The City of Richmond Truth Tazer

Truth so plain and simple that it's SHOCKING! Yes, it hurts some more than others, so proceed with caution!

Friday, August 11, 2006

Were not the Only Ones That Wanna Holler...

The Tazer does love real feelings on the city of Richmond.

This post has been moved to the front page to remind all of us what we're really fighting for.

Thanks to "speedy gonzales"...here's the comment, unedited:

Okay, in he words of the Tupac "I ain't mad atcha" but you all who post on here really need to check yourselves. This is beyond sad. This is pitiful.

The brothas on the corner are laughing at us!How are folks acting like they are criminals and calling each other criminals gonna solve a crime problem? Is this town completely devoid of real community?

Look at the example being set here. It makes us ALL look foolish. No wonder people laugh at Richmond. When we behave like we are doing right here, we become the equivalent of the stinky kid riding the bus. And unfortunately while SOME of us may have earned the funk, there are good people in this City tired of defending the insanity that goes on here in the name of all things golden.

There is an old African Proverb that says, "By the time the fools have learned the game, the players have dispersed." While this community sits up here bickering, we are wasting energy that could be devoted to trying to make our communities better.I want more for the Rich-town.

I want us to be talking about how we GET safe streets. How we MAKE development work for the people. How we IMPROVE the schools. How we RESTORE city services. Why can't we talk about that?I'll tell you why, because it is election year, and everybody-- I mean everybody is working for their team up in this camp.

The sad fact is that nobody really cares about the "Truth", because it doen't benefit them to care. The truth is something none of y'all wanna hear. The truth is there is only ONE team.

That is Richmond, plain and simple. Everybody has all these glib slogans, One Richmond, A better Richmond is possible, No more politics period, Working for a better Richmond, Richmond Rises. We're selling out our own slogans because we refuse to come to the table and debate the issues like adults-- no worse, like human beings! And yet, everytime I turn around I see another one of us pointing the finger at each other, when we have four finger point back at us.

So in the spirit of "open" conversation, I have a question. Is this a blog about debating the issues or is it really the political equivalent of the drudge report, sans the facts?

If I sound redundant it is only because I believe that the way we are going to solve these problems is to stop acting like five year olds and actually agree to look across the isle and come up with some solutions, and some compromise here.I'm tired of the conversation level here bordering on the fanatical, redundant and predictable.

Instead of calling people liars, *itches,pig lips, ugly, stupid, sockos, commies, and thugs, (which by the way,is NOT part of the solution) or hiding behind your rocks, let's be a BIT imaginative for a change. It is telling that I have not seen one of the posters in this strand debate the actual proposals on the ballot.

Not even ONE of you, except maybe the captain over there has actually evaluated any of the issues that are important to the people of this city in November.

You just chime in "un huh, yeah, I know that's right" but we don't discuss. Since there is no diversity in opinion, then I frankly don't even see why anybody bothers to comment. I mean why bother to think when you don't have to, right?

Which leads me to believe they really wanna co-sign. Which is cool, but be real about it if that is what it is. But, hey, I could be wrong.

So I'm gonna ask some real questions:

What tangible things can we do in the short and long term to impact crime in Richmond. Economic Development. Opportunity? The schools? Does anybody even THINK about that.

And you know, posting articles is cool, but how about posting some IDEAS up in this bad boy and let people respond, Tazer. >>>

>>>TAZER NOTE: We don't claim to be idea people or have all the answers speedy. We've created this blog to allow the people of this city to work on that. Your comments are a step in that process.<<<

Because you know I speak the truth when I say that the same folks that agree happy with the Times coverage today are the SAME folk that called it a racist rag, what, not SIX months ago?

Let me ask another, question, though. If we keep on doing the same old thing that we've always done, bickering with each other, not seriously debating the issues, giving each other roses with when we've got gats behind our back, this town will continue to stay the same old, petty, manipulative poor excuses we have always used, will this town ever change?

YOU know the answer. NO! People, my people,I tell you this not to put you down, but to build you up.

Richmond, we are better than this. We can move forward. We can be positive in our disagreements with each other.

We can change things. What we can't do is sit around like the old folks say, and play church. This is too serious. I think we can do better, folks, but we got to get right.I'm through ranting.

Speedy

14 Comments:

  • At August 11, 2006 5:01 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Amen! Well said. Name calling and spreading more hate does nothing to solve the problems. I guess it's easier than working together with others to come up with real solutions . . .

     
  • At August 11, 2006 9:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    The reality is we are in a state of siege and war with street thugs and gangsters, all this TALK ain't gonna solve a thing until we realy declare a war violence that we intend to win!

    Speedy, all you have brought to this forum is more TALK no answers.

     
  • At August 12, 2006 8:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "Hard Core soldier", what answers did you bring? Your tough talk sure isn't a solution! How hypocritical!

     
  • At August 12, 2006 10:15 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Voltaire said, "Opinions have caused more ills than the plague or earthquakes on this little globe of ours." But then he also said, "There are truths which are not for all men, nor for all times."

    Speedy, you sound passionate about Richmond. I like to hear that. Concern and love for this city moves you. It moves me, too. I'd like to be able to read about the people of Richmond feeling so strongly about the city that they make it better instead of kids getting killed over nonsense.

    However, much as any other political situation, the people involved will have differences of opinion, which will tend to divide them. As counterintuitive as it sounds, it shouldn't have to be that way. Unfortunately, the sad and often ugly truth is that it tends to divide in harsh and bitter ways.

    The city of Richmond is obviously no different, but though you and I might debate any number of policies, I want to think that there are fundamental things upon which we would agree. Example: there is a crime problem in the city, and the solution will hinge upon the police department at some point. Sounds simple, right? But once the debate flows and funding gets involved disagreement will follow.

    I try to be informed and knowledgeable about everything I discuss, but then I hold no great claim over solutions. I might believe that things should happen in a certain way -- for instance, that a city should operate within the confines of its taxes, with efficiency and responsiveness to its citizens -- yet how that end is arrived at may have more paths than are perceived. When real discussion happens, ideas are supposed to duke it out so that we all win. But we all know the reality, of course...

    Some may cast epithets lightly; I feel that I do not. Thus, when I say "socko" or "sockpuppet" it is to chide one who springs up as a reflex to criticism of their candidate/policy of choice, perhaps for reasons that aren't neutral, and thus the allusion that they might be controlled like a sockpuppet. The political metaphor "kneejerk" was destined to describe this reaction. Mind you, there's nothing wrong with reacting that way, but it should be recognized for what it is, especially if it is blind and indefensible, and treated with the attention it deserves.

    The "Me-toos" and "Jump-Up Johnnies" fall into a similar category for lack of gravity in the debate. Likewise, nothing may be added to the discussion, but then expressing sentiments -- agreement, disagreement, affection, disgust -- shouldn't be utterly discouraged. What I would discourage, however, is uncivil language, but then I'm an adult and I can wade through it. Otherwise, I see no great harm, so gather yourself and your own thoughts for the discussions you find germaine. We will meet there.

    As for coverage in the Times, I've had my quibbles but never called it a racist rag. In light of its recent sale, though, I think it will pick up a less subtle bias. Time will tell, I suppose, but then I digress...

    Optimally, the debate on the future of Richmond will start with generalities -- philosophies and overarching concepts, if you will -- and narrow into particulars. Concrete matters that form actual policy, such as funding priorities, and city council decisions, should be debated as they come into focus. Example: I dislike the variety of "plans" from the city council that tend to soak business, especially small business; fostering local commerce is essential to community vitality, primarily in youth employment. Outside of those discussions, however, there also exists the realm of political personalities and behavior, which I think you delved into the most...

    I have yet to meet Irma Anderson in person, so I cannot speak to her character as an individual. I hold no personal grudge. That said, I find fault in how she has behaved as mayor and do not believe she should be re-elected. I have enumerated my criticisms before, so I won't retread them without the basis of particular discussion, but suffice it to say that I do not think that she has acted in the best interest of Richmond. Thus, I will not vote for her, and I will counsel others to not vote for her.

    Opinions will vary, of course, but by all means stand your intellectual ground, whatever it is. I invite views from all quarters because I believe that good discussion will not only make us mentally stronger, it will make the ideas we discuss stronger, and Richmond will ultimately benefit from the engagement.

     
  • At August 12, 2006 12:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    No time for more your 'TALK ACTION'it's time to win a 'WAR ON VOILENCE!, THROUGH ACTION!

     
  • At August 12, 2006 1:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    While I am new to the RTT, I think this blogspot really represents our community. Anderson knows her days are counting down. Four more years of her garbage is totally unacceptable. She will always be known as the Mayor nobody wanted.

     
  • At August 12, 2006 2:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Maybe the writer who did this original posting, could quit writing such boring, long-winded postings. Sounds like some trouble-maker from Irma's camp. What a bag of wind.

     
  • At August 12, 2006 2:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Bless Irma's sockpuppet.

     
  • At August 12, 2006 2:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Hey master of the Sockpuppet, do you use your left or right hand to bring Socko to life?

     
  • At August 12, 2006 5:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Ihe Mayor has no one but herself to blame how people of Richmond feel about her. If the Socko and other members of Irma's herd want to write these postings, let them!
    We will see how the people of Richmond feel come election day. Until then Socko just keep up all of your hot air and post it!

     
  • At August 12, 2006 8:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    This is just like Rush Limbaugh's band of followers (I believe they're called the "ditto-heads). With the exception of the Captain who can actually express an original thought and the occasional contribution of someone like Speedy, it's all the same. Disagree and you get called names. Apparently the favorite insult right now is to be called one of "Irma's Pawns." Yawn. Well, I have some news for a few of the "contributors" to this site: Irma could still pull it off, even if it would be better if she didn't. You're so blind to hearing and seeing only what you want to hear and see, you don't realize there is a whole large segment of the community that may well vote for her again. But then again, you'd probably like that because it will give you another four years to make excuses for why YOU'VE done nothing constructive to address the violence and other problems out there. Just keep calling names--it must make you feel better. Yes, yes . . we know "venting is healthy" . . too bad it does nothing to improve things.

     
  • At August 13, 2006 12:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I'd like to thank everyone for your comments-- even the folks that proved my point.

    Although, Captain, I would disagree that vindictiveness and intellectual apathy is a necessary byproduct of the political process, I do agree that it is a likely result. I believe it is your CHOICE how you participate in process of making change. The process is just as important as the result. I appreciate your thoughtfulness even when I disagree, but I think that we hit the slippery slope when we rationalize name calling.

    Unfortunately ,Captain, with a few exceptions, not much is new 'round here. I'll be moving on to other pastures, which I guess is what the desired result was, but thank you for at least making an effort to discuss the issues.

    Hardcore-- You may disagree if you like (it is your right, after all, but I think as an individual who CARES about this city I have a right to speak my concern. I believe that was the purpose of establishing this blog. I didn't realize you were omnipotent and could evaluate the physical contributons of TT posters to this City, however, this is a discussion forum. If all I am doing is talking, I'm among like company.

    BTW- "TALK" and "ACTION" are not mutually exclusive. Talk is a verb. It is wise to discuss and confer before you take actions by making decisions. If you were going to remodel your home, you would talk to somebody to make sure that you didn't implement a design that would cause your walls to collapse. Our goal is far larger that rebuilding a house, it is rebuilding Richmond. The problem with talk is when it doesn't eventually lead to the desired results.


    As for those who think my posts are long and boring, and evidentially meritless, to save words I'll be concise: don't read them! I recall that it was Mark Twain said, the man who doesn't read has no advantage over the one who can't.


    We have a choice how we behave, how we participate. In the end, the choice to change this City is reflected in each of us.

    Good Luck!

     
  • At August 13, 2006 8:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    At this point who cares! Ah what the hell, IT'S SUMMERTIME!

    Pass the ball, pass the ball!

     
  • At August 13, 2006 10:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Speedy, I agree wholeheartedly with 98.6% of what you've said.

    >> Although, Captain, I would disagree that vindictiveness and intellectual apathy is a necessary byproduct of the political process....

    Actually, I was saying the opposite with, "As counterintuitive as it sounds, it shouldn't have to be that way." More accurately, my characterization of political vitriol would be that it's an unfortunate and unnecessary byproduct, and yet it occurs as we've seen.

    >> I appreciate your thoughtfulness even when I disagree, but I think that we hit the slippery slope when we rationalize name calling.

    But then a slippery slope is its own fallacy. Free speech is free speech, albeit with certain limitations...in a democracy. Seems to me that the Tazer is a (usually benevolent, though often anarchic) dictatorship. To allow namecalling is the Tazer's prerogative, I suppose, not that I endorse or admire such behavior, but as long as an opposing viewpoint isn't edited, erased, or squelched I'll continue to inhabit "Tazerville".

    Mark Twain also said, "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." If the fools wish to out themselves, I say let them. To me, it's more important that those opposing viewpoints are given air, not only that they might have merit, but that they might be absolutely correct. I'm willing to risk my intellectual capital for an exchange that finds the right answers.

    >> I'll be moving on to other pastures....

    I'm really, truly sorry to hear that. The Tazer (and Richmond!) can use more like you.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home