Why This Blog?

The aim of this blog is to fit into the blogosphere like the bracingly tart taste of yogurt fits between the boringly bland and the unspeakably vile.

All comments will be answered if their author provides contact info.


I have no sponsoring group(s) or agencies, and I owe no allegiance to any candidate or group.

(C) Copyright 2012 DenRita Enterprises

Sunday, May 12, 2013

From in-box to out  

Today we’re clearing out the in box. Here are some questions that have accumulated from folks afraid to identify themselves. Some questions are about my choices, others about politics.  (These are edited for spelling and in some cases for what we think the writer was trying to say.)

Q: Why are you bringing the charter up again? It was thoroughly trounced last election.

A: A charter is a document much like a constitution. The “trounced” charter had provisions inimical to organized labor, and labor responded with over half a million dollars in propaganda to defeat it. A charter can be good, bad, or indifferent for Costa Mesa. A reasoned and fact-based approach to a charter will be likely to help Costa Mesa. Screaming diatribes about the “evil opposition” (from any perspective) will be of little use and might lead to a harmful charter. So, it’s worth analyzing and discussing.

Q: Name one thing a charter will do that we can’t do now!!!!!!!!!!! (Original in all caps.)

A: Insure that all houses in Costa Mesa are painted red, if there’s a provision in the charter to that effect. It will do what it’s written to do, within California law applicable to charter cities.

Q: Why don’t you (list what’s going on) in Costa Mesa?

A: Local news is readily available in 2 ½ local newspapers, and City government news is easily available by free subscription from Costa Mesa City.

Readers of CM Conserve are generally well-educated and self-sufficient and therefore quite capable of finding news of interest and importance to them.

Q: Why didn't you publish or even acknowledge what I wrote? Do I have to agree with you?

A: I don’t know who you are, so I will probably ignore your missive. I’ll be happy to publish a reasoned entry, if desired, under a pseudonym. However, if you don’t identify yourself I probably won’t even read the material. Most potential commenters are contacted by email if they have something to discuss.

No, in fact I’d rather you disagree. I’ll learn more checking your references and mulling your arguments. However, if you offer only your guess about the Mayor’s motivation or just a label for a prominent person, I’ll put your material in a file to consider later when I have nothing else to do. It’s called the “confined to a nursing home” file.

Q: Everybody knows you have inside information about what’s going on from your bosom buddies on the Council.

A: “Everybody” should let the Grand Jury know about this; it’s possible that a whole bunch of folks, including me, will be going to jail if you are right. If you are just blathering from a faintly-disguised pseudonym to provoke me to defend myself, forget it. Checks rules two and three in 12 Rules for Radicals and consider that the people you hate may be familiar with the rules, also. You seem to have a good grasp of rule six.

Why one, or all, Council members would want to run out to find me and tell me secrets about Council activities eludes me, but if it is so, bring it on. It will probably be more entertaining than TV and might be more informative than reading the CC Meeting agenda.

Q: Why don’t you use names when you criticize people in the blog?

A: This blog isn't about people; it’s about ideas and opinions.  Besides, people, especially informed, thinking people, change their ideas and opinions and are no longer associated with them.

That said, when there’s a clear reason to identify someone, such as the blogger who has written defamation about the Mayor for several years, we give his name. The OC Political Blog calls him Costa Mesa’s Whiner in Chief; we use his name as appropriate.

And, public officials, such as the CEO or Council members will be identified by name when we discuss something they do and not when they just say something, unless that’s the idea being discussed.

Folks who engage in egregious conduct or are charged with criminal acts will often be identified by name.

Q: Why haven’t you answered (blogger’s name’s) insults?          

A: Insults? He correctly notes that CM Conserve crunches ideas to examine each part, over and over. We examine and reprocess them to get the most value from them. He drew his simile awkwardly, but the only real criticism I have is that he limited the sources for the ideas. The ideas processed here come from more than Council members. Aristotle, Patton, Eisenhower, Jack Welch (former GE CEO), Harvard Professor Thomas Sowell, pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, and many others contribute ideas we process, too.

Q: What about (another blogger’s name); do you agree with him?
A: I agree with most other bloggers and even with the speakers and “writers” for some small, local activist groups -- about some things. I disagree with them about others.

I know all five Council members to some degree or another, and I like all of them. I've agreed and disagreed with each of the five.

I rarely try to argue with any of these people; I learn more by listening and reading their messages and comments. However, I occasionally take issue with poorly-reasoned, unsupported comments in various media. Three underlying beliefs are:

            1. Sly, “insider” innuendos are signs of an uneducated, and probably venal, writer or speaker.

            2. Addressing remarks by venal, perhaps stupid, people offers some entertainment but isn't going to convince them (their minds are closed, by definition) or stimulate them to start thinking and researching.

            3. Once in a while my remarks stimulate a logical response that teaches me something, or even leads me to rethink, and even change, my point of view. 
Now that the worst of the backlog is gone, we’ll get back to ideas and concerns in Costa Mesa.

No comments:

Post a Comment