Calhouns Can(n)ons

Monday, March 20, 2006

Wait, It Gets Worse. (see previous post)

If you’ve ever wondered if the editor of the Tribune, or at least the Editorial Page Editor of the Tribune, or whoever writes the Editorial “Boquets and Brickbats” editorials ever bothers to actually read the Tribune, then the answer has to be, uh, No.

I give you Exhibit A, the March 20th Bouquets and Brickbats. Absolutely ignoring or maybe not even reading, or utterly unaware of the Tribune’s March 19th headline story – “Six of the county’s seven cities don’t honor request for records that the law says they must,” the editor hurls a “stinkin’ brickbat” at Los Osos with this sub-hed: “Los Osos board falls short on disclosure.”

And in the story, there’s nary a mention about the other six of the seven cities which also fell short on disclosure. Nope, not a whisper, not a tittle, not a jot. Magically, it’s as if the March 19th story “Celebrating America’s Public Records Laws,” just disappeared into The Great Tribune Forgetting.

Mirable visu! Or caveat lector? Or maybe the Tribune's brickbat budget is getting mighty slim since they've been sold to McClatchy?

12 comments:

Anonymous said...: The difference between the two stories: one asks for information that is either readily available online from the cities' web sites or judged incorrecty to not be distributable, neither case applying to the LOCSD.

LOCSD Breakdown: 15 refered to lawyers (have they no time for what they make?);

12 requests filled versus 39 not filled

Why don't you address the transparency issue? You pooh pooh the Tribune's slant on stories but where are your investigative articles?

You write to entertain not to inform seems to me! Write something sometime that would be publishable in a newspaper as a news and not as a commentary.

It is easy to "comment" on a story in the Tribune or other newspapers (and you do this extrememly well), but can you actually do research and write "news" stories?

I've seen bloggers ask you to investigate topics but I've never seen you respond.

Do you consider yourself a reporter or a commentator? Curious minds want to know!; 5:41 PM, March 20, 2006
Mike Green said...: Dear anon, "to know"
I expect Ann will be the ONLY reporter from the meeting of the Doomed, The Triv?
Lets see---
I was there, the rep from Sam's office was depressing, If anyone can say honestly that they believe that the failure of the negotiations between Sam's office and the CSD board and the "water gods" was not crushed by egos, well let them ask Sam.
Anon "sustantive facts" thanks for the medical report on the efficancy of "smart pills"
Ann it was great to meet you!; 9:19 PM, March 20, 2006
Churadogs said...: From Anonymous, above:"Do you consider yourself a reporter or a commentator? Curious minds want to know!"

Uh, Please pick up a copy of The Bay News. Turn to the "editorial" page, labeled "Everyone's Got An Opinion." There you will see,on the editorial page, Calhoun's Can(n)ons. It's an OPINION COLUMN. It was an OPINION COLUMN when I started writing it back in 1991 in the Sun Bulletin, it's been an OPINION COLUMN in the subsequent Bay News, Bay Breeze, and Bay News again. What I write and have written for lo, these many years, is an OPINION COLUMN that appears on the "editorial page" of the paper, a page that's reserved for OPINION. If you're looking for a "reporter" you'd need to go talk to Abraham Hyatt at the Trib. or Jack Beardwood at the Bay News, or . . . .

To Mike, Hey! great seeing you last night. At last, a face to go with a name. Yep, Blakeslee's aid made it clear (if actually sitting in the various RWQCB hearings didn't,) just what a false picture of Los Osos the Board members are running in their heads, just how much laziness, egoes, pique, anger, ignorance, "face-saving" and "rights-fighting" (do you want revenge or do you want a wastewater system, take your pick)play in these regulatory bodies that have no real checks and balances in place. It's a system that's broken and extremely dangerous to individual citizens. That's one of the critical things Los Ososians need to understand. They can stand up and drive this train or just lay down and get run over. The choice is theirs.; 8:36 AM, March 21, 2006
Shark Inlet said...: Ann,

It is not us who needs to do something but Sam. We cannot convince the RWQCB that we are doing something right if they've already viewed us as full of sh*t. Furthermore, arguing, complaining, whining and the like won't change their perspective.

If this is a trainwreck it is being caused by both the engineer and the brakeman ... if they're spending so much time arguing about how to stop the train that they can't get the train stopped both are to blame.

However, that being said, I see the RWQCB actions as REactions to the choices of the LOCSD board. They told us in advance what they would do should we make the choices we did. We made those choices anyway.

Yes, they could have been more forgiving and patient ... however, we've given them little reason to feel that additional patience would produce a WWTF. Had this board played their cards differently shortly after the election, things would not be so bad now.

Yes, it is time for Sam to step in again and ask both sides to do something more reasonable that what they are committed to currently.; 9:03 AM, March 21, 2006
Anonymous said...: Ann and Mike: Where were you last night and what happened? Inquiring (sewer) minds wanna know! Thanks, you're the best.; 12:27 PM, March 21, 2006
Anonymous said...: Very well stated, Spectator! Finally, a comentary with out dripping sarcasm and blatant bias! Well done!; 2:15 PM, March 21, 2006
Mike Green said...: Sharkey and Spectator,
Lets hope the wierdness thats been going on has run it's course (on this comment blog)
I value both of your perspectives, and your last posts were very good.
One thing that Sams rep. was quite adamnant about was the peception of legislators in Sac. concerning L.O.
We are well known and, it seems, somewhat despised. Their perception (according to her) is that L.O. doesn't care about the ecology or water, that we are all a bunch of "malcontents"
(quote mine)that will do anything to escape having a sewer.
I wonder how they got that idea?
I also wonder what we could do to correct that perception.
If the dissolution effort fails, will the community finaly come toghether and speak with one voice?
Left with nothing else to support, it seems money well spent to delay or defeat the CDOs
Sam's rep was quite insistant that if we want ANY help from our State government we will need to project a united front in favor of a WWTF and quit waring over the details.
She also said that affordability is a "tricky problem" In my mind it seems that that issue will never be addressed.
Might as well quit carping about it then.
On the other hand, if dissolution succeeds, well what kind of voice do we have then? what difference would it make what anybody thought? More importantly, say what you want about the effectivness of Sam, but I think it would be very unwise to not pay heed to his message. He is in favor of local control, that is a direct quote, His office has been working tirelessly in our behalf, dissoulution would cut him off at the knees.
The county? Why haven't we heard anything from them?
I am in agreement that the new board mishandled things at first, if you remember I was in favor of continuing TriW but using other means to achieve a better solution, well so much for that.
Like Ann says, the next vote will decide a lot.
I wonder and wonder; 6:48 PM, March 21, 2006
Shark Inlet said...: Now our favorite friend has decided to spoof yet another person...

How nice and friendly-like. Reminds me of CSD meetings where some people can't handle listening politely to the opinion of others so they feel the need to shout them down. God I missed the old-fashioned shouting ... glad that something comparable has appeared here.

Perhaps the goal is to make Ann's blog so worthless that Ann wants to shut it down herself.; 7:24 AM, March 22, 2006
Churadogs said...: Dear Inlet, I think. My blog only becomes worthless when everyone in the universe stops reading it.And it gets taken off the Newsmission blogspot when Greg emails me and says, "Better put on your striped socks and hit the road, we're giving your blog site to someone who wants to post really cool cooking recipes." In addition, Blogs can exist apart of "comments." ron Crawford, over at Sewerwatch, got so disgusted with some of his "commentors" he turned the "comment" key off. So, I gathered, some of the people sut out of Ron's site, came over to my site and started complaining. Now, of course, we have certain commentors pulling the same silly stuff here.

However, people are free to read my blog postings and forego the "comments." People are also free to scan through the "comments" and read only the sections they chose to. and noboody is required to reply to anything. And everyone should understand that "anonymous" anything falls into the same category as "free advice -- worth what you paid for it, which is ... nothing.

And proceed accordingly.; 8:19 AM, March 22, 2006
Mike Green said...: Spectator, The real one, or at least the one that writes and you can click on the name and see its the same old spectator that I used to poke fun at by calling you spacetater, man, that takes too much effort, any way, thanks for the "kind?" words (did you realy want me to eat used flypaper?)
I just wanted to correct your comment that it was a "sticky" problem, nope, she said "trickey" several times.
I realy don't appreciate people that stoop to cheap computer tricks to make some point.
Anon "substantive facts" please cut it out.; 7:12 PM, March 22, 2006
Anonymous said...: Spectator,

i visit this blog on occasion. mainly to read ann's posts. i'll skim the comments sections but it's usually just the same tired rehash, talking point spin on both sides of the issue. i rarely post so, if you'll excuse me, i'm not going to bother signing up for a name. i supported the recall and i support our current CSD and believe it or not, i'm a republician(well actually a libertarian but i usually vote republician). in 1998, i voted against the formation of the CSD because i knew whatever project the solutions group was going to come up with, it would probably take 5-10 years and whatever they had in mind, the delay would make it more expensive. somewhere in here, i think you ask us if "we were all duped". you are right. we were duped. big time. but, it wasn't last year. it was in 1998 when pandora and the solutions group promised us cheaper, better, faster(i hate to quote the doofus that's been spoofing you and Shark Inlet but the point is valid and it's exactly why i voted against the formation of the CSD in the first place).

i actually came in here to call you on your last post. i try not to get sucked into these blogs but i'm a bit meticulous and it bothers me to see misstatements.
the misstatement you make in your last post is #7 when you say "joey has been rejected". this one i just can't let go cause let's face it, the only people rejected over the course of the last year are Stan Gustafson, Richard Legros, Gordon Hensley, and the solutions group Tri-W project. joey was acquitted.
am i a fan of joey racono? hell no. i think he is an environmental extremist whacko. other than the recall and the tri-w project, i'd probably disagree with him on every other issue. is joey the one who is spoofing you and Shark Inlet? maybe. maybe not. the truth of the matter is, who really gives a damn? although, i hate to admit, i'm finding the posts a bit rude but also quite entertaining (on a scale of 1-5, i'll give them 4 chuckles). i don't expect you to take my advise. but, if you ignore them they will go away. believe me, whoever is spoofing you is sitting on pins and needles waiting for your response so they can come back at you.

as far as sophistry goes, with all respect, takes one to know one. i could take apart almost everyone of your posts, but like i said, i'm not about to waste my time getting burried in a blog like this and letting it suck the life out of me. incase you haven't figured it out yet, 99.9% of people that visit this blog are the people who disagree with you, the people who agree with you, and yourself. this is who is listening to you. seems like kind of a waste of time doesn't it? you think the people, who have been turned off by the extremists that have divided our community, are wasting their time in here? nope. they are out doing stupid stuff like going for sunset or moonlight walks, stupid stuff like spending time with their families, they don't have time to argue with people who only talk and don't listen. admittedly, i've been coming in here a bit more than i usually do. i think ann has been posting more than she usually does. to be quite honest, i've been following the spoofing saga and came in here tonight for the comedy. i've changed my mind Spectator, don't ignore the spoofer. i need a good laugh at least once a day. sorry, my boss just walked in the door(my wife the love of my live). see ya.........; 8:31 PM, March 22, 2006
Mike Green said...: Spectator, No problem, peace mike green; 8:39 PM, March 23, 2006

Pages

Monday, March 20, 2006

12 comments: