Ya know.....when you write a blog, you can't have a thin skin. I'm fortunate. My ratio of good to bad is pretty well stacked up on the good side.
Probably the highest compliment I could receive is that I'm honest. I strive to be honest. I strive to remain above the political mud wrestling. I can compliment someone, and point out their warts at the same time. Sometimes, being honest is painful. It has cost me friends. That is always painful.
Whenever possible, I strive to tell a story about Rowlett without making reference to individuals. I use the word "officialdom" often to avoid singling out a single person for both compliments and complaints. Sometimes, it is not possible to generalize. I always avoid "cheap shots." I don't like them when used against me, and I don't use them against others. If I have a complaint, I don't need to chose a "cheap shot." I think I can make myself clear and register a complaint without such childish devices. "Cheap shots" are used by mental incompetents and persons that have no reasonable answer to an opposing view. Productive debate is always good. It often produces mutually acceptable compromise. "Cheap shots" are counter-productive and never come to a good end.
Now, why all this discussion about honesty? By honesty, I don't mean you refrain from stealing your neighbor's car or don't walk your bar bill. I mean honesty in your heart. I mean telling the truth. I mean two way conversation. Conversation is 50% listening. Only 50% is talking or writing. Ya gotta listen and think, and that includes "officialdom."
I am not perfect. I am quick to admit I am wrong when so proven. It does not hurt me to do so. I feel no shame when I recognize a superior argument. That is what being honest can do for you. If proven wrong, I admit it, apologize if needed, and move on. None of us are perfect. That includes you, and an assortment of various individuals usually referred to as "officialdom." Recently, it's my opinion, that there appears to be some evidence that some of "officialdom" is a little stressed.
Now, all of you that think I am talking about the recent term limits discussion are wrong. However, that discussion did, to me, reveal what could be some undercurrents that could be counter-productive to Rowlett's future. We now have less than a year remaining before campaigning begins for a new mayor and three city councilpersons. That is motive enough for some posturing. That's understandable and okay. However, on this campaign, I want all of us to demand "honesty." I don't want any back room dealing. I want answers to questions based on the candidate's analysis of a situation, not their deft abilities with el torro poo poo. Even tho answers will most certainly vary in response to good questions, honest answers will give voters opportunities to evaluate different approaches to solutions. Stated another way, it demonstrates the candidate's skill in problem solving. What then accrues to the candidate's balance sheet are clear perceptions of their honesty. In my way of thinking, both sides win.
My hunch is that intelligent voters will respond well to "honesty." The big question is, "how many intelligent voters do we have in Rowlett?" I know intelligent people are here. I have met them. I just don't know if they'll engage in the process and vote. We should absolutely hate dog and pony shows, and throw out all who try to dupe us.
Probably the highest compliment I could receive is that I'm honest. I strive to be honest. I strive to remain above the political mud wrestling. I can compliment someone, and point out their warts at the same time. Sometimes, being honest is painful. It has cost me friends. That is always painful.
Whenever possible, I strive to tell a story about Rowlett without making reference to individuals. I use the word "officialdom" often to avoid singling out a single person for both compliments and complaints. Sometimes, it is not possible to generalize. I always avoid "cheap shots." I don't like them when used against me, and I don't use them against others. If I have a complaint, I don't need to chose a "cheap shot." I think I can make myself clear and register a complaint without such childish devices. "Cheap shots" are used by mental incompetents and persons that have no reasonable answer to an opposing view. Productive debate is always good. It often produces mutually acceptable compromise. "Cheap shots" are counter-productive and never come to a good end.
Now, why all this discussion about honesty? By honesty, I don't mean you refrain from stealing your neighbor's car or don't walk your bar bill. I mean honesty in your heart. I mean telling the truth. I mean two way conversation. Conversation is 50% listening. Only 50% is talking or writing. Ya gotta listen and think, and that includes "officialdom."
I am not perfect. I am quick to admit I am wrong when so proven. It does not hurt me to do so. I feel no shame when I recognize a superior argument. That is what being honest can do for you. If proven wrong, I admit it, apologize if needed, and move on. None of us are perfect. That includes you, and an assortment of various individuals usually referred to as "officialdom." Recently, it's my opinion, that there appears to be some evidence that some of "officialdom" is a little stressed.
Now, all of you that think I am talking about the recent term limits discussion are wrong. However, that discussion did, to me, reveal what could be some undercurrents that could be counter-productive to Rowlett's future. We now have less than a year remaining before campaigning begins for a new mayor and three city councilpersons. That is motive enough for some posturing. That's understandable and okay. However, on this campaign, I want all of us to demand "honesty." I don't want any back room dealing. I want answers to questions based on the candidate's analysis of a situation, not their deft abilities with el torro poo poo. Even tho answers will most certainly vary in response to good questions, honest answers will give voters opportunities to evaluate different approaches to solutions. Stated another way, it demonstrates the candidate's skill in problem solving. What then accrues to the candidate's balance sheet are clear perceptions of their honesty. In my way of thinking, both sides win.
My hunch is that intelligent voters will respond well to "honesty." The big question is, "how many intelligent voters do we have in Rowlett?" I know intelligent people are here. I have met them. I just don't know if they'll engage in the process and vote. We should absolutely hate dog and pony shows, and throw out all who try to dupe us.
RSS Feed