Monday, September 25, 2006
Comments, Pro and Con & Scrutinizing Bucks
Comments, Pro and Con & Scrutinizing Bucks
One of the interesting sidebars in the fourteen months since
I began publishing A Bubbling Cauldron has been the opportunity
to hear from readers, pro and con.
As you might expect, people write with critical comments more frequently than those who like what they read. Oh, yes, there are those loyal readers who occasionally write about something they've read with which they agree. Sometimes those same folks will fire off a comment when they think I might have stepped "over the line" with remarks that are stronger than they prefer. I'm grateful for their attempts to kick me back into line. I take every one of them seriously.
And then there are the others. One gentleman (I'm giving him the benefit of doubt here) wrote a very concise assessment of one recent posting. His message was one word - "Bah!". Now, it's tough to argue with that one, so I wrote back to him - twice, as a matter of fact - and asked for a little more information. I'm willing to hear opposing viewpoints on any issue. So far, he's not replied. Heck, for all I know that one word may have been his entire vocabulary.
Of course, there have been comments from defenders of our young jailer/mayor - a couple of which took exception to the use of that term. Well, I tried tinkering with it - using the term "young mayor/jailer", but it didn't seem right. That one implied that he was a guy who put mayors in jail. I could delete the "young" part, but he's a lot younger than I am, so I think I'll keep it the way it is.
Many of the mayor's defenders just don't seem to understand why I "don't like him". As you read through the postings here you will not find one where I said I didn't like him - I don't know him well enough personally to like or dislike him. I'm critical of his ideas, tactics, leadership and apparent motives. For all I know, he might be a swell fella who is just misguided and easily-led. The fact that he comes off as dictatorial is apparently inconsequential. I don't much care for the philosophy of one activist that seems to have a good deal of influence on the mayor, particularly since that philosophy seems to be rubbing off on him.
I suspect I'll be receiving a few more notes from the mayor's friends in the next couple months, regardless of how the election turns out. It looks to me as though he's not likely to change his mind on issues where our views differ and, although I'm always willing to listen to another position, I'm comfortable with my views right now. And, since I think his ideas are bad for Costa Mesa, I'm just going to keep on expressing those views.
***
In his "little newsletter" (now blog) our old pal who very much resembles my theoretical character, Your Neighbor, has made a feeble attempt to cast suspicion of the sources of campaign funding for Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich. What a joke! These guys must be starting to panic because, with only six weeks until the election, it's clear that Garlich and Mike Scheafer have the support of a very broad spectrum of Costa Mesa voters as well as the endorsement of public safety organizations. They're really scratching for issues.
Of course, two can play that game. Don't be surprised if you read on these pages and others an analysis of just where the bucks for our young jailer/mayor and his running mate are coming from. We know that at least half of his dollars come from sources outside this city, while 92% of Garlich's campaign dollars have been contributed by Costa Mesa residents and businesses. It will be very interesting to see just how many of the Minuteman mob have contributed to Mansoor's campaign. We'll take a little peek at the numbers and let you know soon.
10:56 pm pdt
As you might expect, people write with critical comments more frequently than those who like what they read. Oh, yes, there are those loyal readers who occasionally write about something they've read with which they agree. Sometimes those same folks will fire off a comment when they think I might have stepped "over the line" with remarks that are stronger than they prefer. I'm grateful for their attempts to kick me back into line. I take every one of them seriously.
And then there are the others. One gentleman (I'm giving him the benefit of doubt here) wrote a very concise assessment of one recent posting. His message was one word - "Bah!". Now, it's tough to argue with that one, so I wrote back to him - twice, as a matter of fact - and asked for a little more information. I'm willing to hear opposing viewpoints on any issue. So far, he's not replied. Heck, for all I know that one word may have been his entire vocabulary.
Of course, there have been comments from defenders of our young jailer/mayor - a couple of which took exception to the use of that term. Well, I tried tinkering with it - using the term "young mayor/jailer", but it didn't seem right. That one implied that he was a guy who put mayors in jail. I could delete the "young" part, but he's a lot younger than I am, so I think I'll keep it the way it is.
Many of the mayor's defenders just don't seem to understand why I "don't like him". As you read through the postings here you will not find one where I said I didn't like him - I don't know him well enough personally to like or dislike him. I'm critical of his ideas, tactics, leadership and apparent motives. For all I know, he might be a swell fella who is just misguided and easily-led. The fact that he comes off as dictatorial is apparently inconsequential. I don't much care for the philosophy of one activist that seems to have a good deal of influence on the mayor, particularly since that philosophy seems to be rubbing off on him.
I suspect I'll be receiving a few more notes from the mayor's friends in the next couple months, regardless of how the election turns out. It looks to me as though he's not likely to change his mind on issues where our views differ and, although I'm always willing to listen to another position, I'm comfortable with my views right now. And, since I think his ideas are bad for Costa Mesa, I'm just going to keep on expressing those views.
***
In his "little newsletter" (now blog) our old pal who very much resembles my theoretical character, Your Neighbor, has made a feeble attempt to cast suspicion of the sources of campaign funding for Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich. What a joke! These guys must be starting to panic because, with only six weeks until the election, it's clear that Garlich and Mike Scheafer have the support of a very broad spectrum of Costa Mesa voters as well as the endorsement of public safety organizations. They're really scratching for issues.
Of course, two can play that game. Don't be surprised if you read on these pages and others an analysis of just where the bucks for our young jailer/mayor and his running mate are coming from. We know that at least half of his dollars come from sources outside this city, while 92% of Garlich's campaign dollars have been contributed by Costa Mesa residents and businesses. It will be very interesting to see just how many of the Minuteman mob have contributed to Mansoor's campaign. We'll take a little peek at the numbers and let you know soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment