As time has passed it has become clearer and clearer to me that the Vanguard needs to cover the Davis City Council race as an alternative voice to the Davis Enterprise. And while I might be biased and interested in the outcome of the City Council race—who isn’t? Who doesn’t have an agenda? I will simply lay mine on the line every time I discuss the council race and people can decide on their own whether what I have to say makes sense or whether it is political rhetoric.
But more than just that drives my concern. The policies set up by the Enterprise to cover this race—a highly important election that we face—are quite simply inadequate and unfair to the public who need to be able to make an informed decision come election time.
The Vanguard is planning to allow each of the candidates directly to submit one article per week to the Vanguard. This will allow the candidates to communicate directly with the public. It is the Vanguard’s hope that this will inspire community dialogue on a variety of topics. We are also working toward creating a reader-submitted questions for a candidates forum for later in the election.
Many in this community have become increasingly concerned with the tenor of the dialogue that has emerged in this city. They will point to the sometimes contentious city council meetings that at times erupt into personal and heated discord.
And yet in many ways, fueling that discord, indeed fanning it is Bob Dunning, a Davis Enterprise columnist. Bob Dunning has often made the claim that he has no politics and only desired good public people to target for ridicule. If that is true, then it is far more disturbing than if he simply had a political agenda. He fans the flames of discord, taking cheap shots when available. As one person told me, “The substance does not matter, only the neat-word fun you can make of people and get paid for it.”
Those who complain about civility in local politics ought to pay close attention to some of the current tactics employed by Bob Dunning.
The example of young candidate Sydney Vergis is a good one to illustrate the problem. It should be pointed out that Ms. Vergis is too closely affiliated with the developers for my taste, but that does not make the cheap shot, hit and run, and really uninformed rhetorical attack by Mr. Dunning any more appetizing.
Dunning writes:
“Vergis is just 25, younger than Lamar Heystek, but that hasn’t stopped her from becoming a senior land use planner for Sutter County, which bumps into our esteemed county just as you hit rice country…
” Vergis said that in her job as a planner, she’s working to preserve habitat in Sutter County,” St. John’s piece adds. “She also strives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through smart planning, she said, and would like to put her talent in action for Davis.”
I presume she jogs to work in Sutter County, which is more than a few kilometers north as the crow flies. Or maybe she works from home.
…” Vergis said she believes the Davis City Council should support alternative transportation such as bike rentals at automated kiosks near the Amtrak station.”
Hey, maybe she can ride a rented bike to Sutter County.”
The gist of Mr. Dunning’s attack is that it would seem on the surface to be a bit hypocritical to be talking about reducing carbon footprints while commuting 45 miles each way to Sutter County. But as we have often noted with Bob Dunning, he never quite checks his facts. If he had, he would have found that Sydney Vergis actually carpools to work with others and therefore her individual contribution to the carbon emissions is greatly reduced.
More importantly, what purpose does this uninformed attack play in terms of public discourse? It does not give us additional insight into Sydney Vergis’ viewpoints. It is negative. It is an unnecessary potshot.
Again, I have no particular affinity with Sydney Vergis, but I also do not believe she deserves to be hung out on a rail over this issue by Bob Dunning.
This moves me to an additional point that I noted again in the last week. Much has been made of the Anonymous postings on the Vanguard. And yet in the past week, we have “Terry at pacbell.net,” “K.O. at yahoo.com,” “a church member named Sarah,” among others launching into attacks on various candidates. These are essentially anonymous attacks posted in the Davis Enterprise. Except of course, the individual targets do not have the opportunity to immediately respond as they would in the Vanguard. And if indeed, if they took the time to write in a 350 word response in the letters to the editor, that would be published a week later, they could be attacked again in a future Dunning column, with no opportunity to respond.
Again I ask does this aid in the public discourse? Does this help in changing the tone at City Hall? Or it is just fanning the flames and creating more attacks to which people cannot respond? Is there any benefit to the Davis Enterprise printing essentially private communications to their staff in their newspaper?
The Vanguard was created in July of 2006 because first of all I thought the progressive viewpoint did not get a fair hearing in the Davis Enterprise. But secondly, because I believe we as a community deserve better overall. We deserve to be able to hear all of the candidates perspectives on various issues. We deserve to be able to make up our own mind as to who serves our interests the best. We deserve to be able to have a public dialogue without the mudslinging from disinterested commentators who simply wish to fan the flames of resentment by pummeling easy targets. And when these targets are pummeled, they deserve the ability to be able to defend themselves in a reasonable manner.
This blog may be biased, this blog may criticize, this blog may investigate, but every single person who is the subject of this blog has the right to respond as they see fit.
There is a better way to do things, and the Vanguard wishes to lead the way.
The Vanguard wholeheartedly encourages all candidates to read all the material on the blog dealing with the race and to encourage them to comment as often as they see fit. This could lead to some pretty interesting political discussion for the community.
Let the candidates speak for themselves and the public can decide what they want to believe.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Bob Dunning’s anonymous commenters make it easier for him to fill out his column space on slow news days.
Bob Dunning’s anonymous commenters make it easier for him to fill out his column space on slow news days.
Bob Dunning’s anonymous commenters make it easier for him to fill out his column space on slow news days.
Bob Dunning’s anonymous commenters make it easier for him to fill out his column space on slow news days.
anonymous 7:07 am – If what you’re saying is correct then it must be a slow news day every day for Dunning.
I think it’s just plain ol’ mean-spiritedness.
anonymous 7:07 am – If what you’re saying is correct then it must be a slow news day every day for Dunning.
I think it’s just plain ol’ mean-spiritedness.
anonymous 7:07 am – If what you’re saying is correct then it must be a slow news day every day for Dunning.
I think it’s just plain ol’ mean-spiritedness.
anonymous 7:07 am – If what you’re saying is correct then it must be a slow news day every day for Dunning.
I think it’s just plain ol’ mean-spiritedness.
This blog is least attractive and least useful when it is attacking Bob Dunning and the Enterprise. I think you have a mistaken impression about the public understanding of Bob Dunning’s style and substance. We don’t read him for political insight. I hope Cecilia has a thicker skin.
Just report the city council race, apply the disclaimer when it is your own reporting, and don’t worry about the Enterprise.
This blog is least attractive and least useful when it is attacking Bob Dunning and the Enterprise. I think you have a mistaken impression about the public understanding of Bob Dunning’s style and substance. We don’t read him for political insight. I hope Cecilia has a thicker skin.
Just report the city council race, apply the disclaimer when it is your own reporting, and don’t worry about the Enterprise.
This blog is least attractive and least useful when it is attacking Bob Dunning and the Enterprise. I think you have a mistaken impression about the public understanding of Bob Dunning’s style and substance. We don’t read him for political insight. I hope Cecilia has a thicker skin.
Just report the city council race, apply the disclaimer when it is your own reporting, and don’t worry about the Enterprise.
This blog is least attractive and least useful when it is attacking Bob Dunning and the Enterprise. I think you have a mistaken impression about the public understanding of Bob Dunning’s style and substance. We don’t read him for political insight. I hope Cecilia has a thicker skin.
Just report the city council race, apply the disclaimer when it is your own reporting, and don’t worry about the Enterprise.
I agree with Don Shor on this. In addition to his comments, let me say that I enjoy Bob Dunning pointing out the contradictory nature of prevailing Davis attitudes. To use your example of commuting to Sutter County, that is interesting to me for several reasons. I don’t know if it would sway my vote, but it tells me something about the candidate and how she chooses to spend her time. I think Bob Dunning used humor to illustrate this point; I don’t find it mean-spirited.
But, it will be great for you (DPD) to report on the City Council race, biased as you are. We all know that and it’s okay!
I agree with Don Shor on this. In addition to his comments, let me say that I enjoy Bob Dunning pointing out the contradictory nature of prevailing Davis attitudes. To use your example of commuting to Sutter County, that is interesting to me for several reasons. I don’t know if it would sway my vote, but it tells me something about the candidate and how she chooses to spend her time. I think Bob Dunning used humor to illustrate this point; I don’t find it mean-spirited.
But, it will be great for you (DPD) to report on the City Council race, biased as you are. We all know that and it’s okay!
I agree with Don Shor on this. In addition to his comments, let me say that I enjoy Bob Dunning pointing out the contradictory nature of prevailing Davis attitudes. To use your example of commuting to Sutter County, that is interesting to me for several reasons. I don’t know if it would sway my vote, but it tells me something about the candidate and how she chooses to spend her time. I think Bob Dunning used humor to illustrate this point; I don’t find it mean-spirited.
But, it will be great for you (DPD) to report on the City Council race, biased as you are. We all know that and it’s okay!
I agree with Don Shor on this. In addition to his comments, let me say that I enjoy Bob Dunning pointing out the contradictory nature of prevailing Davis attitudes. To use your example of commuting to Sutter County, that is interesting to me for several reasons. I don’t know if it would sway my vote, but it tells me something about the candidate and how she chooses to spend her time. I think Bob Dunning used humor to illustrate this point; I don’t find it mean-spirited.
But, it will be great for you (DPD) to report on the City Council race, biased as you are. We all know that and it’s okay!
I do agree with you that the Enterprise does not lend itself to immediate response to allegations. That is why it should devote itself to investigating and reporting news and events accurately and less to commenting on it.
I do think that Bob Dunning has inserted himself into elections in the past, so I don’t think his column is as benign as Don Shor describes. I also know that we’ve been led astray by the Enterprise’s last minute reporting (the Gidaro fiasco, to be specific). I’ve stopped reading the Enterprise in the last week before elections as a result and I don’t read any campaign related letters to the Editor. I can find out what people think about a candidate other ways that are more helpful to me.
However, Don Shor’s advice is good. The Davis Enterprise, itself, is not news. Just stay on point with the campaigns and what they are doing.
I do agree with you that the Enterprise does not lend itself to immediate response to allegations. That is why it should devote itself to investigating and reporting news and events accurately and less to commenting on it.
I do think that Bob Dunning has inserted himself into elections in the past, so I don’t think his column is as benign as Don Shor describes. I also know that we’ve been led astray by the Enterprise’s last minute reporting (the Gidaro fiasco, to be specific). I’ve stopped reading the Enterprise in the last week before elections as a result and I don’t read any campaign related letters to the Editor. I can find out what people think about a candidate other ways that are more helpful to me.
However, Don Shor’s advice is good. The Davis Enterprise, itself, is not news. Just stay on point with the campaigns and what they are doing.
I do agree with you that the Enterprise does not lend itself to immediate response to allegations. That is why it should devote itself to investigating and reporting news and events accurately and less to commenting on it.
I do think that Bob Dunning has inserted himself into elections in the past, so I don’t think his column is as benign as Don Shor describes. I also know that we’ve been led astray by the Enterprise’s last minute reporting (the Gidaro fiasco, to be specific). I’ve stopped reading the Enterprise in the last week before elections as a result and I don’t read any campaign related letters to the Editor. I can find out what people think about a candidate other ways that are more helpful to me.
However, Don Shor’s advice is good. The Davis Enterprise, itself, is not news. Just stay on point with the campaigns and what they are doing.
I do agree with you that the Enterprise does not lend itself to immediate response to allegations. That is why it should devote itself to investigating and reporting news and events accurately and less to commenting on it.
I do think that Bob Dunning has inserted himself into elections in the past, so I don’t think his column is as benign as Don Shor describes. I also know that we’ve been led astray by the Enterprise’s last minute reporting (the Gidaro fiasco, to be specific). I’ve stopped reading the Enterprise in the last week before elections as a result and I don’t read any campaign related letters to the Editor. I can find out what people think about a candidate other ways that are more helpful to me.
However, Don Shor’s advice is good. The Davis Enterprise, itself, is not news. Just stay on point with the campaigns and what they are doing.
I agree with you DPD, and so do various citizens. I have heard from many, who used to like Bob Dunning’s columns, when there was more of an effort to be unbiased and fairminded in his criticisms. However, many have noted that in the past few years his column has devolved to personal attacks that do not sit well.
I, for one, almost never read his column anymore, because his caustic commentary gets too personal and nasty. It is one thing to point out general inconsistencies, but outright attacks are unacceptable. His treatment of Lamar’s campaign was shameful.
It is also unacceptable to me to “quote” write-ins that are unidentified, and could be of his own making. To me, he tends to have a certain agenda, and uses these “write-ins” to bolster his views, but in a not so nice diatribe. Just don’t like it at all, so very often just skip his column. Also find it can often be positively vapid. It seems to be one extreme or the other.
The other problem is that the Enterprise allows political opinion to bleed onto the regular news page. It’s reporting is so biased, I don’t read a lot of the articles either. I pick and choose what to read, just keeping an eye on upcoming events, etc. It is not all bad reporting – I think their coverage of the school budget fiasco has been reasonable. But lets face it, the school funding mismanagement fiasco was way under-reported. The one good feature about the Davis Enterprise is the Letter to the Editor section, which I read religiously, and sometimes contribute to.
What I find refreshing about the Vanguard is that it goes much more in depth on issues, and through the comment section, brings other views into the mix. I can ask questions and get answers. I am actually fairly conservative in my views, yet still feel welcome to voice my opionions here. The back and forth commentary is actually enjoyable to engage in – and DPD is willing to follow up on leads we give him. My hats off to you, DPD, and I do agree the Enterprise could use some major tweaking. It tends to be full of fluff, rather than good investigative reporting – as if they want to portray Davis as this perfect little town with no underlying problems. I like the fact that you are willing to rock the boat! Rocking the boat is what can bring about needed change for the better…
I agree with you DPD, and so do various citizens. I have heard from many, who used to like Bob Dunning’s columns, when there was more of an effort to be unbiased and fairminded in his criticisms. However, many have noted that in the past few years his column has devolved to personal attacks that do not sit well.
I, for one, almost never read his column anymore, because his caustic commentary gets too personal and nasty. It is one thing to point out general inconsistencies, but outright attacks are unacceptable. His treatment of Lamar’s campaign was shameful.
It is also unacceptable to me to “quote” write-ins that are unidentified, and could be of his own making. To me, he tends to have a certain agenda, and uses these “write-ins” to bolster his views, but in a not so nice diatribe. Just don’t like it at all, so very often just skip his column. Also find it can often be positively vapid. It seems to be one extreme or the other.
The other problem is that the Enterprise allows political opinion to bleed onto the regular news page. It’s reporting is so biased, I don’t read a lot of the articles either. I pick and choose what to read, just keeping an eye on upcoming events, etc. It is not all bad reporting – I think their coverage of the school budget fiasco has been reasonable. But lets face it, the school funding mismanagement fiasco was way under-reported. The one good feature about the Davis Enterprise is the Letter to the Editor section, which I read religiously, and sometimes contribute to.
What I find refreshing about the Vanguard is that it goes much more in depth on issues, and through the comment section, brings other views into the mix. I can ask questions and get answers. I am actually fairly conservative in my views, yet still feel welcome to voice my opionions here. The back and forth commentary is actually enjoyable to engage in – and DPD is willing to follow up on leads we give him. My hats off to you, DPD, and I do agree the Enterprise could use some major tweaking. It tends to be full of fluff, rather than good investigative reporting – as if they want to portray Davis as this perfect little town with no underlying problems. I like the fact that you are willing to rock the boat! Rocking the boat is what can bring about needed change for the better…
I agree with you DPD, and so do various citizens. I have heard from many, who used to like Bob Dunning’s columns, when there was more of an effort to be unbiased and fairminded in his criticisms. However, many have noted that in the past few years his column has devolved to personal attacks that do not sit well.
I, for one, almost never read his column anymore, because his caustic commentary gets too personal and nasty. It is one thing to point out general inconsistencies, but outright attacks are unacceptable. His treatment of Lamar’s campaign was shameful.
It is also unacceptable to me to “quote” write-ins that are unidentified, and could be of his own making. To me, he tends to have a certain agenda, and uses these “write-ins” to bolster his views, but in a not so nice diatribe. Just don’t like it at all, so very often just skip his column. Also find it can often be positively vapid. It seems to be one extreme or the other.
The other problem is that the Enterprise allows political opinion to bleed onto the regular news page. It’s reporting is so biased, I don’t read a lot of the articles either. I pick and choose what to read, just keeping an eye on upcoming events, etc. It is not all bad reporting – I think their coverage of the school budget fiasco has been reasonable. But lets face it, the school funding mismanagement fiasco was way under-reported. The one good feature about the Davis Enterprise is the Letter to the Editor section, which I read religiously, and sometimes contribute to.
What I find refreshing about the Vanguard is that it goes much more in depth on issues, and through the comment section, brings other views into the mix. I can ask questions and get answers. I am actually fairly conservative in my views, yet still feel welcome to voice my opionions here. The back and forth commentary is actually enjoyable to engage in – and DPD is willing to follow up on leads we give him. My hats off to you, DPD, and I do agree the Enterprise could use some major tweaking. It tends to be full of fluff, rather than good investigative reporting – as if they want to portray Davis as this perfect little town with no underlying problems. I like the fact that you are willing to rock the boat! Rocking the boat is what can bring about needed change for the better…
I agree with you DPD, and so do various citizens. I have heard from many, who used to like Bob Dunning’s columns, when there was more of an effort to be unbiased and fairminded in his criticisms. However, many have noted that in the past few years his column has devolved to personal attacks that do not sit well.
I, for one, almost never read his column anymore, because his caustic commentary gets too personal and nasty. It is one thing to point out general inconsistencies, but outright attacks are unacceptable. His treatment of Lamar’s campaign was shameful.
It is also unacceptable to me to “quote” write-ins that are unidentified, and could be of his own making. To me, he tends to have a certain agenda, and uses these “write-ins” to bolster his views, but in a not so nice diatribe. Just don’t like it at all, so very often just skip his column. Also find it can often be positively vapid. It seems to be one extreme or the other.
The other problem is that the Enterprise allows political opinion to bleed onto the regular news page. It’s reporting is so biased, I don’t read a lot of the articles either. I pick and choose what to read, just keeping an eye on upcoming events, etc. It is not all bad reporting – I think their coverage of the school budget fiasco has been reasonable. But lets face it, the school funding mismanagement fiasco was way under-reported. The one good feature about the Davis Enterprise is the Letter to the Editor section, which I read religiously, and sometimes contribute to.
What I find refreshing about the Vanguard is that it goes much more in depth on issues, and through the comment section, brings other views into the mix. I can ask questions and get answers. I am actually fairly conservative in my views, yet still feel welcome to voice my opionions here. The back and forth commentary is actually enjoyable to engage in – and DPD is willing to follow up on leads we give him. My hats off to you, DPD, and I do agree the Enterprise could use some major tweaking. It tends to be full of fluff, rather than good investigative reporting – as if they want to portray Davis as this perfect little town with no underlying problems. I like the fact that you are willing to rock the boat! Rocking the boat is what can bring about needed change for the better…
DPD – I certainly don’t have any problem with you reporting on the campaigns for City Council. Newspapers are not pillars of unbiased fact-finding anyway, and continually back one candidate or other – which colors their reporting on future news articles. I feel the Enterprise did just that in the VO case.
Lovenberg and Harris, candidates for the School Board, were supported by the Davis Enterprise. Both these candidates wanted to close VO period, and were against it as a charter school. Not too long after the Davis Enterprise endorsement, it ran an article about the failure of charter schools in Ohio. Clearly a hit piece to bolster Harris and Lovenberg’s position to close VO. Not nice…nor ethical journalistically.
“I will simply lay mine on the line every time I discuss the council race and people can decide on their own whether what I have to say makes sense or whether it is political rhetoric.”
David,
I think this is a reasonable decision. I know you occassionally like to label your commentaries as “commentary.” But the fact is, everything you write on your blog comes with your political bias. And that is fine: this is opinion journalism. As long as you let your readers know up front that you are married to one of the candidates, they can make up their own minds as to what you have to say.
I would suggest, however, that you stop writing under the pen name “Doug Paul Davis.” That just adds to the confusion. I speak to people all the time in town who ask me, “Who is Doug Paul Davis?”
Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.
A humorless friend of mine (who happens to be very conservative) told me he cannot watch David Letterman, because “Letterman is out to get George Bush.” I explained to him that Letterman makes fun of Bush just because Bush is the guy on the scene now. When Bill Clinton was in office, Clinton was Letterman’s daily target….
That is just how Bob Dunning works. I’ve been reading his column for 30 years. He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics. That said, some people have been richer targets (most notably Dave Rosenberg and Julie Partansky) and others less so. So if you have thin skin and are a rich target for jokes, you might incorrectly conclude that Dunning is acting in a partisan fashion. But he’s not.
DPD – I certainly don’t have any problem with you reporting on the campaigns for City Council. Newspapers are not pillars of unbiased fact-finding anyway, and continually back one candidate or other – which colors their reporting on future news articles. I feel the Enterprise did just that in the VO case.
Lovenberg and Harris, candidates for the School Board, were supported by the Davis Enterprise. Both these candidates wanted to close VO period, and were against it as a charter school. Not too long after the Davis Enterprise endorsement, it ran an article about the failure of charter schools in Ohio. Clearly a hit piece to bolster Harris and Lovenberg’s position to close VO. Not nice…nor ethical journalistically.
“I will simply lay mine on the line every time I discuss the council race and people can decide on their own whether what I have to say makes sense or whether it is political rhetoric.”
David,
I think this is a reasonable decision. I know you occassionally like to label your commentaries as “commentary.” But the fact is, everything you write on your blog comes with your political bias. And that is fine: this is opinion journalism. As long as you let your readers know up front that you are married to one of the candidates, they can make up their own minds as to what you have to say.
I would suggest, however, that you stop writing under the pen name “Doug Paul Davis.” That just adds to the confusion. I speak to people all the time in town who ask me, “Who is Doug Paul Davis?”
Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.
A humorless friend of mine (who happens to be very conservative) told me he cannot watch David Letterman, because “Letterman is out to get George Bush.” I explained to him that Letterman makes fun of Bush just because Bush is the guy on the scene now. When Bill Clinton was in office, Clinton was Letterman’s daily target….
That is just how Bob Dunning works. I’ve been reading his column for 30 years. He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics. That said, some people have been richer targets (most notably Dave Rosenberg and Julie Partansky) and others less so. So if you have thin skin and are a rich target for jokes, you might incorrectly conclude that Dunning is acting in a partisan fashion. But he’s not.
DPD – I certainly don’t have any problem with you reporting on the campaigns for City Council. Newspapers are not pillars of unbiased fact-finding anyway, and continually back one candidate or other – which colors their reporting on future news articles. I feel the Enterprise did just that in the VO case.
Lovenberg and Harris, candidates for the School Board, were supported by the Davis Enterprise. Both these candidates wanted to close VO period, and were against it as a charter school. Not too long after the Davis Enterprise endorsement, it ran an article about the failure of charter schools in Ohio. Clearly a hit piece to bolster Harris and Lovenberg’s position to close VO. Not nice…nor ethical journalistically.
“I will simply lay mine on the line every time I discuss the council race and people can decide on their own whether what I have to say makes sense or whether it is political rhetoric.”
David,
I think this is a reasonable decision. I know you occassionally like to label your commentaries as “commentary.” But the fact is, everything you write on your blog comes with your political bias. And that is fine: this is opinion journalism. As long as you let your readers know up front that you are married to one of the candidates, they can make up their own minds as to what you have to say.
I would suggest, however, that you stop writing under the pen name “Doug Paul Davis.” That just adds to the confusion. I speak to people all the time in town who ask me, “Who is Doug Paul Davis?”
Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.
A humorless friend of mine (who happens to be very conservative) told me he cannot watch David Letterman, because “Letterman is out to get George Bush.” I explained to him that Letterman makes fun of Bush just because Bush is the guy on the scene now. When Bill Clinton was in office, Clinton was Letterman’s daily target….
That is just how Bob Dunning works. I’ve been reading his column for 30 years. He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics. That said, some people have been richer targets (most notably Dave Rosenberg and Julie Partansky) and others less so. So if you have thin skin and are a rich target for jokes, you might incorrectly conclude that Dunning is acting in a partisan fashion. But he’s not.
DPD – I certainly don’t have any problem with you reporting on the campaigns for City Council. Newspapers are not pillars of unbiased fact-finding anyway, and continually back one candidate or other – which colors their reporting on future news articles. I feel the Enterprise did just that in the VO case.
Lovenberg and Harris, candidates for the School Board, were supported by the Davis Enterprise. Both these candidates wanted to close VO period, and were against it as a charter school. Not too long after the Davis Enterprise endorsement, it ran an article about the failure of charter schools in Ohio. Clearly a hit piece to bolster Harris and Lovenberg’s position to close VO. Not nice…nor ethical journalistically.
“I will simply lay mine on the line every time I discuss the council race and people can decide on their own whether what I have to say makes sense or whether it is political rhetoric.”
David,
I think this is a reasonable decision. I know you occassionally like to label your commentaries as “commentary.” But the fact is, everything you write on your blog comes with your political bias. And that is fine: this is opinion journalism. As long as you let your readers know up front that you are married to one of the candidates, they can make up their own minds as to what you have to say.
I would suggest, however, that you stop writing under the pen name “Doug Paul Davis.” That just adds to the confusion. I speak to people all the time in town who ask me, “Who is Doug Paul Davis?”
Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.
A humorless friend of mine (who happens to be very conservative) told me he cannot watch David Letterman, because “Letterman is out to get George Bush.” I explained to him that Letterman makes fun of Bush just because Bush is the guy on the scene now. When Bill Clinton was in office, Clinton was Letterman’s daily target….
That is just how Bob Dunning works. I’ve been reading his column for 30 years. He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics. That said, some people have been richer targets (most notably Dave Rosenberg and Julie Partansky) and others less so. So if you have thin skin and are a rich target for jokes, you might incorrectly conclude that Dunning is acting in a partisan fashion. But he’s not.
It is disingenous to say that Bob Dunning is only being humorous when he ridicules people the way that he did Vergis.
First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them.
Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.
Apparently, there are quite a number of people in Davis who think it is quite funny to make up things about other people in the community in order to subject them to ridicule. Rather odd, isn’t it?
–Richard Estes
It is disingenous to say that Bob Dunning is only being humorous when he ridicules people the way that he did Vergis.
First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them.
Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.
Apparently, there are quite a number of people in Davis who think it is quite funny to make up things about other people in the community in order to subject them to ridicule. Rather odd, isn’t it?
–Richard Estes
It is disingenous to say that Bob Dunning is only being humorous when he ridicules people the way that he did Vergis.
First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them.
Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.
Apparently, there are quite a number of people in Davis who think it is quite funny to make up things about other people in the community in order to subject them to ridicule. Rather odd, isn’t it?
–Richard Estes
It is disingenous to say that Bob Dunning is only being humorous when he ridicules people the way that he did Vergis.
First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them.
Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.
Apparently, there are quite a number of people in Davis who think it is quite funny to make up things about other people in the community in order to subject them to ridicule. Rather odd, isn’t it?
–Richard Estes
The Vanguard is much ‘fairer’ than I would wish it to be. We don’t need another outlet for the moneyed – corporate interest point of view. That’s all one will find in the Enterprise. But the Vanguard will present that as well as the ‘progressive’ point. The Enterprise are not interested in reporting on anything that might educate anyone that there might be a counter point of view. So the Vanguard should take ‘fairness’ criticisms with a grain of salt.
Some of us living in this town have made a choice NOT to commute to a job. I could very easily afford a house on the other side of the river.But I decided some years ago to put my money where my politics were. So I rent where I work and I walk or bicycle. I know this is humorous to the many SUV – driving members of our community. However, where someone lives and commutes from is a huge factor to some of us in deciding our representatives.
The Enterprise is not without value however. Based on the values and interests of the local newspaper, I immediately eliminate any candidate endorsed by said enterprise from my short list.
The Vanguard is much ‘fairer’ than I would wish it to be. We don’t need another outlet for the moneyed – corporate interest point of view. That’s all one will find in the Enterprise. But the Vanguard will present that as well as the ‘progressive’ point. The Enterprise are not interested in reporting on anything that might educate anyone that there might be a counter point of view. So the Vanguard should take ‘fairness’ criticisms with a grain of salt.
Some of us living in this town have made a choice NOT to commute to a job. I could very easily afford a house on the other side of the river.But I decided some years ago to put my money where my politics were. So I rent where I work and I walk or bicycle. I know this is humorous to the many SUV – driving members of our community. However, where someone lives and commutes from is a huge factor to some of us in deciding our representatives.
The Enterprise is not without value however. Based on the values and interests of the local newspaper, I immediately eliminate any candidate endorsed by said enterprise from my short list.
The Vanguard is much ‘fairer’ than I would wish it to be. We don’t need another outlet for the moneyed – corporate interest point of view. That’s all one will find in the Enterprise. But the Vanguard will present that as well as the ‘progressive’ point. The Enterprise are not interested in reporting on anything that might educate anyone that there might be a counter point of view. So the Vanguard should take ‘fairness’ criticisms with a grain of salt.
Some of us living in this town have made a choice NOT to commute to a job. I could very easily afford a house on the other side of the river.But I decided some years ago to put my money where my politics were. So I rent where I work and I walk or bicycle. I know this is humorous to the many SUV – driving members of our community. However, where someone lives and commutes from is a huge factor to some of us in deciding our representatives.
The Enterprise is not without value however. Based on the values and interests of the local newspaper, I immediately eliminate any candidate endorsed by said enterprise from my short list.
The Vanguard is much ‘fairer’ than I would wish it to be. We don’t need another outlet for the moneyed – corporate interest point of view. That’s all one will find in the Enterprise. But the Vanguard will present that as well as the ‘progressive’ point. The Enterprise are not interested in reporting on anything that might educate anyone that there might be a counter point of view. So the Vanguard should take ‘fairness’ criticisms with a grain of salt.
Some of us living in this town have made a choice NOT to commute to a job. I could very easily afford a house on the other side of the river.But I decided some years ago to put my money where my politics were. So I rent where I work and I walk or bicycle. I know this is humorous to the many SUV – driving members of our community. However, where someone lives and commutes from is a huge factor to some of us in deciding our representatives.
The Enterprise is not without value however. Based on the values and interests of the local newspaper, I immediately eliminate any candidate endorsed by said enterprise from my short list.
One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made.
Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.
One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made.
Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.
One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made.
Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.
One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made.
Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.
DPD,
I agree with you that Dunning does take his share of cheap shots. I personally think his last one against Cecilia stunk, I also thought his making fun of Lamar because of his age and joking about Lamar being in diapers was uncalled for.
This eco thing, however is no cheap shot. People like Vergis and others rail about bicycles all day long, except when they need to get to work or what have you. Davis is progressive, but I still see SUV’s cars, trucks, and minivans the same as in any other town. I think people like Vergis should push the bicycle thing in moderation and not get so darned extreme about it. You can talk about cutting down CO2 only so much. We all drive. We all have to. This is the real world.
DPD,
I agree with you that Dunning does take his share of cheap shots. I personally think his last one against Cecilia stunk, I also thought his making fun of Lamar because of his age and joking about Lamar being in diapers was uncalled for.
This eco thing, however is no cheap shot. People like Vergis and others rail about bicycles all day long, except when they need to get to work or what have you. Davis is progressive, but I still see SUV’s cars, trucks, and minivans the same as in any other town. I think people like Vergis should push the bicycle thing in moderation and not get so darned extreme about it. You can talk about cutting down CO2 only so much. We all drive. We all have to. This is the real world.
DPD,
I agree with you that Dunning does take his share of cheap shots. I personally think his last one against Cecilia stunk, I also thought his making fun of Lamar because of his age and joking about Lamar being in diapers was uncalled for.
This eco thing, however is no cheap shot. People like Vergis and others rail about bicycles all day long, except when they need to get to work or what have you. Davis is progressive, but I still see SUV’s cars, trucks, and minivans the same as in any other town. I think people like Vergis should push the bicycle thing in moderation and not get so darned extreme about it. You can talk about cutting down CO2 only so much. We all drive. We all have to. This is the real world.
DPD,
I agree with you that Dunning does take his share of cheap shots. I personally think his last one against Cecilia stunk, I also thought his making fun of Lamar because of his age and joking about Lamar being in diapers was uncalled for.
This eco thing, however is no cheap shot. People like Vergis and others rail about bicycles all day long, except when they need to get to work or what have you. Davis is progressive, but I still see SUV’s cars, trucks, and minivans the same as in any other town. I think people like Vergis should push the bicycle thing in moderation and not get so darned extreme about it. You can talk about cutting down CO2 only so much. We all drive. We all have to. This is the real world.
from the darkside: did you miss the part of the post where DPD says that Vergis uses a carpool to get to work, another instance of Dunning not letting the facts get in the way of a good, snide insinuation of hypocrisy?
–Richard Estes
from the darkside: did you miss the part of the post where DPD says that Vergis uses a carpool to get to work, another instance of Dunning not letting the facts get in the way of a good, snide insinuation of hypocrisy?
–Richard Estes
from the darkside: did you miss the part of the post where DPD says that Vergis uses a carpool to get to work, another instance of Dunning not letting the facts get in the way of a good, snide insinuation of hypocrisy?
–Richard Estes
from the darkside: did you miss the part of the post where DPD says that Vergis uses a carpool to get to work, another instance of Dunning not letting the facts get in the way of a good, snide insinuation of hypocrisy?
–Richard Estes
Wow! What a tortured piece of rationalization you’ve engaged in here. You have a HUGE conflict of interest. Your unwillingness to disengage will only further erode your credibility and leave you open to attacks that frankly you will not be able to refute. The fact that the Enterprise and Bob Dunning are not perfect is not sufficient justification for you to simply follow suit and jump in the pool with them. It’s a shame that when you were presented the opportunity to declare your conflict of interest and opt out you instead chose the easier, more expeditious route and rationalized your behavior based on the time-worn “Everyone else does it!” Childish, poorly reasoned and unethical. Sadly, just more of the same.
Wow! What a tortured piece of rationalization you’ve engaged in here. You have a HUGE conflict of interest. Your unwillingness to disengage will only further erode your credibility and leave you open to attacks that frankly you will not be able to refute. The fact that the Enterprise and Bob Dunning are not perfect is not sufficient justification for you to simply follow suit and jump in the pool with them. It’s a shame that when you were presented the opportunity to declare your conflict of interest and opt out you instead chose the easier, more expeditious route and rationalized your behavior based on the time-worn “Everyone else does it!” Childish, poorly reasoned and unethical. Sadly, just more of the same.
Wow! What a tortured piece of rationalization you’ve engaged in here. You have a HUGE conflict of interest. Your unwillingness to disengage will only further erode your credibility and leave you open to attacks that frankly you will not be able to refute. The fact that the Enterprise and Bob Dunning are not perfect is not sufficient justification for you to simply follow suit and jump in the pool with them. It’s a shame that when you were presented the opportunity to declare your conflict of interest and opt out you instead chose the easier, more expeditious route and rationalized your behavior based on the time-worn “Everyone else does it!” Childish, poorly reasoned and unethical. Sadly, just more of the same.
Wow! What a tortured piece of rationalization you’ve engaged in here. You have a HUGE conflict of interest. Your unwillingness to disengage will only further erode your credibility and leave you open to attacks that frankly you will not be able to refute. The fact that the Enterprise and Bob Dunning are not perfect is not sufficient justification for you to simply follow suit and jump in the pool with them. It’s a shame that when you were presented the opportunity to declare your conflict of interest and opt out you instead chose the easier, more expeditious route and rationalized your behavior based on the time-worn “Everyone else does it!” Childish, poorly reasoned and unethical. Sadly, just more of the same.
Here is a prime example of how you can’t even practice the form of even-handedness let alone the substance. You list your wife on the postings menu as: Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald. You also list her as: Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald. You list Sydney Vergis as Sydney Vergis, but you list three members of council as “Asmundson, Saylor, or Souza.” Why the difference? What are some people presented with their entire name and others relegated to surname only status? We know why. It’s because you can’t even be fair on the most basic of levels. It’s such a glaring example of how you refuse to even conceded your structural biases against those you don’t like or who don’t support your wife. You have a long way to go my friend.
Here is a prime example of how you can’t even practice the form of even-handedness let alone the substance. You list your wife on the postings menu as: Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald. You also list her as: Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald. You list Sydney Vergis as Sydney Vergis, but you list three members of council as “Asmundson, Saylor, or Souza.” Why the difference? What are some people presented with their entire name and others relegated to surname only status? We know why. It’s because you can’t even be fair on the most basic of levels. It’s such a glaring example of how you refuse to even conceded your structural biases against those you don’t like or who don’t support your wife. You have a long way to go my friend.
Here is a prime example of how you can’t even practice the form of even-handedness let alone the substance. You list your wife on the postings menu as: Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald. You also list her as: Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald. You list Sydney Vergis as Sydney Vergis, but you list three members of council as “Asmundson, Saylor, or Souza.” Why the difference? What are some people presented with their entire name and others relegated to surname only status? We know why. It’s because you can’t even be fair on the most basic of levels. It’s such a glaring example of how you refuse to even conceded your structural biases against those you don’t like or who don’t support your wife. You have a long way to go my friend.
Here is a prime example of how you can’t even practice the form of even-handedness let alone the substance. You list your wife on the postings menu as: Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald. You also list her as: Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald. You list Sydney Vergis as Sydney Vergis, but you list three members of council as “Asmundson, Saylor, or Souza.” Why the difference? What are some people presented with their entire name and others relegated to surname only status? We know why. It’s because you can’t even be fair on the most basic of levels. It’s such a glaring example of how you refuse to even conceded your structural biases against those you don’t like or who don’t support your wife. You have a long way to go my friend.
The labels are a timing issue. The blog was already going several months when labels became an available feature. The first labels I put only had last names, and since I have put up full names, I never went back to change it once I put them in. So that’s the explanation. It’s not really as nefarious.
The labels are a timing issue. The blog was already going several months when labels became an available feature. The first labels I put only had last names, and since I have put up full names, I never went back to change it once I put them in. So that’s the explanation. It’s not really as nefarious.
The labels are a timing issue. The blog was already going several months when labels became an available feature. The first labels I put only had last names, and since I have put up full names, I never went back to change it once I put them in. So that’s the explanation. It’s not really as nefarious.
The labels are a timing issue. The blog was already going several months when labels became an available feature. The first labels I put only had last names, and since I have put up full names, I never went back to change it once I put them in. So that’s the explanation. It’s not really as nefarious.
I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.
I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.
I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.
I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.
i think as long as you’re up front about your relation with cecilia and your political beliefs, that it’s perfectly fine to write what you want to. people have a right to freedom of speech and the press, and blogs are a vibrant example of both. people do not cede their constitutional rights when their friends and family run for office.
and while i share your irritation with dunning’s feigned “just for laughs” shtick and not-so-evenhandedness, the solution IMO is simply to render him irrelevant by creating your own content. rewarding mediocre commentary by giving it hits and attention isn’t terribly productive.
i think as long as you’re up front about your relation with cecilia and your political beliefs, that it’s perfectly fine to write what you want to. people have a right to freedom of speech and the press, and blogs are a vibrant example of both. people do not cede their constitutional rights when their friends and family run for office.
and while i share your irritation with dunning’s feigned “just for laughs” shtick and not-so-evenhandedness, the solution IMO is simply to render him irrelevant by creating your own content. rewarding mediocre commentary by giving it hits and attention isn’t terribly productive.
i think as long as you’re up front about your relation with cecilia and your political beliefs, that it’s perfectly fine to write what you want to. people have a right to freedom of speech and the press, and blogs are a vibrant example of both. people do not cede their constitutional rights when their friends and family run for office.
and while i share your irritation with dunning’s feigned “just for laughs” shtick and not-so-evenhandedness, the solution IMO is simply to render him irrelevant by creating your own content. rewarding mediocre commentary by giving it hits and attention isn’t terribly productive.
i think as long as you’re up front about your relation with cecilia and your political beliefs, that it’s perfectly fine to write what you want to. people have a right to freedom of speech and the press, and blogs are a vibrant example of both. people do not cede their constitutional rights when their friends and family run for office.
and while i share your irritation with dunning’s feigned “just for laughs” shtick and not-so-evenhandedness, the solution IMO is simply to render him irrelevant by creating your own content. rewarding mediocre commentary by giving it hits and attention isn’t terribly productive.
“Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.”
I don’t find nasty attacks that are “below the belt” humorous, but nevertheless I do have a sense of humor. Just because someone does not care for Bob Dunning’s brand of humor does not necessarily mean they don’t have a sense of humor. It is a matter of taste…
Furthermore, Bob Dunning most definitely has a political agenda that is quite transparent. He clearly disliked Lamar Heystek’s candidacy. It’s OK to hit at Lamar’s political views, but not attack him personally. The attacks as I remember them were particularly vicious. Below-the-belt journalism is just not appropriate in my book.
“He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics.”
Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.
“First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them…Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.”
Amen. And as a result, Bob Dunning is not well liked by many. It is also part of the reason many of us have turned to DPD’s blog, which is not mean- spirited. And by the way DPD, don’t change your psuedonym – it works for me! It could stand for
“Davis Politics Demystified”! Or how about “Dopey Press Debunked”? How about “Davis Pulled from the Darkside”?
“One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made…Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.”
That would be an interesting enterprise. I would love to hear what these two have to say, but bet they would never agree to such an interview…
“I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.”
Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.
Furthermore, without DPD’s investigative reporting, all the business about Total School Solutions would have continued to fly under the radar screen. The public needs to know about these sorts of things…
“Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.”
I don’t find nasty attacks that are “below the belt” humorous, but nevertheless I do have a sense of humor. Just because someone does not care for Bob Dunning’s brand of humor does not necessarily mean they don’t have a sense of humor. It is a matter of taste…
Furthermore, Bob Dunning most definitely has a political agenda that is quite transparent. He clearly disliked Lamar Heystek’s candidacy. It’s OK to hit at Lamar’s political views, but not attack him personally. The attacks as I remember them were particularly vicious. Below-the-belt journalism is just not appropriate in my book.
“He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics.”
Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.
“First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them…Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.”
Amen. And as a result, Bob Dunning is not well liked by many. It is also part of the reason many of us have turned to DPD’s blog, which is not mean- spirited. And by the way DPD, don’t change your psuedonym – it works for me! It could stand for
“Davis Politics Demystified”! Or how about “Dopey Press Debunked”? How about “Davis Pulled from the Darkside”?
“One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made…Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.”
That would be an interesting enterprise. I would love to hear what these two have to say, but bet they would never agree to such an interview…
“I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.”
Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.
Furthermore, without DPD’s investigative reporting, all the business about Total School Solutions would have continued to fly under the radar screen. The public needs to know about these sorts of things…
“Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.”
I don’t find nasty attacks that are “below the belt” humorous, but nevertheless I do have a sense of humor. Just because someone does not care for Bob Dunning’s brand of humor does not necessarily mean they don’t have a sense of humor. It is a matter of taste…
Furthermore, Bob Dunning most definitely has a political agenda that is quite transparent. He clearly disliked Lamar Heystek’s candidacy. It’s OK to hit at Lamar’s political views, but not attack him personally. The attacks as I remember them were particularly vicious. Below-the-belt journalism is just not appropriate in my book.
“He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics.”
Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.
“First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them…Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.”
Amen. And as a result, Bob Dunning is not well liked by many. It is also part of the reason many of us have turned to DPD’s blog, which is not mean- spirited. And by the way DPD, don’t change your psuedonym – it works for me! It could stand for
“Davis Politics Demystified”! Or how about “Dopey Press Debunked”? How about “Davis Pulled from the Darkside”?
“One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made…Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.”
That would be an interesting enterprise. I would love to hear what these two have to say, but bet they would never agree to such an interview…
“I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.”
Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.
Furthermore, without DPD’s investigative reporting, all the business about Total School Solutions would have continued to fly under the radar screen. The public needs to know about these sorts of things…
“Regarding Bob Dunning: you just don’t get it. He is a humorist. That’s it. He really is not a partisan. Bob does not have an axe to grind. When he makes fun of a public figure, his intention is not to harm that person or to disadvantage their campaigns. His intention is get a laugh.”
I don’t find nasty attacks that are “below the belt” humorous, but nevertheless I do have a sense of humor. Just because someone does not care for Bob Dunning’s brand of humor does not necessarily mean they don’t have a sense of humor. It is a matter of taste…
Furthermore, Bob Dunning most definitely has a political agenda that is quite transparent. He clearly disliked Lamar Heystek’s candidacy. It’s OK to hit at Lamar’s political views, but not attack him personally. The attacks as I remember them were particularly vicious. Below-the-belt journalism is just not appropriate in my book.
“He tries to get a laugh out of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s politics.”
Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.
“First, in many instances, there is a clear political purpose, he directs these efforts towards people that he politically dislikes. And, his intention is, through ridicule, to politically damage them…Second, he is frequently factually wrong in what he writes, as he was with Vergis, and with Lamar Heystek as well. If called on it, instead of admitting his mistake, he instead exploits it as another opportunity to ridicule the person, as he did with Heystek.”
Amen. And as a result, Bob Dunning is not well liked by many. It is also part of the reason many of us have turned to DPD’s blog, which is not mean- spirited. And by the way DPD, don’t change your psuedonym – it works for me! It could stand for
“Davis Politics Demystified”! Or how about “Dopey Press Debunked”? How about “Davis Pulled from the Darkside”?
“One of the interesting, and thus far undiscussed, questions that arises from the DJUSD Budget crisis is the fact that one City Council candidate and one County Supervisor candidate were members of the DJUSD Board during the period when the decisions that have caused the current problems were made…Without letting all the other DJUSD Board members off the hook, perhaps it would be prudent to ask Jim Provenza and Don Saylor to share with the voters their “inside” perspective on how and why the DJUSD is where it is right now.”
That would be an interesting enterprise. I would love to hear what these two have to say, but bet they would never agree to such an interview…
“I understand. But it’s another example of how you give your enemies fuel. You should be setting the standard and making everyone else live up to yours. I’m sure there are technical explanations or structural rationales for the way things are but why not strive for fairness and balance? You just might find that people respond to it.”
Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.
Furthermore, without DPD’s investigative reporting, all the business about Total School Solutions would have continued to fly under the radar screen. The public needs to know about these sorts of things…
“Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.”
Be great, just for a change to see Bob try to find humor in, say, John Whitcombe or Chuck Roe. Though they don’t hold public office, these “heavy-hitters” sure spend a lot of time in City Council chambers, and generate lots of laughs when councilmembers come over to shake hands and shoot the breeze with them during city council meeting breaks.
But, of course, that would mean Bob Dunning would have to get up off the couch and physically attend the meetings, since all the interestingly funny stuff happens out of the range of the TV cameras…
“Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.”
Be great, just for a change to see Bob try to find humor in, say, John Whitcombe or Chuck Roe. Though they don’t hold public office, these “heavy-hitters” sure spend a lot of time in City Council chambers, and generate lots of laughs when councilmembers come over to shake hands and shoot the breeze with them during city council meeting breaks.
But, of course, that would mean Bob Dunning would have to get up off the couch and physically attend the meetings, since all the interestingly funny stuff happens out of the range of the TV cameras…
“Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.”
Be great, just for a change to see Bob try to find humor in, say, John Whitcombe or Chuck Roe. Though they don’t hold public office, these “heavy-hitters” sure spend a lot of time in City Council chambers, and generate lots of laughs when councilmembers come over to shake hands and shoot the breeze with them during city council meeting breaks.
But, of course, that would mean Bob Dunning would have to get up off the couch and physically attend the meetings, since all the interestingly funny stuff happens out of the range of the TV cameras…
“Bob Dunning tries to get a laugh at the expense of anyone in public office, regardless of the target’s reputation or dignity as a human being.”
Be great, just for a change to see Bob try to find humor in, say, John Whitcombe or Chuck Roe. Though they don’t hold public office, these “heavy-hitters” sure spend a lot of time in City Council chambers, and generate lots of laughs when councilmembers come over to shake hands and shoot the breeze with them during city council meeting breaks.
But, of course, that would mean Bob Dunning would have to get up off the couch and physically attend the meetings, since all the interestingly funny stuff happens out of the range of the TV cameras…
Wow, “phooey” sure is long winded. I agree with Rich Rifkin, for the second time in 6 months. Dpd should come straight forward about the council race and admit that he supports his wife because very few others do.
Bob Dunning is great and for those of us who have read his column for more than 30 years he is right on about people the majority of the time.
His comments about Julie Partansky were great and we all realized that Julie was/is that special person from her village who wound up here in davis.
Bob is also correct about Lamar. Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion.
Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.
Wow, “phooey” sure is long winded. I agree with Rich Rifkin, for the second time in 6 months. Dpd should come straight forward about the council race and admit that he supports his wife because very few others do.
Bob Dunning is great and for those of us who have read his column for more than 30 years he is right on about people the majority of the time.
His comments about Julie Partansky were great and we all realized that Julie was/is that special person from her village who wound up here in davis.
Bob is also correct about Lamar. Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion.
Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.
Wow, “phooey” sure is long winded. I agree with Rich Rifkin, for the second time in 6 months. Dpd should come straight forward about the council race and admit that he supports his wife because very few others do.
Bob Dunning is great and for those of us who have read his column for more than 30 years he is right on about people the majority of the time.
His comments about Julie Partansky were great and we all realized that Julie was/is that special person from her village who wound up here in davis.
Bob is also correct about Lamar. Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion.
Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.
Wow, “phooey” sure is long winded. I agree with Rich Rifkin, for the second time in 6 months. Dpd should come straight forward about the council race and admit that he supports his wife because very few others do.
Bob Dunning is great and for those of us who have read his column for more than 30 years he is right on about people the majority of the time.
His comments about Julie Partansky were great and we all realized that Julie was/is that special person from her village who wound up here in davis.
Bob is also correct about Lamar. Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion.
Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.
“Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.”
Let me get this straight. Because the Enterprise is, in your storied opinion, flawed, that justifies this blog in behaving in the same manner? You’re an ethical genius aren’t you? How childish. How typical. Though I did think the name calling was the best part of your commentary.
“Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.”
Let me get this straight. Because the Enterprise is, in your storied opinion, flawed, that justifies this blog in behaving in the same manner? You’re an ethical genius aren’t you? How childish. How typical. Though I did think the name calling was the best part of your commentary.
“Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.”
Let me get this straight. Because the Enterprise is, in your storied opinion, flawed, that justifies this blog in behaving in the same manner? You’re an ethical genius aren’t you? How childish. How typical. Though I did think the name calling was the best part of your commentary.
“Phooey on youey! DPD has always strived for fairness and balance, despite making no bones about this column being commentary and noting his “bias” as a progressive. I, for one, am glad he made the decision to report on the City Council race, since I don’t think we will get a fair assessment in the Davis Enterprise. I am smart enough to sift through what I think are biases in his commentary, to make up my own mind.”
Let me get this straight. Because the Enterprise is, in your storied opinion, flawed, that justifies this blog in behaving in the same manner? You’re an ethical genius aren’t you? How childish. How typical. Though I did think the name calling was the best part of your commentary.
anonymous 8:36 said…
Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date.
By my score, even though he’s in the Council minority, Lamar has done a helluva lot for Davis in his short time on the Council.
Right when he got on the Council, he called for a permanent roadway maintenance fund and led the Council in passing a budget that included $100,000 more for repairs to streets, sidewalks and bike paths. I live on a street that has been recently repaired because Lamar took the lead on the issue.
Another issue Lamar has made progress on is our agricultural mitigation ordinance. He’s the one who said for every acre of ag land that we lose to development, at least two acres must be preserved. This minimum 2:1 mitigation standard is the most stringent in the state.
Lamar was there every step of the way to ensure that renters had the same First Amendment rights as homeowners to post political signs. He worked with students to get provisions of a bill vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger implemented in Davis.
Just recently, Lamar has taken the lead to advocate at Council meetings and literally stood side by side with senior citizens asking for local and state measures to address rent increases and require emergency power generators at assisted living facilities. Now we have legislation pending for both.
Shall I continue?
anonymous 8:36 said…
Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date.
By my score, even though he’s in the Council minority, Lamar has done a helluva lot for Davis in his short time on the Council.
Right when he got on the Council, he called for a permanent roadway maintenance fund and led the Council in passing a budget that included $100,000 more for repairs to streets, sidewalks and bike paths. I live on a street that has been recently repaired because Lamar took the lead on the issue.
Another issue Lamar has made progress on is our agricultural mitigation ordinance. He’s the one who said for every acre of ag land that we lose to development, at least two acres must be preserved. This minimum 2:1 mitigation standard is the most stringent in the state.
Lamar was there every step of the way to ensure that renters had the same First Amendment rights as homeowners to post political signs. He worked with students to get provisions of a bill vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger implemented in Davis.
Just recently, Lamar has taken the lead to advocate at Council meetings and literally stood side by side with senior citizens asking for local and state measures to address rent increases and require emergency power generators at assisted living facilities. Now we have legislation pending for both.
Shall I continue?
anonymous 8:36 said…
Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date.
By my score, even though he’s in the Council minority, Lamar has done a helluva lot for Davis in his short time on the Council.
Right when he got on the Council, he called for a permanent roadway maintenance fund and led the Council in passing a budget that included $100,000 more for repairs to streets, sidewalks and bike paths. I live on a street that has been recently repaired because Lamar took the lead on the issue.
Another issue Lamar has made progress on is our agricultural mitigation ordinance. He’s the one who said for every acre of ag land that we lose to development, at least two acres must be preserved. This minimum 2:1 mitigation standard is the most stringent in the state.
Lamar was there every step of the way to ensure that renters had the same First Amendment rights as homeowners to post political signs. He worked with students to get provisions of a bill vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger implemented in Davis.
Just recently, Lamar has taken the lead to advocate at Council meetings and literally stood side by side with senior citizens asking for local and state measures to address rent increases and require emergency power generators at assisted living facilities. Now we have legislation pending for both.
Shall I continue?
anonymous 8:36 said…
Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date.
By my score, even though he’s in the Council minority, Lamar has done a helluva lot for Davis in his short time on the Council.
Right when he got on the Council, he called for a permanent roadway maintenance fund and led the Council in passing a budget that included $100,000 more for repairs to streets, sidewalks and bike paths. I live on a street that has been recently repaired because Lamar took the lead on the issue.
Another issue Lamar has made progress on is our agricultural mitigation ordinance. He’s the one who said for every acre of ag land that we lose to development, at least two acres must be preserved. This minimum 2:1 mitigation standard is the most stringent in the state.
Lamar was there every step of the way to ensure that renters had the same First Amendment rights as homeowners to post political signs. He worked with students to get provisions of a bill vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger implemented in Davis.
Just recently, Lamar has taken the lead to advocate at Council meetings and literally stood side by side with senior citizens asking for local and state measures to address rent increases and require emergency power generators at assisted living facilities. Now we have legislation pending for both.
Shall I continue?
“Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion. Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.”
I don’t agree with Lamar on the Living Wage issue. However, he has been successful in pushing this issue, like it or not. He also has been a significant contributor on other issues, including progress toward choice voting and the preservation of the Anderson Bank Building (both issues which I am in agreement with him). And while he has been in a minority position on the council on many issues, Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable.
Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor. When he first ran for council and Dunning suggested he was something like 100,000:1 to win, Lamar (who showed himself to be a quality candidate in that losing effort) had a good laugh over Dunning’s odds. Unfortunately, some of his supporters (notably David G.) don’t seem as thick-skinned about these jokes as Lamar himself is.
“Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion. Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.”
I don’t agree with Lamar on the Living Wage issue. However, he has been successful in pushing this issue, like it or not. He also has been a significant contributor on other issues, including progress toward choice voting and the preservation of the Anderson Bank Building (both issues which I am in agreement with him). And while he has been in a minority position on the council on many issues, Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable.
Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor. When he first ran for council and Dunning suggested he was something like 100,000:1 to win, Lamar (who showed himself to be a quality candidate in that losing effort) had a good laugh over Dunning’s odds. Unfortunately, some of his supporters (notably David G.) don’t seem as thick-skinned about these jokes as Lamar himself is.
“Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion. Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.”
I don’t agree with Lamar on the Living Wage issue. However, he has been successful in pushing this issue, like it or not. He also has been a significant contributor on other issues, including progress toward choice voting and the preservation of the Anderson Bank Building (both issues which I am in agreement with him). And while he has been in a minority position on the council on many issues, Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable.
Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor. When he first ran for council and Dunning suggested he was something like 100,000:1 to win, Lamar (who showed himself to be a quality candidate in that losing effort) had a good laugh over Dunning’s odds. Unfortunately, some of his supporters (notably David G.) don’t seem as thick-skinned about these jokes as Lamar himself is.
“Lamar is a nice guy but does not appear to have done anything of any significance for the people of Davis to date. Lamar is antoher council member who serves his own purposes without regard to public opinion. Bob and Rich should be congratulated on their insight.”
I don’t agree with Lamar on the Living Wage issue. However, he has been successful in pushing this issue, like it or not. He also has been a significant contributor on other issues, including progress toward choice voting and the preservation of the Anderson Bank Building (both issues which I am in agreement with him). And while he has been in a minority position on the council on many issues, Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable.
Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor. When he first ran for council and Dunning suggested he was something like 100,000:1 to win, Lamar (who showed himself to be a quality candidate in that losing effort) had a good laugh over Dunning’s odds. Unfortunately, some of his supporters (notably David G.) don’t seem as thick-skinned about these jokes as Lamar himself is.
“Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable…Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor.”
Yes, Lamar has articulated his positions while being considerate to others – which is not the case with Bob Dunning, who could take a lesson from Lamar.
Funny how not liking Bob Dunning’s nasty humor somehow makes one “thin-skinned” – one man’s sense of humor when at someone’s personal expense is another man’s poor taste in humor, no?
If you enjoy people being personally skewered, I would refer you to the cheap tabloids, not a local newspaper, which should be above personal attacks.
“Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable…Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor.”
Yes, Lamar has articulated his positions while being considerate to others – which is not the case with Bob Dunning, who could take a lesson from Lamar.
Funny how not liking Bob Dunning’s nasty humor somehow makes one “thin-skinned” – one man’s sense of humor when at someone’s personal expense is another man’s poor taste in humor, no?
If you enjoy people being personally skewered, I would refer you to the cheap tabloids, not a local newspaper, which should be above personal attacks.
“Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable…Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor.”
Yes, Lamar has articulated his positions while being considerate to others – which is not the case with Bob Dunning, who could take a lesson from Lamar.
Funny how not liking Bob Dunning’s nasty humor somehow makes one “thin-skinned” – one man’s sense of humor when at someone’s personal expense is another man’s poor taste in humor, no?
If you enjoy people being personally skewered, I would refer you to the cheap tabloids, not a local newspaper, which should be above personal attacks.
“Lamar has articulately argued his positions every time, while being considerate to others on the council and in the community. To me, that’s quite laudable…Also, I have never heard Lamar complain about comments or jokes Bob Dunning has made about him. My interactions with Lamar suggest that he is not thin-skinned and has a good sense of humor.”
Yes, Lamar has articulated his positions while being considerate to others – which is not the case with Bob Dunning, who could take a lesson from Lamar.
Funny how not liking Bob Dunning’s nasty humor somehow makes one “thin-skinned” – one man’s sense of humor when at someone’s personal expense is another man’s poor taste in humor, no?
If you enjoy people being personally skewered, I would refer you to the cheap tabloids, not a local newspaper, which should be above personal attacks.
Bob Dunning does a great job. Some of the above just don’t appreciate his sense of humor. And for those of you who don’t agree with me remember the old saying; TOUGH you know what!
Bob Dunning does a great job. Some of the above just don’t appreciate his sense of humor. And for those of you who don’t agree with me remember the old saying; TOUGH you know what!
Bob Dunning does a great job. Some of the above just don’t appreciate his sense of humor. And for those of you who don’t agree with me remember the old saying; TOUGH you know what!
Bob Dunning does a great job. Some of the above just don’t appreciate his sense of humor. And for those of you who don’t agree with me remember the old saying; TOUGH you know what!
What’s interesting about these comments is that none of them acknowledge that Bob is pretty much an equal opportunity skewer. They also neglect to point out that he often is sympathetic to those he criticizes. More pointedly, those who don’t like Bob tend to focus on his comments aimed toward specific individuals. They clearly don’t like their friends being held up for comedic value but they voice no protest against those they don’t like being ridiculed. Finally, Bob tends to focus on issues of excess or issues related to hypocrisy. So, for example, if someone owns rental property and yet works against growth he points that out. Frankly, I think Bob offers a community service. I appreciate what he does without always agreeing with him.
What’s interesting about these comments is that none of them acknowledge that Bob is pretty much an equal opportunity skewer. They also neglect to point out that he often is sympathetic to those he criticizes. More pointedly, those who don’t like Bob tend to focus on his comments aimed toward specific individuals. They clearly don’t like their friends being held up for comedic value but they voice no protest against those they don’t like being ridiculed. Finally, Bob tends to focus on issues of excess or issues related to hypocrisy. So, for example, if someone owns rental property and yet works against growth he points that out. Frankly, I think Bob offers a community service. I appreciate what he does without always agreeing with him.
What’s interesting about these comments is that none of them acknowledge that Bob is pretty much an equal opportunity skewer. They also neglect to point out that he often is sympathetic to those he criticizes. More pointedly, those who don’t like Bob tend to focus on his comments aimed toward specific individuals. They clearly don’t like their friends being held up for comedic value but they voice no protest against those they don’t like being ridiculed. Finally, Bob tends to focus on issues of excess or issues related to hypocrisy. So, for example, if someone owns rental property and yet works against growth he points that out. Frankly, I think Bob offers a community service. I appreciate what he does without always agreeing with him.
What’s interesting about these comments is that none of them acknowledge that Bob is pretty much an equal opportunity skewer. They also neglect to point out that he often is sympathetic to those he criticizes. More pointedly, those who don’t like Bob tend to focus on his comments aimed toward specific individuals. They clearly don’t like their friends being held up for comedic value but they voice no protest against those they don’t like being ridiculed. Finally, Bob tends to focus on issues of excess or issues related to hypocrisy. So, for example, if someone owns rental property and yet works against growth he points that out. Frankly, I think Bob offers a community service. I appreciate what he does without always agreeing with him.
That’s not true. When was the last time either Souza and Saylor have been skewered by Bob? He’s gone after the Greenwalds and Vergis, but nary a disapraging word for Souza/ Saylor. I suppose that’s just because they are above the board…
That’s not true. When was the last time either Souza and Saylor have been skewered by Bob? He’s gone after the Greenwalds and Vergis, but nary a disapraging word for Souza/ Saylor. I suppose that’s just because they are above the board…
That’s not true. When was the last time either Souza and Saylor have been skewered by Bob? He’s gone after the Greenwalds and Vergis, but nary a disapraging word for Souza/ Saylor. I suppose that’s just because they are above the board…
That’s not true. When was the last time either Souza and Saylor have been skewered by Bob? He’s gone after the Greenwalds and Vergis, but nary a disapraging word for Souza/ Saylor. I suppose that’s just because they are above the board…
You’re wrong. He has skewered both of them. That’s my point. You read so selectively you miss half of what he has to say because you have blinders on.
You’re wrong. He has skewered both of them. That’s my point. You read so selectively you miss half of what he has to say because you have blinders on.
You’re wrong. He has skewered both of them. That’s my point. You read so selectively you miss half of what he has to say because you have blinders on.
You’re wrong. He has skewered both of them. That’s my point. You read so selectively you miss half of what he has to say because you have blinders on.
“Hurrah” for Bob Dunning. All of you detractors should write as well and with as much insight. And yes, DPD could take lessons as well.
“Hurrah” for Bob Dunning. All of you detractors should write as well and with as much insight. And yes, DPD could take lessons as well.
“Hurrah” for Bob Dunning. All of you detractors should write as well and with as much insight. And yes, DPD could take lessons as well.
“Hurrah” for Bob Dunning. All of you detractors should write as well and with as much insight. And yes, DPD could take lessons as well.