Boy did a lot of people get upset with me yesterday.
Let me open with the ADDENDUM from yesterday's blog entry. This was posted in the early evening hours.
"ADDENDUM:
When mistakes are made in the media, it calls for a correction.
When feathers are ruffled and feelings are hurt, neither a correction nor a direct apology is required.
While I stand by my statements of this morning, I will add that I am simply criticizing an organization. If I am critical of the Republican Party, is that to be taken as a direct attack on fine men like Senator Carl Vogel or Representative Bill Deeken? Of course not. Same thing when it comes to the Democrats. Does that mean I am attacking House Minority Leader Paul LeVota? Obviously not. And in the case of Paul, we disagree a lot, but he is still a man who I have known for nearly 20 years and was a great influence during my early adulthood.
My comments were taken as an attack on many fine people here in Jefferson City. They were not intended as such. I am critical and will continue to be critical of a group that they are a part of, because I see that group as flawed. But the people, the ones that I know at least, are all good and decent people. Individually, to my knowledge, they are people of integrity. I think emotions got the best of them when putting together this group and that leads to guilt by association.
I apologize to any feelings that were hurt.
I will go back to the ideas that I find fault with in future commentaries, in hopes of keeping things clear.
I pride myself on being open and approachable. I invite any criticism but ask that you bring it to me directly. Some folks have done so, others have yet to do so, but I hope they will."
One criticism that I got was that I challenged a group more than their message. True. I challenged a group because of what they named THEMSELVES. Because I found that they did not live up to their name.
So, let me go to the message. And I take this from the junk mail piece I received here at work yesterday (but just got my hands on this morning).
The spin doctoring begins with the confusion in their answer to their second question, "How much money does the City get for having a casino?"
Factually, they are dead on. But the mention that the money from a casino comes from the people. Point of order here folks.....ALL MONEY THAT GOES TO THE GOVERNMENT COMES FROM THE PEOPLE!!! To use their terminology, LIKE YOUR NEIGHBORS!
Most people I have talked to who are in favor of having a casino here have told me that it is unlikely that they will EVER go to the casino. If they do not go, they do not pay. Furthermore, everytime someone from Jefferson City goes to Boonville, St. Charles, North Kansas City or any other casino in the state, they give money to those communities. If no one went to these casinos from here, there would not be buses willing to take them. Why not keep those folks, and a percentage of their money, here in town? And why not use a casino like flypaper to get more money from people from St. Louis, Kansas City, Moberly, Columbia, Linn, Eldon, etc., to our community?
Question three continued this trend of confusing the issue with the answers to their own questions. "What casino is planning to come to Jefferson City?"
They admit that no one is coming, but then they confuse the answer to their own question by addressing the possible activity of the General Assembly. The question was about Jefferson City. While the actions of the General Assembly apply to us here, that should be addressed through our representatives there.
So, you see some of what I am saying. Given the definitions of INTEGRITY that I read and posted here, this is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is opinion and spin mixed with facts and other opinions and studies.
One question that I do wish do address that they bring up is a BIG one. And here, we are in agreement.
Question number 9 is a set up, but even this answer includes spin. This is the Economic Development question.
The answer, and this is semantics, said that the Jefferson City (Area) Chamber of Commerce commissioned a study for economic development in 2007. Well, this is probably inaccurate because I chatted with Randy Allen about this in January 2007, so I believe this happened prior to 2007. I do not know for sure. I do know, FIRST HAND, that the Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce did expand their role in Economic Development through a staff expansion in 2007. Now, semantics aside, let me go on and say that a casino in Jefferson City will not bring the light industrial type jobs that pay well to our community. NOT going to happen, PERIOD. I know this.
Will it bring jobs, yeah, but the better jobs from a casino, initially at least, will be filled by those who would be brought in from outside. And those folks would spend money here to. So that is not all bad as some would have you believe.
And saying that the economic development study that was commissioned by the Jefferson City Area Chamber of Commerce "did NOT suggest we go looking for a quick fix from a casino" is true. But the wording of this by the folks at CSI is misleading. I'd have to go and read the study. But, I think we can read between the lines here. I'd guess that the study doesn't even address the concept of a casino. I am being completely honest. I think they are being misleading.
And that has been my point all along. Citizens Supporting Integrity are using FEAR, UNCERTAINTY and DOUBT in their campaign. The individuals involved are fine folks, make no mistake. And after they win and have their chance to gloat after their win, I hope we can put this behind us. But my opinion is that when you use deception in any campaign, that shows a lack of INTEGRITY.
Politics by its nature lacks INTEGRITY, so when you choose that word as your name, know that you SHOULD be held to higher standard.
It is like a college coach who turns in another school for breaking the rules. That coach has to be squeaky clean and beyond even ACCUSATIONS of wrong doing.
If you choose to use a word, live up to it. My saying that has offended some.
If I am the FIRST one to challenge this, that says a lot more about those who have been keeping their mouths shut than it does about me.
One thing that I have prided myself on for my entire career in radio is that I am open and approachable. Yet, not everyone has chosen to notice that. I know that MY words have meaning and the use of those words have CONSEQUENCES.
I hold others to that standard as well. Is THAT wrong?
Based on the reaction of yesterday, I can only assume that it must be.
Really?
Oh, and the best way to SHUT me up on the air? Call in. Until you distort my words, I offer an open forum.
----------------
Add your comments as you see fit.
