out of place”. Councilwoman Goodlander accused us of “character assassination”, though no one had said a word against Mr. Nipp’s character. Meanwhile, the mayor and council neglected to do their job. They never discussed the AG’s report, Mr. Nipp’s decade without disclosures or their responsibility to supervise the LCDC. Not a word. Unspoken message to community: Don’t even think about questioning the LCDC!
Two days later, at a public meeting in City Hall, long time community advocate, Susie Snedaker was verbally accosted by Councilman Mike Kennedy. He angrily demanded to know who she is friends with, who she’s been talking to and what “group” might be organizing. Mike chastised her for challenging the city and said the council doesn’t appreciate her testimony at their meetings. Susie called me later that evening, still shaking with shock and disbelief.
I understood her reaction because Councilman Kennedy did something similar to me. It was at a public forum on LCDC, about a year ago. Mr. Kennedy charged up, coming way too close, then loudly berated me for a comment I had written. His face was red and his neck veins were bulging. He was so incensed that, as a former critical care nurse, I was mentally reviewing the protocols for CPR.
Mike Kennedy works full-time for Steve Meyer, who is Charlie Nipp’s partner in another business, a large real estate development company. Mr. Kennedy has an important job to protect–his own. Unspoken message to community: Don’t even think about questioning the LCDC!
LCDC has given taxpayer dollars to many of our community’s organizations, thereby ensuring their allegiance. The Chamber, Library, Kroc Center, School District and NIC have all received money, or commitments of such, from LCDC. Now they can’t or won’t speak out.
Here’s my loudly stated message to the City and LCDC: People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing. Please start treating citizens with respect, answer our questions, listen to our ideas, ask for our vote, follow the laws and handle our money with transparency. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, “When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory.”
What will happen (as a continuation of what has happened) are attacks on the messenger, friends associates and perceived allies of the messenger and denials that the events reported actually happened. In essence the Inside Connection will unleash the Dogs of War. This column hits too hard, is too honest and too forthright to be ignored, therefore it must be destroyed. Beware incoming fire!
Comment by Pariah — March 21, 2009 @ 11:44 am
Yes, the personal attacks are going. That’s why I moved this topic over here, to OpenCdA, where we can filter out any nasty comments. The subject of intimidation of citizens by government officials is a serious problem. Their mud flinging is an attempt to avoid responsibility for the officials’ behavior and diverts attention away from their misdeeds.
Comment by mary — March 21, 2009 @ 2:54 pm
I see where someone posted in the Press comment section using my moniker from here. Now that is desperation. The SR is losing more of its core long term reporters. HBO can no longer link to CdA Press content and offers now offers little Idaho news. It seems that the wheels are loosened and may come off sooner rather than later. There was an coordinated effort made to tarry up the comments on Mary’s editorial no doubt by HBO folks, perhaps even DFO himself.
I can here the dominoes clicking as they start to fall.
Comment by Wallypog — March 21, 2009 @ 3:52 pm
the sic-o-phants are out in force that is for sure.
Comment by TheWiz — March 21, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
I love the big banner on the front of the SR building saying something to the fact of IDAHO’s PAPER. I dont remember word for word because I start laughing uncontrolably when I start to read it and need to concentrate on driving!
Comment by concerned citizen — March 21, 2009 @ 5:19 pm
I am pleasantly surprised! Jorgenson obviously packs some muster.
It is known that within abusive relatioships when the abused leave the abuser it becomes a very volatile time. This is that time.
Nipp has lost face. His attorney may choose to sue or not. Doesn’t matter. Either way, the abused have won. This is a beautiful thing. Watch for fireworks, but be wary of the duds.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 21, 2009 @ 5:38 pm
From the Attorney General’s news release: ” ‘Our investigation revealed that Mr. Nipp’s conduct, while constituting a technical violation of the statutes, does not rise to the level of a prosecutable crime,’ Deputy Attorney General Stephen Bywater wrote in a letter to Mr. McHugh.”
How do one or more private citizens presumably without access to anything more than public documents uncover evidence of “…conduct,…constituting a technical violation of the statutes,…” sufficient to inspire the Attorney General’s investigation, yet that same evidence eluded the oversight that the Coeur d’Alene Mayor and City Council and the LCDC’s auditors are supposed to be exercising?
Comment by Bill — March 22, 2009 @ 9:08 am
Rhetorical…right Bill!
An answer to Marys excellent column in todays paper. The writer is probably a real person, but the letter is so CDA council…LCDC that one wonders who actually composed it. Either the letter writer is living on some fluffy cloud in never never land or is blind. But there is a serious side. People such as this vote and they haven’t a clue as to who or what they are actually voting for. Depressing.
Now Mary and Dan, you must stop making up these stories about our sterling leaders. After reading this commentary in todays paper, I came to realize that I have moved to Nirvanna or Shangrila. That the leaders are totally altruistic and benign and only care about what is best for their subjects.
Have they never heard of revolution??
Comment by Faringdon — March 22, 2009 @ 10:43 am
Can you smell their fear? It’s palpable.
Comment by Dan — March 22, 2009 @ 11:55 am
Faringdon,
Were you talking about the letter by Renee Abbey?
If so…
Yes, Dan. Shame on you and Mary and Jim Brannon and Jerry Weaver and Joe Kunka and Wayne Frisbie and Susie Snedaker and Anita Banta and Chris Patterson for having the audacity to try and work within our systems of laws and elections to achieve change in the community. You should do it the way our mayor, city administrator, and council do it: visits and disparaging letters to critics’ employers and conducting meetings over the telephone and in secret.
Comment by Bill — March 22, 2009 @ 12:36 pm
Yes, Bill, when did speaking out for people’s rights become a horrible thing? Are we now to be painted as “unpatriotic” because we want the laws to be followed and the intimidation to stop? The absurdity is clear and citizens of North Idaho can see through it; people are not dumb, even though some of our city leaders treat them as such.
Comment by mary — March 22, 2009 @ 1:04 pm
Another rhetorical question, right Bill? 🙂
Yes Renee baby is the letter writer. And honestly, I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry at that letter. Do I laugh at the absurdity or do I cry at the delusional stupidity. Has Renee never heard of the right to work for change. In this case, much needed change. Does she not understand that a citizen has the right to run for office and the right to tell the truth. Does she not understand that a citizen has the right to question elected official who dispense tax dollars. Does she not understand the fallacy of following in lockstep with the incumbant council. Does she not understand that ultimately, in doing so, she will fall off the cliff.
Note to Renee; just as you had a right to write that absurd letter that demonstrated you lack of knowledge, so do other have the right to try and inform you, all the while suffering the outrageous slings and arrows of the outrageous groups you defend. To say nothing of the petty retribution from this lot. Oo0ps…there goes Renee, floating away on her cloud.
Comment by Faringdon — March 22, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
Someone just sent me a comment from a different blog, that Spokane one, on which the question was asked about the AG’s decision to keep confidential the identities of citizens bringing questions to their legislators. Here’s the comment:
JamesBond on March 21 at 3:22 p.m.
I don’t know enough about the specifics to comment on the attorney-client privilege aspect, but clearly, legislators are the clients of the attorney general, so the basis exists for it and it is certainly not something new.
However, what concerns me the most is that we have a man who sits on a quasi-governmental board who is clearly seeking to chill and maybe even punish in some way citizens who exercise their rights to pursue grievances against the government. That is plain scary.
These quasi-governmental districts and boards that get to play with tax money and credit ratings and other governmental tools of finance need to be held accountable. The private sector people that get on them have a very odd view of their role. They want no oversight. They always claim no tax dollars are ever at stake. It’s like they just magically make money and magically come up all these other benefits. It’s a wonder they don’t just do what they do like any other private sector person, except without all the government advantages they get. Crap, to here them sell their various and sundry proposals the way they always do, they are always fantastic ideas, demanded by the market, and are 100% guaranteed to never, ever result in anything bad! Why do we need them!?!?! Just let the market work it’s magic!!!!
Nipp needs to move on with his life.
Comment by mary — March 22, 2009 @ 2:18 pm
Either the letter writer is living on some fluffy cloud in never never land or is blind. …delusional stupidity.
can’t they just be expressing a different opinion? don’t they have that right without being ‘blind’ or ‘stupid’?
Comment by reagan — March 22, 2009 @ 2:31 pm
can’t they just be expressing a different opinion?
they did, it was just clearly uninformed and blind and stupid. opinions are just that, the facts are clear – nipp broke the law, for a decade. he then lashed out at those who called him on it. poor renee just does not get it.
Comment by TheWiz — March 22, 2009 @ 3:36 pm
It was an either-or question, reagan. Obviously if they’re not blind or stupid, then they’re living on a fluffy cloud. I thought that was clear. 😉
Comment by Dan — March 22, 2009 @ 3:37 pm
Faringdon,
No, it really wasn’t a rhetorical question. I had seen only the online version of the Sunday Press. Her letter was online, but occasionally some of the guest op-ed pieces do not appear online for a while if at all. I just wanted to make sure any readers here associated my response with what I had read, her letter.
Comment by Bill — March 22, 2009 @ 3:49 pm
they did, it was just clearly uninformed and blind and stupid. thewiz
Obviously if they’re not blind or stupid, then they’re living on a fluffy cloud. dan
nice to know that this is a site unlike the press or spokesman where people have ‘rational discussions,’ btw, does anyone know how to spell hypocrisy?
Comment by reagan — March 22, 2009 @ 5:03 pm
One of my Newsletter readers emailed this quote from American patriot Patrick Henry (1736-1799), who said:
The reader went on to say that maybe LCDC and the Mayor should study those important words.
Comment by mary — March 22, 2009 @ 6:23 pm
Sorry Bill, I didn’t mean Renees letter. My mind was back on a previous post. I was chuckling on another of your sharp wit bon mots.
Comment by Faringdon — March 23, 2009 @ 8:51 am
“His face was red and his neck veins were bulging. He was so incensed that, as a former critical care nurse, I was mentally reviewing the protocols for CPR.”
Now that’s respectful, responsible dialogue.
Comment by samtaylor — March 25, 2009 @ 7:09 am
Sam, Welcome! Glad you want to be part of our conversation. As a writer yourself, I know you try to communicate by using words that will describe a situation clearly for your readers. That’s what I did when I described Mr. Kennedy’s physical response to his emotion. It was a way that I, as a writer, could communicate the level of intensity Mr. Kennedy exhibited while minimizing any personal judgment.
If I had written something like, “He was acting like a jerk”, or “He was a bully”, those would be much more personal. Instead, I described the changes I saw in his body. And, yes, I was actually getting ready to do CPR on the guy because he looked like he was going to have a stroke or heart attack.
Sam, Do you think our elected officials should be responsible for the way they treat others at public meetings?
Comment by mary — March 25, 2009 @ 8:50 am
As someone who’s seen Mr. Kennedy’s tea kettle boil over a few times, I must say that Mary’s description was apt.
Comment by Dan — March 25, 2009 @ 9:02 am
I was actually getting ready to do CPR on the guy because he looked like he was going to have a stroke or heart attack.Comment by mary — March 25, 2009 @ 8:50 am
Almost,everything the CDA city council or LCDC does, almost gives me a stroke or heart attack.
Comment by kageman — March 25, 2009 @ 11:04 am
sam taylor and reagan both seem to think that criticism isn’t responsible. how odd. and their style is very much the same. how odd.
Comment by TheWiz — March 25, 2009 @ 4:47 pm
Oh lord, Wiz, I’m not even going to bother with accusations of having another identity. I put my name on my posts for a reason. I’m not shy when it comes to asking questions. It’s what I do for a living and I enjoy in engaging in conversation and asking those questions.
Mary is a public figure just as much as anyone on the Cd’A City Council and so I think it’s only fair to ask questions. If anyone, Mary might be MORE of a public figure, considering none of the council members have a (now) monthly column in the only newspaper in the city, plus another newsletter, etc.
Mary – as to your very last question – I would of course cover what happened at a meeting and leave it up to the public to decide whether or not the conduct was inappropriate, etc. I let people do that by giving them the info and they then have the opportunity to contact their officials, comment on what I write or issue their opinion at the ballot box. For me, what an official says or does is a happening I relay to others.
Honestly, I totally agree your writing very-well conveyed what you wanted it to. It was quite descriptive and I had a very clear vision for what you were trying to achieve for the words.
Of course, we have to take you at your word, and I personally believe that, as a fellow writer you have sort of hurt your credibility in terms of being transparent and honest. You welcomed me here, but if you recall, I’ve been here before. That was to specifically ask you if you tape recorded Christie Wood without her permission. You refuse to answer that question, but it seems clear that occurred. That is why I don’t fully believe the things you write, because you haven’t been up front with people. That not only hurts you, by the way, it hurts everyone in the newspaper profession, who already have a bad rap from the public, generally due to the actions of large, national media, and most especially in the broadcast field (24-hour news networks).
So I hope you understand where I’m coming from with my remarks. You call for respectful dialogue but your words are intense and so I guess my question is if you really think they help your argument in the article itself or if they help with your overall cause. Are you not simply burning more bridges than you’re building?
I do appreciate the dialogue here. That’s why I posted before. I do hope you’ll some day have the gumption to answer a very easy question regarding the recording of Christie Wood (which, of course, isn’t a violation of Idaho law but is dubious ethically and no journalist should be doing anything but asking for permission. I’d wager she would have given that permission. Most people do.)
Comment by samtaylor — March 25, 2009 @ 7:52 pm
Oh lord, Wiz, I’m not even going to bother with accusations of having another identity.
sure but you will keep trying to beat a dead horse wont you? by the way, why wont you bother? the truth hurts? you outed yourself here sammy, accept that or deny it. remember, ip addresses are recorded.
Comment by TheWiz — March 25, 2009 @ 9:25 pm
Sam, My column in an opinion column. I am not a reporter or a journalist, and have never presented myself as such. So, whether you believe what I write or not is fully up to you. To suggest, however, that I am somehow responsible for the reputation of the entire newspaper profession and then further expand my impact to the national media, is way more than a stretch! (Thanks for the backdoor compliment, but I’m really not that important.)
Comment by mary — March 25, 2009 @ 9:32 pm
but I’m really not that important.)
sam isnt either nor is reagan.
Comment by TheWiz — March 25, 2009 @ 9:40 pm
wiz, why is it that mary, dan and bill pound away on the same topic over and over and over again and that is ok, but when samtaylor asks a question that mary refuses to answer with a simple yes, or no, that is beating a dead horse? why are there two different standards?
Comment by reagan — March 25, 2009 @ 9:46 pm
ip addresses are recorded.–the wiz
that wouldn’t be an attempt at intimidation, would it?
Comment by reagan — March 25, 2009 @ 9:48 pm
I know Sam Taylor and would hate to think he is also reagan. Sam is a nice young man, although some of the people he emulates aren’t worth that compliment. Sam, I do believe your commentary regarding Marys description of Kennedy was snarky. That is what he did. How else was she supposed to describe it? I was not happy about the “supposed” Christie Wood episode and also asked questions. However, this is not a court of law and those who post here have the right to say or not to say what they choose. Whatever the facts of that episode are, it is in the past. Time and events are moving forward and that is what all of us should focus on. In regard to the actions of the city council and LCDC, Mary, Dan and Bill back up their facts. Much of thesse facts are public record. You can’t get much more transparent than that. Sam, if you don’t believe facts, what do you believe? By the way, how is that darling wife of yours?
Comment by Faringdon — March 26, 2009 @ 8:51 am
the right to say or not to say what they choose. –faringdon
but that right does not apply to all equally?
Whatever the facts of that episode are, it is in the past.–faringdon
and are not the ‘episodes’ that dan, mary and bill chronicle also ‘in the past’? what is the difference?
i ‘know’ samtaylor, too. 😉
Comment by reagan — March 26, 2009 @ 8:58 am
1. Charlie Nipp is an appointed public official on LCDC, where he was Chairman for 10 years and is still a board member. 2. The unelected LCDC makes decisions about MILLIONS of dollars in public money. 3. There are laws requiring disclosures of possible conflicts of interest. Charlie did not follow those laws, according to the Attorney General’s opinion.
These are three important reasons that the public has the right to question Charlie Nipp.
Comment by mary — March 26, 2009 @ 11:56 am
Scary, I apologize for not knowing who either of you are.
Mary – columnists that write in newspapers should still be subject to a code of ethics. Technically, in our society there are already cultural and societal mores that would suggest that recording someone without their permission is not the right thing to do.
The point is that little things accumulate and make a bigger issue. It’s not just your actions but the actions of all unethical newspaper writers building up over time that have caused people to be distrustful of a very noble profession. So you’re not helping by contributing. I hope that makes sense.
Faringdon – my wife is doing great, thanks for asking. She’s madly in love with two wonderful nephews she has and taking a lot of great photos as an amateur photographer these days.
To your other issue: You say it’s in the past. But Mary and others here bring up things from the past all of the time. That seems like a moot point to me. As a reporter, I don’t stop asking questions merely because someone refuses to answer. I keep asking and reporting that they’re not answering. Here, I’m acting as a journalist who has been deeply involved with the Society of Professional Journalists and I’m saying that Mary’s actions hurt the entire field.
However, it is clear Mary won’t answer and I’m not sure I should bother continuing on that train. What baffles me is the continued silence. What if Mary runs for office again? Will she ignore people who ask about that issue? People’s records of conduct are important to voters. And so are answers to their questions.
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 6:41 pm
I will, however, also say this: I find this entire issue extremely interesting. I’ve only done cursory reading on LCDC but I fully intend on really learning more about it in the days, months and years to come.
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 6:43 pm
Sam, I would be happy to forward you information about LCDC. I’m glad you are interested but am shocked that you have not yet realized that this is a huge impact on our community.
Why is it, Sam, that you don’t address the subject of this post, which is the intimidation of citizens by their public officials? You don’t even write about Charlie Nipp’s failure, as an appointed official that handles large amounts of taxpayer money, to be clear and transparent about his business dealings, as is required by law.
And your response to the behavior of an elected city councilman, Mike Kennedy, accosting citizens, on two separate occasions, in his official capacity, was tepid.
What’s with all this, Sam? Do you have a political agenda? Are you not willing to focus on issues of citizen rights?
Comment by mary — March 26, 2009 @ 7:04 pm
According to some in the world of Jornalistic ethics, the role of a newspaper is to: “…dig up the facts, expose the wrongdoing, and hold those in power accountable,” and as to the methods, “As long as it’s legal, I don’t have a problem with it,”. See http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hiddenlife/outing/srinvestigate.html for the whole story.
But the reality is the media condones and closes ranks behind those who used forged documents as long as the victim of the media hoax is right of center, look at Memogate and the Rather/Mapes affair.
OpenCDA.com does what the news media no longer does, it holds elected and appointed officials feet to the fire. That sycophants and left wing ideologues dislike the site and the active members of the site needs to be seen as a badge of honor not anything else.
Comment by Pariah — March 26, 2009 @ 7:44 pm
Hi Mary, no, I have no political agenda. I think my comments have been pretty clear so there’s no need to try to resort to the most base, lame accusations because you’re embarrassed by your own actions. I’m very forward about what I’m doing … I’m asking you questions because I’m concerned about your ethics and how it affects the job of all in the newspaper world. To ask me questions about the actions of the council members is ridiculous as I already answered you … I’d cover it. I don’t have opinions on it. I get opinionated when it comes to journalist. Period. It’s all about being transparent and having conversation about the world of newspapers because a lot of people have a lot of misinformation when it comes to reporters and who we are and how we do our job. There is no political agenda in a reporter asking questions, plain and simple.
On another note, like I said, I’m very interested in what’s going on. If I was there covering the issue I’d absolutely be including information from you, Dan and others in articles because it seems that you’re a portion of the community with concerns that others have the right to know about. That’s the role of a journalist. I don’t really have an opinion on any of it … and how could I? I’m not even there. I’m only reading everything I see from you and in the Press and on HBO. I’ve been doing back reading, as well. In that vein: I can’t find anything on who made a phone call to someone’s employer to allegedly intimidate them. I looked on the archive here via the search but found nothing. If you can provide me a link or more info I’d appreciate it.
The comment I made earlier, and the follow-up question still stands to me … don’t you feel like you’re hurting your own position with the way you’re going about all this? Is it productive? Will you actually get anywhere by acting that way?
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 7:57 pm
Pariah – your comments are somewhat valid, because the newspaper in Cd’A sucks and has no watchdog function whatsoever. I’m honestly of a mind to move back home some day and go watchdog crazy there. It bugs me a lot that I get criticized by other journalists and organizations for being from a place where there is a newspaper that they consider subpar.
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 7:58 pm
The CDA Press has been running some decent stories, Mo Dolan does a very credible job and the Nipp and LCDC coverage have been good. The SR has abandoned any pretense of covering North Idaho and DFO has become an apologist for the Meyer/Nipp gang.
Your odd claim to be an expert or arbiter on ethics in a field ridden with conflicts is amusing. You are being used as a tool and you evidently can’t even see that in your game over the claims about Mary. That is an ethical issue that you cannot seem to recognize. Manipulating journalists is an old left wing game, they are very good at it.
Comment by Pariah — March 26, 2009 @ 8:03 pm
samtaylor comments here with a straightforward approach and all pariah can do is resort to name calling; why is it that samtaylor is a “tool” and dfo is an “apologist” and everyone who doesn’t spout the souza/gookin/mccrory/snedaker/pariah mantra is “left wing”? don’t you ever get tired of repeating the same, old timeworn stereotypes? or is that just easier than thinking critically and engaging in rational discussion?
Comment by reagan — March 26, 2009 @ 8:12 pm
Facts are facts ‘regan’ your word games are simply noise. Nipp has been exposed, he broke the law. His partner Meyer is next.
Comment by Pariah — March 26, 2009 @ 8:14 pm
Pariah … I only stand part of your comments. I totally agree that S-R is worthless in Idaho. They abandoned a growing market for who knows why. That was a poor decision and hurt my friends. I believe the Press journalists themselves work very hard, but they’re constrained by a horribly-abusive management structure that hurts the journalistic process.
Actually, there are very, very few people who have ever questioned my ethics in this business and most of anyone who ever has, save for a rare few on the outliers, end up respecting me for the work I do. I’m an insanely hardworking and, I believe, a good journalist. I’m a records geek, and that’s partly why I enjoy the conversation here. People here have taken advantage of public records laws that I once used to when I lived in Idaho and I enjoy to see what the fishing expeditions came up with.
To talk left or right wing in manipulating journalists is absurd to me. Based on that comment, I’m not sure if you understand how government/politics or the media works at all.
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
P.S. ~ Please tell me what you do for a living so I can stereotype you with false assumptions. 😉
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 8:26 pm
Sorry Sam, you are young and it shows. The fact that you cannot acknowledge that you are being manipulated simply means that your ego is getting in your way. Your self-congratulatory remarks illustrate the issue.
Comment by Pariah — March 26, 2009 @ 8:29 pm
Okay, Pariah.
Comment by samtaylor — March 26, 2009 @ 8:54 pm
Sam, glad to see that you continue here. Point and counterpoint is excellent. Regarding your comment that you haven’t found evidence of anyone calling employers to intimidate, trust me it has happened. And there wouldn’t be any evidence would there? Somebody indulging in that behavior would neither record or brag about it. But believe you me, it indeed does happen. Not only to individuals but to their family members. As for “in the past”, you misunderstand my context. I do not know the facts, like everybody, I surmise. There was backlash and I believe that whatever the actual facts (and I’m not condoning or condeming anything) a point was made. The things from the past that Dan, Mary and Bill bring up on this site, regard the actions of elected officials that impact the tax paying citizenry. Big difference. As for you worrying about Marys “ethics”, I believe you should leave that to her. As others should leave your ethics to you. We all look in a mirror at one time or another during the day. ie: I answer more strongly to that image than to an ything else (save God). “To thine own self be true…”
Comment by Faringdon — March 27, 2009 @ 9:01 am