Tired of the argument?

You know, once in awhile I have to take my fellows to task.

Perhaps it’s because I have such convincing arguments or maybe I have scared all the liberals away, but I don’t get a high number of comments on my website. (Well, I get a lot of comments but 99% are of the spam variety, which Akismet takes care of.)

So once in awhile I feel I have to give feedback to others. Included in this was a comment I sent in to the newly rechristened Lower Eastern Shore News regarding Jonathan Taylor’s criticism of the two dissenting voters in a recent County Council vote to allow overtime for building inspectors and other county employees in order to approve work on the rolling 4 1/2 day ‘Extreme Makeover‘ project.

My comment addressed three premises in playing devil’s advocate:

  1. The idea that the county’s FY2012 budget is approved, and a general query as to where he would suggest cutting to make up this expense.
  2. What sort of lasting impact this national exposure would have, as in if someone could name other cities which have had ‘Extreme Makeover’ homes without Googling it. (I don’t watch the show, so I wouldn’t know.)
  3. The hypocricy of Taylor complaining about a $10,000 annual expense to the city to provide health insurance for part-time employees but feeling just fine about spending this $7,000 of county money.

I placed none of the seven words which cannot be said on television in the comment, and thought I had legitimate questions. Yet Taylor rejected it, saying he was “tired of having the argument…when you get on this Republican high horse is when you lose reason.”

But I think Culver and Holloway have a legitimate reason for voting their way – citing the fact ‘Extreme Makeover’ is a for-profit enterprise while the county denies taxpayer funds to non-profits – while the other five had their reasons for voting yes, primarily as a boost to the local economy and tourism. (That may be a stretch.) In the end, Taylor got his wish and I said as much. Personally, I would have tried to take the money from somewhere else to make it a zero-sum game so I’m not going to criticize Culver and Holloway for their vote. Nor do I think the other five are off base, since there’s a simple difference of opinion here and we may find the $7,000 is well-spent. Or we may not.

Ultimately Jonathan can run his website as he sees fit, and if rejecting comments because he’s “tired of the argument” is his best defense, well, I suppose I don’t have recourse there. I’d reprint the comment I sent in here on my site but it’s vanished into the ether of the internet like the thousands of spam comments I’ve sent packing have been. (There’s still 4,815 comments here, so that’s plenty of feedback over the years.)

The point is, though, had I been someone who didn’t have his own bully pulpit and decided to use it you would have never known the gist of what I said. I’m not saying I accept every comment I get, because obviously I don’t or there wouldn’t be 375,529 spam comments to my site now vanished.

Instead, my policy has always been that good comments help move the narrative along, so I reject as few as possible. In fact I like the ones which disagree with me because then I have to sharpen my arguments. So if you think Taylor was right, by all means tell me why.

My contention is that if you truly want to add to the discourse, you don’t get tired of the argument. Just ask yourself what else is missing when comments which are otherwise legitimate don’t get through.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.

One thought on “Tired of the argument?”

  1. I think Taylor is wrong, but for a different reason than you. Extreme Makeover is a COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE, funded by network advertising. One presumes that since the show survives in prime-time, and seems to get good ratings, it draws in a fair amount of advertising money for the network (and its production company).

    If $7,000 is not such a big deal, why is it a big deal for them to foot the bill?

    Frankly, its “corporate welfare”. It will not create any lasting jobs. I would be surprised if it created one job period. I would be more surprised if it saved any jobs. At best, it may remove some tradesmen (and tradeswomen) from the unemployment rolls *temporarily*. And it may temporarily increase retail sales.

    But the lasting effect beyond that one home? Nothing more than increased property taxes and probably a decrease in the homestead tax credit for that one homeowner (if they are even eligible) since the amount of work may exceed $100,000.

    But its still corporate welfare, and I am tired of “big business” (and network TV is the biggest of business) getting tax breaks that can’t be tied directly to promoting tangible economic growth.

Comments are closed.