Brad T Humphreys wrote:Brian Essi wrote: Caught in a lie? You have no names. You just made all that crap up. Just admit it. "I Corey Rossen lied when I claimed people joined Summers and BL because of the Deck and SLH--I have no names or evidence of that. I just made it up to get attention."
I'll give you one: Brad Humphreys (and 6 of the 7 council members from 2.3 years ago).
Lurk around the observer Facebook page and you will find where I expressed my concerns that CCF manipulated this situation to suit their needs (ala decanting). I was not actively involved in either SLH or BL. I had hopes that SLH would exhibit some leverage to strengthen a negotiating position, but alas, we got the "Essi" show.
Who knows, maybe I'm just one of few, but the "screaming" embellished information only undermined your arguments. Jim O'Bryan's post calling it "stupid" to be asking the question of what happens if Issue 64 passes, gets some credit too. The other "Observer Half Dozen" can split some minor credit also. This is not a black and white issue, selling it that way, may impress some, but not me. Some people do respond to emotion, some need comfort in the veracity of the information presented to them. I have never really considered political messaging/pr an honorable profession; I can thank-you for proving to me otherwise.
I'll turn this back over to Corey to continue doing a great job of pushing your buttons. But I just could not help myself to not post when you are tossing around "liar"... "no names"... "you made all that crap up". It's like this kid I knew in 4th grade.... except he is still in 4th grade. That brings me to my other reason for posting: to get my Observer "label"... shall I be a Troll, A shill, conspirator, member of the Illuminati?
Brad
Brad,
That's at least one then.
I agree with you that my work with Corey is child's play--a needed diversion from the tiring work I'm doing. You accuse me of "screaming embellished information", but you cite no information that I have embellished So let's use the "facts" of this post that brought you to the Deck as an example.
First, I cited cold hard facts that our government gave away $13.4M in assets for free on just one part of the transaction--nobody has laid a glove on these facts. For his part Corey discounts these hard facts as "stats" Very telling avoidance and denial.
Second, I wrote a follow up comment: "
For example, I've been told that in those numerous "executive sessions," Madigan et al blocked the rest Council from having legal counsel review the evidence of decanting etc. If true, it begs the question: What possible legitimate motive could there have been for Council leadership to deny a full and fair analysis of the evidence against CCF and LHA while Council was allegedly "deliberating" only the litigation and not the "competitive bid" and "LOI"?
Third, my post bothered Corey so he ignored all the facts and substance, but instead wanted to know my source for the executive session comment--a classic Corey diversion thread drift tactic. I assure you that it is a "fact" that the comment was made to me by a Councilmember, but please note that I used the words "if true"--in other words its a fact tat the Councilmember told me, but it does not mean that he or she was telling me the truth or that it really happened. While I believe that member's statement is true, I did not and do not want to reveal his/her name. Hence, I consciously engaged in the child's play of diverting attention to Corey's unrelated and unsubstantiated claims--an admitted tacit--in essence giving Corey a taste of his own medicine--I have done this before and it is like high school physics--stimulus-response. It spun into Corey being outraged and calling me a liar etc. which he has done before when I have, as you say "pushed his buttons." We can debate whose is better at pushing whose buttons, but I think its fair to say from the record that Corey's reactions to my button pushing is louder than mine. Thou think he doth protest too much--and quite often.
Fourth, Please be aware too that by calling me a "4th grader" you engaged in name calling. No worries Brad, I've been called a lot worse and as things unfold and I am proven right, I fully expect the anger at me will grow louder. Also, it was Corey above, not me who used the term "liar" so you aren't being entirely accurate. I simply pointed out to Corey that he could not come up with names---and he could not so that appeared to be a "lie." He then denied he had made claims--(similar to yours but you admit your don't really know), that I have single handedly turned the whole political tide against the SLH cause resulting in the hospital closure when it could have been saved. You suggested that you and 6 of 7 council may have been swayed by the "Essi" show. You are one, there could be thousands, and whether more support me or reject me is a matter of speculation wrapped around conjecture. Al that matters to me are the facts and getting to the truth. I am not prone to sugar coating things--especially ugly things like lies and corruption. Why would I do that?
I find this comment of yours to be most troubling from an intellectual stand point in the context of your post: "
Some people do respond to emotion, some need comfort in the veracity of the information presented to them. A decent point that is torpedoed by embellishment/extrapolation is a lost point." Since objectively, I have brought a plethora of facts to the Deck and directly to Council in cogent documented form, what you suggest is that my tone and presentation make it all for naught. If we accept that premise, then doesn't that suggest that you and these alleged six Council members (and the others you suspect have been turned off by me) are acting on emotional reactivity rather than the facts presented? In other words, ignore all the facts and focus only on the style and personality of the messenger. That's the problem with politics in a nutshell. In that regard Brad, I'll let you in on secret---I'm not trying to be popular.
So Brad, I am curious, what have you done with your knowledge of CCF's decanting? Have written and engaged with Council? Did you try to support SLH? If so I applaud you.
Can you get real direct and specific with me about the facts you dispute and claim I embellish? That would be the best service to our community--- prove me wrong so that I can join Mr. Kenny and others lighting candles and we can put an end to the "Essi" show.