OK, Rick. You vigorously defended your paper against my suggestion that it might be acting as Jim Mangan’s mouthpiece a little too much.
But now … page 1, lead article … “Citizens challenge candidates.”
For one thing, that title is misleading. I read the article several times to make sure that I didn’t miss anything, but it’s CITIZEN … SINGULAR … meaning Jim Mangan. No one else is mentioned.
Yeah, OK … he claims to be representing a “group of homeowners.” Were these “homeowners” named on this challenge? I’m tired of Mangan and his shadowy cabals claiming to represent the majority opinion of Pekin citizens.
Yes Rick … I can anticipate the obvious criticism now. I don’t sign my real name to the opinions posted on this blog, so I shouldn’t be demanding that others do it elsewhere. However, I also don’t claim to be representing a group or anyone’s opinion but my own.
Mr. Mangan currently serves on the 303 school board and is the spokesman for the Citizens for Pekin School Consolidation (a group of 3 or 4 people, as far as I can tell – probably the “homeowners” he’s referring to in his challenge). That makes him a public figure in Pekin. I understand that.
However, this article has NOTHING to do with school consolidation. Mangan’s challenging the city council and mayoral candidates to pledge not to raise taxes or fees without public referendum. Fine … he can do that. Just like any citizen who wants his voice to be heard, Mr. Mangan is free to write the candidates and make any sort of challenge that he wants. If others want to sign their name to it too, that’s their right as well.
But why does Mr. Mangan’s opinion deserve a page 1 lead article? He serves on the SCHOOL BOARD. He’s not even running for re-election, and he’s not running for any other public office to my knowledge. When it comes to his opinion on city government, he’s JUST ANOTHER CITIZEN. If Mangan submitted this challenge stapled to a list of a hundred signatures, then I’ll bite my tongue … but I doubt that’s the case.
First he becomes a regular and endlessly repetitive presence on the opinion page. Now he’s page 1 news. WTF???
There is one thing that this article and the no-tax challenge CLEARLY point out – Mangan’s primary concern is battling taxation. That’s what his consolidation argument is all about, not improving the academic performance of Pekin schools as he claims. All he wants to see is his already diminutive property tax burden go down. He doesn’t care if the students in Pekin public schools suffer for it.
19 responses so far ↓
1
Tom
// Feb 13, 2007 at 1:26 pm
One would think that he owns stock in the paper. Next he will be asking for promises to plow his street first. Hey, it’s worth a try, since he has so much clout in this town.
2
Rick Wade
// Feb 13, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Ah, Mr. Knight, I won’t take your obvious bait. I don’t expect an amateur such as yourself to understand the meaning free speech and the responsibility that goes with it. Let me explain it in simple language you might understand. Mr. Mangan sent his letter to all the candidates, basically, in my own personal opinon, to extort some kind of pledge that can later be used against any candidate who might dare to do the right thing when necessary, ie raise taxes. The letter is newsworthy and the people need to know about it. It’s not our job to hide such things or bury them just because we do not agree with what the letter says. Goodness, what is bigger news than somebody trying to influence a local election that means so much to the future of this city? Ignoring such matters would open us up to charges of bias, accusatons that we ourselves are trying to influence an election through omission. Besides, did you even read the article? How many people said such a pledge was a good thing, compared to those who did no? My philosphy has always been that it’s better to turn over the rock and shine a light on what creatures scurry out from underneath it than to leave the rock where it is. The best way to counteract the free speech you don’t like is through more free speech. You are welcome any day to send me a letter with your name attached for publication in the Times. I won’t hold my breath.
3
T.V.
// Feb 13, 2007 at 6:23 pm
So Mr. Mangan and his “group of homeowners” is against any type of growth in the City of Pekin?? Because the way I see it is this City is growing very fast. This is a very good thing for those who are proud of Pekin. I too am a homeowner, and I understand that there may be times when the unpopular thing may be the best alternative. To ask council candidates to not raise taxes is absurd, I paid 954 dollars in taxes last year. Of that more than 3/4 went to the school districts with very little coming back to the City. The possibility of a tax raise is just one minor issue that the candidates should be focused on, why didn’t Mr. Mangans letter have a petition to help out the Southside of town. I think the “group of homeowners” need to look at the big picture.
4
knightindragonland
// Feb 13, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Rick,
Yes, I did read the article. I agree that Mangan’s challenge was a form of extortion. The consolidation referendum was the same thing.
Yes, I did notice that the people quoted in the article were generally dismissive of Mangan’s request. Burt Dancey’s quote in particular gave me quite a chuckle.
However, I think that putting Jim Mangan front and center on page one elevates him to a level of attention that he does not deserve. It puts the Daily Times “stamp of importance” on Jim Mangan’s opinion.
In my opinion, Mangan’s weed needs to wither away in the darkness. Instead, the Times just put a grow light on it.
If you think Mangan’s attempt at extortion is important enough to print, then by all means do it … but don’t make it the lead article! You might as well just anoint him with oil and put a crown on his head while you’re at it.
Rick, you make some valid points, although I disagree with you. I’d have a lot more respect for your opinion if you weren’t such a condescending jack ass about it. You have the ability to argue without being a bitch. Try it sometime.
By the way, Rick … your continued passive-aggressive attempts to “out” me are infantile. Cease and desist.
5
knightindragonland
// Feb 13, 2007 at 7:38 pm
TV,
I agree with your assessment, and fortunately it seems like most of the candidates and officials quoted in the article agree as well.
6
Rick Wade
// Feb 13, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Hee-haw! Hee haw! Hee-Haw!
7
Rick Wade
// Feb 13, 2007 at 9:19 pm
I thought this was a venue for free speech, yet close readers of your last diatribe against me was censored! I guess i win!
8
knightindragonland
// Feb 14, 2007 at 2:28 am
Again we see Mr. Wade’s infantile behavior. I really hope that more and more Pekin citizens will drop by my blog and see how the editor of their paper behaves without the filter of a printing delay.
I censored your attempt to “out” me, Rick. I know you know who I am. It’s really not much of a journalistic accomplishment to have figured it out. However, my identity will not be made explicit for reasons I have already mentioned. I edited no other content of your post … even your insults remained intact.
I thought that after my “open letter” you were going to play nice, Rick. That didn’t last very long. Every time I make a post that’s the least bit critical of your paper, your hackles rise and you start the condescending, insulting bull shit. For a journalist who frequently harps on free speech, you really don’t take criticism very well.
9
Rick Wade
// Feb 14, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Just take responsibility for your words with your name and I won’t say another word.
But you don’t have what it takes.
10
Rick Wade
// Feb 14, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Look, I really really try to be civil. I even apologized profusely for my tone, which you did not mention in your last post.. I thought it was all over. But you attack again. There is a big difference between criticism and attacks, which is what i feel that you do, both me and people like Jim Mangan and Mike Noyes. And I do believe in free speech, but as I had said so many times, folks need to take responsibilty for their words. That is what we do in newspapers. If you were writing about emotions, personal stuff, etc., fine, be anonymous. But to viciously attack people in a public forum like the Internet just is not right.
11
knightindragonland
// Feb 14, 2007 at 7:00 pm
You try to be civil??? No, you don’t, Rick. Look again at the comment you posted 8 minutes before your most recent one! You call that “trying to be civil”???
I attacked the editorial decision to place the piece about Mangan front and center on page 1, and I listed my reasons for thinking that was a mistake. You then attack me PERSONALLY and take pot shots at my anonymity.
Anonymous or not, I have every right to criticize your paper, just as you have every right to criticize my blog. My original post was critical, but it was not condescending or insulting – unlike your subsequent commentary. Thicken your skin and mind your manners, Mr. Editor.
12
Rick Wade
// Feb 15, 2007 at 5:21 am
There you go again. What if you were a plumber, and I, with no training in plumbing or knowledge of the rules and laws of plumbing and no idea what takes place behind the scenes that limit just what a plumber can do, publically ridiculed the way you install pipes? You you not feel offended? And would not my comments possibly affect others who might need a plumber sometime in their decision to use your plumbing business? It is all very simple. Take responsibility for your PUBLIC statements. That’s all. Your reasons for not doing so ring hollow. And by the way, i did read my previous comments. How is asking you to step up to the plate and do the honorable thing an attack? It is obvious you don’t have what it takes to accept responsibilty for your words, otherwise you would do so.
13
knightindragonland
// Feb 15, 2007 at 7:56 am
If I was the homeowner who hired that plumber, I sure as hell have the right and OBLIGATION to criticize his work! I pay for your newspaper, Mr. Wade.
Also, I didn’t RIDICULE the placement of the article. I criticized it. Unlike you, I included no personal attacks on your intelligence or integrity. I didn’t call you stupid – unlike your condescending assessment of my intelligence.
Jeesh, Rick. You must not be very confident of your editorial abilities if you find some stupid anonymous blogger to be such a threat to your position. You fire off like you’re going to lose your job because Knight in Dragonland criticized the placement of ONE article in your newspaper. Come off it! You are WAY too touchy.
14
Dave but not THAT Dave
// Feb 15, 2007 at 8:48 am
Wow, I personally find Mr. Wade’s comments insulting and they are not even directed at me. Sounds like he needs to hop off the my way or the highway bus and appreciate an opposing opinion.
Just found the blog and I Like It!
15
bruce
// Feb 15, 2007 at 11:43 am
opinions with out names are like assholes—-they stink.
16
knightindragonland
// Feb 15, 2007 at 1:05 pm
And “Bruce” is adequately identifying enough not to make you a hypocrite? I guess I’m not the only asshole, Bruce.
17
bruce
// Feb 15, 2007 at 1:58 pm
I calls um like I sees um. and its good to see u understand your body part.
18
Mrs Jackass
// Feb 15, 2007 at 7:30 pm
You know I wish BOTH you, Dr. Dragonland and Rick would knock it off. Im with Bruce on this. Put you name where your mouth is. The Monday morning “water cooler” conversations or the Saturday morning debates at the barber shop are far more credible than this pile of babble here. You know Dragonlandman you seem to be intellegent and and have a fair talent for writing. Have ever thought about writing a letter to the editor or better yet an editorial? Dont hide behind this. If you beleive in something say it. I may not like what someone has to say but will respect them for taking ownership of their opinions. Personally I dont understand the usefulness of blogging. Well I have said enough and expect you to take me to task for this. So fire away Pal!
Respectfully Submitted, Mrs. Condescending Jack Ass
19
knightindragonland
// Feb 15, 2007 at 7:59 pm
You’re entitled to your opinion, Mrs. If you don’t have any respect for what’s on my blog and consider it unworthy babble … then don’t read it!
Thank you for the compliments.
Leave a Comment