By Monotreme
I am creeped out by the fact that the Standard-Examiner seems to have the same obsession with the failed Dorothy Littrell election lawsuit as the mayor.
I've heard the mayor complain loud and long that Dorothy Littrell is responsible for everything bad that happens in the city. If the crime rate were rising, then she'd probably be responsible for that. It's an odd idee fixe, but if you're going to be the Hero, you need an antagonist, right?
Where, oh where, was the news peg in today's story? "Lawyers want money"? Wow. That's a revelation.
Wake up, Standard-Examiner! When you publish stories that appear to have been ground out of the Mayor's personal diary, it just makes you look like more of a lapdog for the city administration.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
44 comments:
Thanks for the most excellent post, Mono.
Interesting development with Godfrey's greed-head lawyers.
Supposedly Ms. Littrell's lawsuit was facially "frivolous" and "without merit."
So how is it possible that Godfrey's lawyers managed to "rack up" a $29,000 bill?
First, these legal sleazeballs have managed to "pad" their bill to ridiculous proportions.
And now these pompous "priests" of the Utah legal "priesthood/fraternity" intend to file another "fat" legal brief, to jack up their exorbitant fees even more.
Secondly, the message is being sent out by that nitwit judge West:
"You can't fight city hall."
"And if you do... we right wing socialist applefaces on the bench will punish you severely, and send you into economic oblivion."
Not a happy time for the taxpayers of Emerald City, nor for liberty in America.
Folks, the original ruling was Judge Baldwin I believe. Please don't jump West till he says something, he was a neighbor of mine some few decades ago.
It seems to me the ruling of "bad faith" only applies up to October 23rd. For Dorothy to make motions to avoid those fees is certainly not in "bad faith" and so the "meter" should not still be "continuing to run" as the article suggests. Dorothy should be able to claim the legal fees are excessive without having to pay the other side to say they are reasonable . . .
I think Dorothy missed the mark on this lawsuit but I still admire her brass. One needs to choose one's battles . . .
The best line was Dorothy's comment that the election is not over. Would that it were not over . . . but it is.
Reader:
You wrote: The best line was Dorothy's comment that the election is not over. Would that it were not over . . . but it is.
Well said. And as long as Ms. Littrel continues to feed the SE sound bite meat like that --- "the election isn't over yet" --- the SE will run with them.
Ms. L. has done good work on matters like eminent domain, but at times, I think, she resembles the Toonerville Trolley which had no terminal facilities. It's time, it's past time, for Ms. Littrel and her co-filers to cut their loses, I think and find other fights, with better probabilities of success, to fight.
And Mono has a good point: why is the continuing wrangling of attorneys over a failed lawsuit for their pay news when the release of the city's mandated financial statement [which includes, it has been alleged, multi-million dollar write offs of city funds invested in development] is not news.
Curiouser and curiouser....
curm,
you comment "city's mandated financial statement [which includes, it has been alleged, multi-million dollar write offs of city funds invested in development]". why would you say alleged. if you read the same thing as the rest of us why would you say the black and white facts are gray. are you already trying to mute the level of discontent with both the administration and the local paper.
disgusted:
Why? Because I don't pretend to understand, fully, the city's financial statement, and I've learned over the years not to accept at face value [without independent corroboration] claims made on blogs about the meaning of official documents from people who are not entirely disinterested. The claims made here regarding the report may be absolutely 100% on the money. I suspect they are. But they're being made by Godfrey opponents. Given that, I'd very much like to hear what someone who knows about urban finances and financial statements [an accountant, perhaps], who does not have a dog in this fight has to say about the report and its meaning. That's why "alleged."
I think it's the job of the city's newspaper to do that for its readers. And as a subscriber, I'm pretty pissed off that it hasn't. That is the job of a local newspaper. And if The Standard Examiner can't, or won't, do it, it should [in the name of truth in advertising] consider changing its name to The Weber County Advertiser, With Comics.
I had the feeling that the "Dorothy Littrell files baseless lawsuit" story was a recurring meme that the Standard-Examiner ran weekly, just to fill space.
So, I did some digging through the S-E archives, and I found that it was only a slight exaggeration.
In the nine weeks since the lawsuit was thrown out, there have been three stories, not including the initial report on Oct 24:
Oct 24: Godfrey stays on Nov. ballot, judge criticizes 'bad faith' suit
Oct 27: Ballot plaintiffs react to possible fees
Dec 7: City officials looking for legal fees
Dec 27: Tally keeps growing in election suit
As I said earlier, I don't see the "news peg" here. I'm okay with the October 27 story, as a sort of followup news analysis (which it's not, but in a stretch, I could justify it to my editor on that basis). Both of the December stories are incredibly pointless, of what Curm would call the "sun rises in the East" variety.
If there is some reason for the Dec 7 and Dec 27 stories to exist other than to remind readers that Dorothy Littrell filed a lawsuit that was found to be "without merit and in bad faith", I'm willing to hear an explanation.
Judge Parley Baldwin is the judge who ruled on the Littrell case.
He ruled that it was without merit and in bad faith without ever ever getting the point of the suit.
Based on the Ogden Municipal Code Littrell had tried for weeks to get the City Recorder to ask for and to audit Godfrey's financial records.
That was never done because City Attorney Williams ruled there was no basis for auditing the records.
Don't forget that Attorney Williams was being asked under the Municipal Code to actually look at his own boss's financial records and to run the risk of finding what it was that Littrell kept trying to find out.
Based on Utah law there was no other approach that Littrell could take to get a look at those records.
Judge Parley Baldwin never understood that was the purpose of the suit.
Neither have you other armchair yay-hoos who keep beating up on Littrell for having the nerve to actually bring a lawsuit based on Ogden Ogden City Municipal Code.
Don't you get it? - There was no other way to try to get a look at Godfrey's financial records.
The same questions still exist and have never been answered regarding Godfrey's records as there were when Littrell filed the suit.
Word is that more discrepancies pertaining to those records have surfaced since the election.
Which of you experts have the balls to pursue the questions to help Littrell get an answer.
How can a Judge rule a case was filed in bad faith without ever talking to a single Plaintiff to find out what their mind set was for being part of the suit?
Also, don't forget that Brian Barnard is a reputable attorney known for fighting for Civil Rights Issues who would not take on a case without merit.
Also, do not forget that CPA Littrell is a forensic accountant who helped send more than a few crooks to Point of the Mountain during her 35-year career in Ogden.
Dorothy has never wasted her time on unravelling the facts unless there are facts that need to be unravelled.
You people that keep blaming her for a suit that you say should have never been filed have no clue as to what you are talking about.
Your ignorance keeps showing and it turns my stomach.
Cletus
I couldn't agree with you more.
People talk about the timing of her lawsuit, yet they forget that you can’t look at ones campaign records until they start accruing the records and funds. Those funds and records are developed just months before the election (with required filing dates). Those that criticize the timing aren’t using their heads, when else would she have had a look at the books?
The city law states that it’s on complaint basis whether a candidate has to show their records. No complaint equals no need to provide any additional information (i.e. any other information than what the candidate has already provided). Godfrey did receive a complaint. No other complaints were filed against any other candidate thus no other responsibility was established for the city attorney or city clerk to pursue the issue with any of other candidates. The attorney and clerk were responsible under city law to look further into Godfrey though and did not. People should read the law. The judge was wrong and obviously did not read the law.
Dorothy had evidence that showed several areas where the information provided by Godfrey was inaccurate or blatantly wrong and misleading versus what had actually transacted. Godfrey’s mother and brother sent Dorothy flowers from his dad’s funeral coffin claiming them as a gesture of love and peace, and them Godfrey had one of his goons put Dorothy’s name on the list for provisional balloting, and effectively stopped her vote from counting in the election. Real peace and love, don’t you think?
The man and his whole family are amoral sickos.
Since the SE seems to like to keep us up to date on court cases why haven’t we heard about the out come of little Bobby Geiger’s court case?
Dorothy if you read this, I have all the respect in the world for you and the efforts that you have put forth to protect the resident of Ogden. I personally want to thank you for all that you’ve done.
Interesting paradox. Like Monotreme, I think the Littrell lawsuit has gotten way more press attention than it deserves. So what are he and I doing? Giving it even more attention by discussing it here.
Anyhow, while we're on the subject: If the real point of the Littrell lawsuit was to get the city to audit Godfrey's campaign finances, then why didn't the complaint say so, prominently? And why didn't she issue a press release emphasizing that point? How many of you Littrell defenders have actually read her complaint? I read it the day after the suit was filed, and while there was something in there about auditing Godfrey's finances, you had to read a long time before you saw that part and it never gave any good reasons for such an audit. Most of the complaint was about the name of Godfrey's campaign committee and that part truly was frivolous, IMO. What Littrell doesn't understand is that in politics, a lawsuit is never enough; you must also have a media strategy or you lose big.
Sadly, while the newspaper is wasting more and more ink on the Littrell lawsuit, most Ogden citizens remain unaware of the many campaign-related stories that they've ignored, such as the Jorgenson job threat and the Envision Ogden scandal. And now there's another fascinating story that Bill C. mentioned in passing a couple of weeks ago: A hitherto unknown entity called Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate contributed $8990 to Blain Johnson's campaign and $9700 to Royal Eccles's campaign. The address of this entity is the same as that of Johnson's law office. Although it is plainly the intent of the Ogden City code to prohibit anonymous campaign contributions, it appears that Johnson and Eccles have created a loophole by setting up this money-laundering entity. We'll probably never learn where this money really came from.
curm,
you say, “because I don't pretend to understand” and yet that is exactly what you are doing. you pretend to understand what the right approach is to validate this finding. you don’t have to be a cpa to read an annual report but you do have to read it. its not easy but what in life is. is the person a cpa I don’t know but its apparent that he did read it. if you are not going to put the effort into reading and understanding the report or validating the findings with someone that does understand it then don’t criticize someone thats gone to the effort to educate you. why bring their findings into question. prove your accusations or hold your tongue. especially when you then say “but they're being made by godfrey opponents”. do you expect one of his supporters to point this out. and what neutral third party is going to come forward. don’t look to the paper I don’t think anyone on their staff will put the effort into it. they will simple ask the administration for an explaination. look to those that are his opponents but that provide the backup to substantiate their claims.
if you’re too lazy to read the annual report or cant figure out a way to validate the information then don’t try to marginalize it in the name of impartiality or for the sake of the benefit of doubt. dont pretend to understand it and explain it to us so that we will. i dont buy it.
Dan I would be willing to bet that the Friends of Northern Utah Real Esatate is either Ogden Community Foundation, or Envision Ogden.
Disgusted:
You wrote: prove your accusations or hold your tongue.
Well, I haven't made any accusations, so I'm hard put to understand how I could prove them.
The accounting is a complex document. So was the previous one. You may think the meaning is obvious, or should be to all, but I don't. If the Mayor claims the accounting proves something, anything, that is a self-serving statement and I would want to see it corroborated by knowledgeable people who are not involved in the dispute. If Rudi or you... or I for that matter... make some pronouncement about what the report proves, those too would be self-serving statements [yes, even mine] and anyone reading them would be wise to look for independent corroboration that our [and my] interpretation of the figures and their meaning was correct. Getting that independent disinterested opinion is the job our local mullet wrapper should be doing, but isn't. That's the job it should have done on the various crime statistics raised in the election, but it didn't do that job either. That's the job it should have done with respect to the differing claims about the size of the city's debt during the election, and it also didn't do that job.
Looking for corroboration of what partisans in public disputes claim is "proven" by this document or those numbers is, I've found, always wise. Always. Yes, that advice applies even when the partisan making the statement is me. I did not say your conclusions about the report's meaning are wrong, merely that I'd like to see the same conclusions reached by knowledgeable people who are not, as you are --- and as I am --- anti-Godfry partisans. That's all.
While the subject of lawyer fees is being bantered around, why pray tell are the idiot neocons of the SE so enamored with the piddly assed amounts involved in this Littrel suit.
Where's the Front page story on how much tax payer money lying little matty has squanded in his personal vendetta against Bruce Edwards? Bruce has won every go-round, lying little matty keeps going back to court, Ogden City residents have been paying all along. Come on Schwebke, what's the running total to date? It's at least 10 to 15 times as great a number, and still counting.
In the wake of this interest in godfrey related court proceedings, the SE should use this as a lead in to a great article summarizing all the litigation and costs to the tax payer brought on by this immature little arogant liar. It would give pause to the trivial writing off of 6.3 million RDA loss.
Bill, Godfrey loves the Court venues, he had an unlimited bank account whne it comes to court costs and attorney fees. He has wasted more tax dollars on lawsuits than any other Mayor in Ogden's history.
Hey, I love the letter about Rep. Neil Hansen in the standard, I know that Neil was right all along about the issue and wish that he was the Mayor now.
These problems that are in Ogden are Democrat Neil Hansen's fault. Because if he would have beat me, these problems would have been addressed.
I tend to disagree with the resident board eggheads on the Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey election lawsuit, in that neither its timing nor its merit affected the outcome; it was a well-rooted complaint that signaled illegality and malfeasance in regard to Weency Gondola Boy's registration, filing, reporting, and election law compliance. I find it hard to believe a judge would determine that because no similar suit were filed against any other candidate -- or because other candidates had acted similarly on the basis of one of the complaint's caveat's the name registration of the campaign committee -- such singularity rendered the complaint baseless and biased. I applaud Ms. Littrell and all the plaintiffs for their chutzpah and attempt to put their money where their mouths are. But what do I know? I have no concept of the community revitalization powers of onion-reeking gondolas and do not plaster my vehicles with dozens of "ski hub" company decals, thereby demonstrating my own cultural impotence and affection for tiny liars who tackle drunk neighborhood retarded kids and slap their spouses. Regardless, Wayne Peterson, leader of his own famed Squirrel Patrol, could order a phone canvass all 14,000-some-odd voters who participated in the November debacle and not one would respond:
"I voted for Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey for mayor because some evil accountant and her fellow dwarf haters filed a complaint against his campaign."
Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey -- despite widespread abhorrence for him and his criminal misdeeds -- is a white male Mormon (well, half a male, anyway, and one of the biggest-smallest Mormon hypocrites on the planet), and although she made a more than a valiant effort, SVH could not overcome that. In Utah, of course, even rough-and-tumble OTown. Then again, I am a proclaimed "enemy" of Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey and, as such, my blather has no credence, according to Good Old (?) Curmudgeon and Short-deck Geiger. But in this I take great comfort, because Dr. Hunter S. Thompson postulated that a man should be judged by his friends, but, more importantly, by his enemies. So shove your gondolas up your eradicated nut caches!
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
Jason:
I think we know what the lawsuit meant to allege. For whatever reason, that real purpose and meaning was lost in the actual filing.
If you read it, the actual malfeasance accusations are buried deeply, and never clearly stated.
Plus, we have the S-E editorial board repeating, over and over again, the meme that "it was about naming his campaign committee" which it was (probably) not.
I think you and Cletus misrepresent the feeling of many of us about this lawsuit. I think the lawsuit was unfortunate for two reasons, both outlined by Dan above:
1. The filing itself did not clearly state the purpose behind the complaint.
2. The subsequent media "spin" was mishandled, badly, so that Godfrey et al. were able to successfully reframe it as "about naming my campaign committee".
What frustrates me is how the S-E is happy to repeat this, and so many other statements by leaders and politicians, without even a token attempt to subject those statements to critical analysis. Not surprising, mind you, but still frustrating.
The SE has an editorial today that is certainly worth a mention. It deals with the provisional ballot mess in the last election and is headed "Voters' Confidence Shaken." It discusses the ACLU's recent press release regarding the mishandling of, apparently, hundreds of provisional ballots by election officials at various polling places. Here are the concluding graphs:
No one has yet heard a public explanation from Weber County Clerk/Auditor Alan D. McEwan. Maybe the ACLU's report, when it is made public, will smoke him out.
This is important because Weber County voters cannot have confidence in a system so vulnerable to error -- from the sound of it, the fault of various contributing factors. Weber County voters deserve answers and solutions. To date, all they've received is silence.
This time, the stonewalling is coming not from the Godfrey administration, but from County officials. Good of the SE editorial to point out that the stonewalling on a matter of great importance is continuing.
crooked bastards,
You're not the first to speculate that there may be some connection between Envision Ogden and Friends of Northern Utah Real Estate. Perhaps EO decided to launder the rest of its money through this new entity, once they realized they were under scrutiny. Or perhaps they realized that if they raised any more money in their own name, they'd be subject to IRS disclosure requirements and so the same people quickly set up a different entity and directed donors there.
All this would probably be completely legal, I'm afraid. But any formal relation between either of these entities and the Ogden Community Foundation would not be legal, because the OCF is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit.
On editorials and their impact...
From the Dec. 31, 2007 issue of The New Yorker, p. 134:
According to the Department of Education, between 1992 and 2003... the proportion of [average adult Americans] who were... "capable of... comparing viewpoints in two editorials" declined from 15% to 13%.
Which means, if the DOE is correct, 87% of Americans can not compare the POVs in two different editorials.
Sigh....
Good Old (?) Curmudgeon:
Are you suggesting that the Gondola Examiner's "recommendation" of Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey may have engendered split results? That the Gondola Examiner is irrelevant? Well, here's what I offer to the Editorial Board: You fat, overfed, Layton-living losers like gondolas, even when a third grader thinks they are stupid: "We support the urban gondola." That, fat sirs, will go down in history: You advocated a circus ride, absent of any factual data, any studies, any sense -- only the dictum from your moron, idiotic, Midwestern jerkoff of a boss who likes gondolas, Squirrel Patroller Lee Carter. But please, by all means, discuss the issue rationally via the fingertips of sellout loser Don Porter: "Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey is just dotting the Is and crossing the Ts; with Ogden and THE GONDOLA, it's always something." You second-grade idiots: Do you really think UDOT would ever allow a circus ride above our main thoroughfare -- unmonitored, unheated, uncooled, unable to rescue feebs when Wayne Peterson and his famed Squirrel Patrol couldn't muster up the power bill? -- and you could editorialize in its favor like you just walked out of a dressing room with clothier Dave Hardman? You idiot morons: IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Dot your Is and cross your Ts: you are jokes, collective GONDOLA BOYS.
Again, I reiterate:
The Gondola Examiner wrote, in a fatuous pile of crap entitled "The Newspaper and the Gondola:"
We support the urban gondola.
How dumb are you creeps? Did you view those same neat posters created by Wayne Peterson and his famed Squirrel Patrol about the roadless fairy-tale castle, serviced via shit orbs?
You have egg all the f??? over your fat faces:
"Like it or hate it, it is impressive."
Go back to middle school, Porter, and maybe you can gain a sense of perspective: It's a joke.
"But with THE GONDOLA and OTown, it's always something new."
Yeah, jerkoff. Tell Squirrel Patroller to hold out hope: It only costs $40 million.
THE SKI IS OBSCURED BY FOURTH-GRADE IDIOTS MASQUERADING AS NEWSPAPERMEN
It would have been interesting to have all of Mayor Godfrey’s campaign records and finances revealed, since many of the mayor’s methods and figures are hidden from the public. It’s unfortunate that Ms. Littrel was unable to gain access to the mayor’s questionable financial records. She has my respect for her effort.
Jason W. wrote, “Dr. Hunter S. Thompson postulated that a man should be judged by his friends, but, more importantly, by his enemies.”
Thanks for referring to Dr. Thompson Jason. It’s a shame Dr. Gonzo is no longer with us. “Fear and Loathing in the Emerald City” could be the tale of certain mayor’s term of office. These are strange times for Ogden and, as Dr. Gonzo wrote, When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Are you kidding me?
I now love Birdlips.
"The weird turn pro:" a favorite saying among the actives who made me, a pledge, a shining beacon of the White Cross.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
Jason, my brother! Anybody that quotes Hunter S. Thompson is good people with me. I’ve been a huge fan of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson since I read his first book, ”Hell’s Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs.” Dr. Gonzo rode with the Hells Angels, on a “Limey bike ,” and then wrote about the experience....he even got stomped by some of them.
He wrote about politics, among “other” things (as you probably know) and it’s too bad there isn’t a gonzo journalist of his stature to write about the ongoing political strangeness in Ogden.
Yeah, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ... George McGovern. And masterpieces since, Oh, well. I'm now in the middle of Rum Diaries. Jeezus.
Jason,
I know I'll regret even attempting to respond... but let's set the record straight on just one point. UDOT's position on the gondola is the same as its position on the streetcar or BRT system: If it's what Ogden wants, they'll work with us to make it possible. My source for this information is Cory Pope, UDOT's regional director.
Two months ago our mayor tried to convince the city council that a streetcar on Harrison isn't feasible because of some alleged new rules from UDOT limiting right-of-way impacts on their highways. The next day I called Mr. Pope and he assured me that there are no new rules and, in fact, UDOT's position on the streetcar hasn't changed since he participated in the 2005 feasibility study. In other words, the mayor was (to put as charitably as possible) misinformed. But you are equally misinformed about UDOT's position on the gondola. They may not like it, and they'll require that the right-of-way impacts be minimized, but they're not gonna stop it.
Beloved Dan S.:
Well ... Mr. Pope can speak as you dsecribed and be on the record all he wants. Fact is, if push came to shove and it never will, UDOT will shoot THE GONDOLA in the onion: They do care, and they are being polite. It's freakin stupid, and I have it from higher authority than your Pope buddy. THE GONDOLA was and never will be feasible, despite Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey's middle school note-passing.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
P.S. Why the note of regret? Speak, genius!
Jason,
Masterpieces works for me. After Dr. Thompson’s death, Tom Wolfe wrote a tribute article about him on the Wall Street Journal editorial page and compared him to Mark Twain.
A streetcar would certainly be more useful than that ridiculous gondola.
Somewhere back in the blur I knew Thompson's first wife Susie. Nice gal as I recall. When I knew her she was with another bat shit crazy writer by the name of Douglas Graham. Doug was also a genius sort like Thompson, and of course was also pretty nutso although not as famously so as Gonzo. At the time (70 - 75) I wasn't particularly tuned into Thompson so I wasn't that interested in Susie's ex. I was having plenty of troubles with her present (Douglas) of the time.
I do remember her contempt for Hunter because of the incredibly mean spirited way in which he treated every one around him - his posse if you will. In his personal life at that time he basically spent all of the time wildly loaded on everything from whiskey to rum to cocain to heroin to every other conceivable drug he could find that would and could fuel his insatiable need to be cruel to people.
Now there is an unbiased opinion for you Hunter lovers! A thirty year old second hand reporter who seems to remember getting it from the then recently spurned and possibly bitter ex wife! What more proof do you naysayers amongst us need that Hunter was a smuck?
HeeHaw:
Him acting as a schmuck is an essential dichotomy to HST's character, some would say genius; he held his posse, as you say, up to ridiculous selfish standards of debauchery that they couldn't possibly achieve; he loathed beer saufers and mouthy drunken hangers-on, while he was unrepetently hammered on Wild Turkey, weed, oipates and acid. Despite his ingestion of all substances, he never was sloppy. And apparently he was always an ahole -- equally and with equanimity. But he was a genius, in the truest sense as a writer, because his style and diction were as inimitable as they were proficient and flawlessly readable, cogent and masterfully executed. There are a host of douchey pretenders, present and past, but only one Good Dr.
Mahalo.
Also: Never apologize, never explain.
Jason
Or as Henry Ford the II put it: "Never explain, never complain".
Your post makes me want to read a little of Hunter's stuff. Something I have somehow done without for all these years.
So Jason, does Hunter being a genius, in your estimate, make it acceptable and laudable for him to also be a raving and abusive prick of the first order?
I still think a person's real character is indicated by how they treat the hired help, not how much dough they made off their talent.
Oz:
You ask does Hunter being a genius, in your estimate, make it acceptable and laudable for him to also be a raving and abusive prick of the first order?
No, but for most of us who didn't know HST or his entourage, the question is irrelevant. He was a writer, and so gets to be judged, by most of us, by his work. Period. If he wrote good magazine articles, books, than I, The Reader, don't much give a damn if he was Mother Theresa in is private life, or a miserable son of a bitch. What mattered then, matters now, is his writing. And it was good. Mostly. Eventually his self indulgence overtook his talent, but that was late in his career.
I don't have to like him to like his work. Just as I don't much care if a presidential candidate is a Model Husband and Father, or is boinking the entire BYU Marching Band [both sexes] every other weekend, so long as he can run the country well. I'm considering hiring a candidate to be CEO of the US, not Husband [or Father] of the Year. Same with writers.
And baseball managers. Leo Durocher was a pig. Beat up wife Loretta with some regularity, it was widely rumored, following lost games. But he was, for a time, a hell of a manager.
So: talent doesn't excuse somebody's being an SOB. But for most of us, who have no contact with the person or those around them, it just doesn't matter much. Only the talent does.
HeeHaw:
No. I agree with your character test and assessment. Some of my favorite writers weren't/aren't pricks of the first order: Saul Bellow, Kurt Vonnegut, JD Salinger, John Updike, Phillip Roth, John Kennedy Toole, Edward Abbey, Zora Neale Hurston. Others are: Charles Bukowski, John Irving, Norman Mailer, Ernest Hemmingway, Tom Wolfe, Bob Geiger.
THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE
"We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. I remember saying something like, "I feel a bit lightheaded; maybe you should drive . . ."And suddenly there was a terrible roar all around us and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car, which was going about 100 miles an hour with the top down to Las Vegas. And a voice was screaming: "Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?"
Then it was quiet again. My attorney had taken his shirt off and was pouring beer on his chest, to facilitate the tanning process. "What the hell are you yelling about," he muttered, staring up at the sun with his eyes closed and covered with wraparound Spanish sunglasses. "Never mind," I said. "It's your turn to drive." I hit the brakes and aimed the Great Red Shark toward the shoulder of the highway. No point mentioning those bats, I thought. The poor bastard will see them soon enough.
It was almost noon, and we still had more than 100 miles to go. They would be tough miles. Very soon, I knew, we would both be completely twisted. But there was no going back, and no time to rest. We would have to ride it out. Press registration for the fabulous Mint 400 was already under way, and we had to get there by 4 to claim our soundproof suite. A fashionable sporting magazine in New York had taken care of the reservations, along with this huge red Chevy convertible we'd just rented off a lot on the Sunset Strip . . . and I was, after all, a professional journalist; so I had an obligation to cover the story for good or ill."
Who but a genius could write shit like this, we ask! Only Doctor Gonzo, the father of Gonzo journalism could do this... and be well-paid in the process... throughout his ENTIRE LIFETIME.
Hunter S. Thompson ushered in, for good or ill, the recognition that journalism CAN NEVER BE NEUTRAL! So long as human beings keep writing the news, the HUMAN ELEMENT WILL ALWAYS CREEP OUT.
Hail to HUNTER S. THOMPSON for revealing this subjective fact of ugly "objective journalism."
Ace Reporter Schwebke should READ UP AND READ UP GOOD!
Rudi:
While I share your liking of HST's work, he was not doing straight reportage, and no editor in his right mind would have hired him to do straight reporting. Nor should they have. Things like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas were great reads, and provided insights, observations and really chewy bits about the political process you'd never find on the front pages of a straight news paper. But that makes HST's work a different kind of journalism, not a replacement for mainstream [well-done] journalism.
Same for Tom Wolfe's reporting [not fiction] which is often similar to HST's reporting. Wolfe's magazine piece collections like The Kandy-Colored Tangerine Flaked Stream-lined Baby and The Pump House Gang were not all that unlike HST's reporting pieces, and were, as well, a different kind of journalism, but not a replacement for straight journalism. So was some of Norman Mailer's reporting [e.g. Miami and the Siege of Chicago].
I absolutely do NOT want a HST or Tom Wolfe or Norman Mailer doing straight political reporting for the SE. For the Salt Lake Weekly, absolutely. But not for the SE or the SL Trib news columns.
If nothing else, Thompson's work illustrated that there exists NO "straight reportage."
Sorry to differ wuth you again (this seems to be one constant on this board,) but your blogmeister will continue to maintain that "objective journalism" exists only in the mind of the so-called "objective" publisher.
Watch out for the flying Std-Ex manta rays and pterodactyls BTW, we warn.
I'm not certain, but I think the flying creatures bedeviling the Standard-Examiner editorial offices are fiery flying serpents.
Rudi:
Hey, we've agreed on two things this very day: (a) that Utah could use a PAC donation ID law and (b) that Hunter Thompson was a helluva writer.
However, HST did not "prove" that nobody could do objective reporting. He only proved that he couldn't. Nor did he try. The claim that objective reporting is impossible is one of those bromides that has caught on, to be repeated endlessly without much examination. And it's flat not true. It's not true anymore than the claim that it's impossible to write unbiased history. Both are possible. Not easy, but certainly possible.
Careful: you seem to be slip-sliding into post-structuralism, into the allegedly "liberal" belief that there are no absolutes and everything is relative and that objectivity is impossible. [That's not the "liberal position" by the way; it's only what Rush Limpaw and Bill Orally and their ilk like to pretend is what liberals think.]
So as to the possibility of doing objective straight reporting, we'll have to agree to disagree. But hey, so far today, were 2 for 3 as far as agreeing goes. And .666 ain't bad. Hit that in the majors and they retire your number.
Just want to send some high fives to Dorothy!
Who would have thought there would be so many Hunter Thompson fans on this blog? It seriously warms my innards.
Jason, thanks again for quoting Dr. Thompson and starting this conversation about Gonzo journalism.
Oz, you’ve certainly been around some off-the-wall characters. Dr. Hunter S. Thompson definitely was a wild man and he pissed off a lot of people, but the man had a lot of style. Not only is he “Uncle Duke” in the Doonesbury comic strip (Raoul Duke was his alter-ego, ) but he once ran for sheriff of Pitken County, Colorado (which includes Aspen), and almost won. His campaign was known as The Battle of Aspen and he ran on the Freak Power ticket. The platform and some interesting moments included:
# Legalization of drugs on a recreational basis (although profiteering dealers would be prosecuted harshly.)
* Thompson did make a concession on the drugs issue - he promised that if elected, he would not eat mescaline whilst on duty.
# Tearing up parking lots and sidewalks for more grassy areas.
# Demolishing any buildings that would block the view of the mountains.
# Renaming Aspen "Fat City" to scare off the rich investors that Thompson felt were ruining the city.
# Firing the majority of the conservative county officials and bureaucrats.
# Thompson shaving his head bald and referring to the crew-cut, ex-army, Republican incumbent as "My long-haired opponent."
Curm, your analysis of the behavior versus the writing ability of Dr. Thompson is excellent. Sure, he was a jerk, but good god could he write.
As for the Constitution: How can students be expected to care about it when the President of the United States ignores it and trashes it....... repeatedly?
Rudi, those passages from “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Dream,” were perfect. It’s been a long, strange day for me and I needed a good belly laugh. Mahalo nui loa.
This blog continues to amaze me. There’s comedy and tragedy....Yin and Yang. Good stuff!
Post a Comment