We'd like to alert all our gentle readers to a downright comical discussion developing over on the Standard-Examiner website, in the comments section, under yesterday's Std-Ex article, 'Envision' head speaks up / Shreve defends political contributions as means to 'promote Ogden's outdoor vibe'.
It seems that good ole Mr. Faulty Logic himself (Bob Geiger) has emerged, posting under the screen names Is it??? and Wow. Little Bobby has apparently rubbed his two semi-functioning brain cells together and concocted a theory that it was okay for Boss Godfrey to loan out the Salomon Center to political action committee Envision Ogden for free, divert $20,000 of the taxpayers' rightful "Sneak Peak" revenues to Envision Ogden, launder them through a bogus entity (FNURE - evidently to hide the true source of funds,) and then funnel them to his two "Godfrey Ticket" candidates Eccles and Johnson.
And why does little Bobby think this is okay? Because council candidate Dirk Youngberg donated what remained of his own campaign funds to four other council candidates when he dropped out of the 2007 race.
Okay... we confess we don't get the logic. As one Std-Ex reader said in a Std-Ex article comment, "It's an apples to llaamas" comparison.
And as an added bonus this morning, we'll add a pointer to a delightful and classic multi font/color Bobby Geiger email rant which was circulating around Emerald City email inboxes last night, a document so far hasn't appeared anywhere else on the web that we know of. Within this marvellous example of ill-reasoned crank correspondence, our readers will be able to bone up on the intricacies of Little Bobby's theory, and witness the fruits of the Godfrey Brain Trust in full flower. We're entirely sure it will bring a smile to the face of any Weber County Forum reader who peruses it. This is some wacked-out material our gentle readers will definitely not want to miss:
• Faulty Logic, by Bob GeigerWe're also tempted to warn our pal Boss Godfrey that "With friends like Bobby, who needs enemies;" but we won't. Godfey never listens to us, despite all the sound advice we constantly spew out.
Your ever-savvy reader comments are invited, as always.
And while you're at it, why not mosey over to the Std-Ex site and lodge a comment or two? It may be an otherwise slow news day, but this will nevertheless give our readers something particularly useful to do.
35 comments:
If Mr. Geiger can establish that Mr. Youngberg (a) raised his money by telling donors he was raising money for a non-profit organization dedicated to encouraging better public knowledge about fire protection, [while he intended instead all along to use the money to pay for election campaigns] --- which is what Mr. Shreve recently confessed Envision Ogden did, and (b) that Youngberg gave the money he raised to an unregistered organization [membership unknown to this day] called, say, "Friends of Northern Utah Fire Prevention" [FNUFP] which then in its own name gave the money to election campaigns [which is what Envision Ogden admits it did], and (c) that Mr. Youngberg solicited funds from the State of Utah [and got them] and then used them for campaign purposes, which is what Envision Ogden reportedly it did, and (d), that Mr. Youngberg got use of the Junction [city property at the time] to stage a fundraiser for his alleged public service organization [while intending to use the money raised for campaign purposes], which seems to be what Envision Ogden did, and (e) that Mr. Youngberg, half a year or more after his campaign ended, retroactively revised his campaign finance reports when the press revealed skullduggery in his campaign finances, which is what Mr. Johnson and Mr. Eccles did ---- once Mr. Geiger has established all that with respect to Mr. Youngberg's campaign [or any of it for that matter], I'll be ready to give his complaints some serious consideration.
But not until then. Comparing apples to llamas is exactly the way to describe what he's attempting.
Seems that they don't care if you have proficiency in logic or how to form the possessive singular of nouns with 's at the US Naval Academy or Boston University before handing out degrees...or Geiger was not paying attention and somehow slipped though the cracks.
People making donations to Dirk Youngberg's City Council campaign knew that they were donating to a political campaign. People donating to Envision Ogden and participating in the Salomon Center sneak peek event fundraiser (at facility under control of Ogden City) thought they were contributing to a non-profit organization devoted to doing good in Ogden- NOT to political campaigns or anonymous FNURE activities.
It is common practice to pass remaining campaign funds on to other candidates.
Ogden City Campaign Finance Disclosure Ordinance 1-8-1 even addresses this issue under:
EXPENDITURE: An expenditure shall include:
A. A purchase, payment, donation, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, gift of money or anything of value made for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any candidate;
B. A contract, promise or agreement, express or implied, whether or not legally enforceable to make any expenditure;
C. A transfer of funds by a candidate or a personal campaign committee to another candidate, another candidate's personal campaign committee or a political committee;
D. Goods or services provided to or for the benefit of another candidate, another candidate's personal campaign committee, or a political committee for political purposes at less than fair market value.
The same ordinance also addresses the anonymous campaign contribution issue:
B. Anonymous: The acceptance of anonymous contributions is prohibited. Any anonymous contributions received by a candidate or personal campaign committee shall be transmitted to the City Treasurer for deposit in the General Fund. (1979 Code § 1.20.050; Ord. 95-53, 7-18-1995)
Big difference Bobby.
Keep in mind that Envision Ogden did not register as a PAC until after the election, when it was brought to their attention that they were in violation of the law.
But Dan Schroeder has long hair, teaches at Mr. Geigers villian WSU and belongs to the Sierra Club. How dare Mr. Schroeder use his pen and paper to ask questions. It is a known fact that unless you completely support the mayors vision for Ogden you are against all progress. I only hope that attorney Williams has learned his lesson well and can still make his miracle cure on all campaign questions. It is a well known fact that the best way to prove your point is to make a personal attack on the person asking questions.
Rudi, you pointed out and determined why Bobby Geiger’s logic is lacking in reasonable explanation and facts.
I’d like to add a few thoughts and facts of my own.
1. Bobby reasoned that “the money that John Gullo (a private individual), donated to Dirk Youngberg, did not end up going to Dirk's campaign at all, but rather to other campaings that Mr. Gullo did not support. Mr. Gullo's money was given to other campaigns in the name of another -- Amy Wicks, Susan Van Hooser, Caitlin Gochnour, and Sheila Aardeema.” Bobby prove that John Gullo’s contribution to Dirk Youngberg were the funds that went to the candidates you name rather than to cover his campaign expenses during the primary race. You can’t! Because all donations are combined and it is impossible to say where specific donations were spent.
2. PACs and PALs are organized specifically for donations to campaigns. Those who donate funds know that their money is going to support a candidate – unlike what Envision Ogden did at the Salomon Center fund raiser. We’ve read the comments of several of the donors who contributed to that event thinking that they were supporting the Administration’s plan to make Ogden the Mecca for outdoor recreation and ski activities. They were deceived when some of those funds went to the campaigns of Eccles, Godfrey and Johnson. The IRS filing of Envision Ogden showed that Envision Ogden paid to a printing company for the printing of Godfrey’s signs, brochures and flyers in 2007. Godfrey’s campaign did not show that Envision Ogden donated to his campaign as Envision Ogden paid the printer directly. Rather devious!
And illegal. Candidates are required by law to report “in kind” contributions. How can amending a campaign report 15 months after it is filed, make it correct without consequences?
The new Weber County DA needs to look into these three campaigns.
Blackrulon:
Just think of the possibilities if Mr. Williams "cure" doctrine caught on and spread in Ogden City. I can see a student who failed a course because he got a failing grade on the required term paper at Ogden High [or WSU for that matter] coming back six months later with a much improved paper, and insisting that he now had a right to have his grade changed to a passing one because the new paper had "cured" the F on the old one.
And of course we'd be able to pay city taxes and water fees late without penalty, because willingness to pay six months late would "cure" not having paid them on time in the first place.
Ogden City, under the "retroactive cure principle" Mr. Williams is preaching, could neglect to pay Mr. Williams his salary as City Attorney for half a year. Just so long as the city ponied up six months later, that would "cure" its not having paid him on time.
Why, the possibilities are endless....
George K:
Point 1. you make is, I think, not a good one. Because all the campaign donations were mixed into one fund, and because money is fungible, the presumption is that a portion of all money donated to the mixed fund goes to every campaign expenditure. Unless separate funds are established to receive separate funds for specific purposes --- and that was apparently not done by Envision Ogden or Mr. Youngberg --- the presumption about a portion of all the funds in the mixed fund going to all expenditures holds. That's why, for example, Envision Ogden's soliciting funds from a state agency as a public service group is such a problem for EO. The money went into the EO general fund, which was used, much of it, for campaign donations, and so a portion of the public money donated to EO by the State of Utah went to fund the Godfrey, Eccles, Johnson and Peterson campaigns.
Do you suppose that any or all of the people on the extensive mailing list for Bobby's inane and rambling rant looked at it and were embarrassed for him? Do any of them see the bizarre nature of it, or do some of them think it was brilliant?
Just as Bobby became an embarrassment for Lift Ogden, he now appears to be doing the same thing for Envision Ogden. Then again they are one in the same in that EO is just the new name LO operates under after Bobby and some other mentally irregular folks there brought ridicule and shame to the name.
Bobby says more in this rant by what he left out than by what he wrote. He never got near the real issues, but rather tried, clumsily I might add, to tie together unrelated peripheral issues and to divert the investigative attention away from the real criminals to onto a former candidate that did not make it through the primaries.
Seems like every time poor Bobby makes a public appearance he shows everyone a very foolish side of himself.
Oh no, I've been geigered!
The barbed insults are so painful: Skinny! WSU Professor! Sierra Club Leader! Pony tail! Beard!
Defeated by such acute attacks, I now crawl into my hole in despair.
Bob Geiger is a super sexy guy who goes queer cross town to go homo after he sees his fairy fine friend.
It will be interesting to find out if Ogden City Attorney Williams actually answers Mr. Geiger's letter and in what vein he answers.
From any answer he may put forth then we should be able to see if his thinking has as many holes in it as Geiger's does.
City Attorney Williams has shown to this point that he never investigates anything that might expose Godfrey or the Godfrey ole boy's club which has been formed to accomplish all the hare brained ideas that Godfrey would love to have happen. Williams is a true blue Godfrey supporter who follows the part line of Godfrey who is after all the person who hired him and the one who can fire him if he deviates from the Godfrey party line.
I am making book that he never makes any answer to Geiger in writing.
And who is little Booby's friend?
Jay Cavendish, of course.
There are no more dedicated "friends' these days in the Ogden homosexual community than 'little Bobby' and his new friend, Cavendish.
The Ogden Standard Examiner has sunk to a new low.
Sensationalizing the suspects who are confirmed 013 gang members. Who two of them had been out burglarizing residential homes all day. When a female cop identifies the suspects. The suspects take off at high speeds (because they are cowardly punks) won't pull over, they speed up and run a red light which killed two innocent teenagers when they bashed into their car.
How dare these reporters and editors give the parents of the suspect the time of day? They allow these parents of the suspects to blame this on the POLICE.
The news reporters should be ashamed of themselves.
The Ogden Police Department should sue the suspects and their parent for raising gang bangers that killed 2 innocent teenagers.
The Ogden Police Department should sue the KSL Newsroom and the Standard Examiner for slandering this poor Officer who is a highly trained professional, just trying to protect the public.
This type of news reporting is unethical and it needs to stop now.
The least these reporters and editors can do is apologize to the victims and the Ogden police officer and the Ogden police department for their careless reporting.
Typical Republican News Orginizations.
cavendish blew litty matty godfrey up too high adventure never never land we should send these guys to michael jacksons never never land homo ranch with plenty of kids videos
Curm, I wish it were possible to convince attorney Williams to go to medical school. He could "cure" illness and make Ogden famous for its robust health. By the way is it possible for Mr. Geiger to repair my Smart Growth Ogden sign?
How is it legal to sell tickets for Ogden City's new mall site and give that money to candidates running for city council?
I took the suggestion to go over to the Standard's site to read comments. That site is not nearly as interesting as this Weber County Forum site.
The people who post here give facts that substantiate their statements of position.
Thanks to the ones of you who keep this Weber County Forum so interesting and pertinent.
I know it takes dedication and effort as well as hours of your time to make it so interesting and legitimate for the rest of us.
I feel sorry for him. The kid needs professional help, truly.
You know I just can't get past Bobby's first paragraph. In particular the last two sentences of that paragraph.
"This issue was raised, and pushed by opponents of Mayor Godfrey and his supporters. As a citizen, I would like more understanding." First of all, is Bobby really saying that the Mayor's supporters (like Bob Geiger) have been pushing the Envision Ogden/FNURE investigation? "his supporters"??? I assume he means oppenents of Mayor Godfrey and "their" supporters. But of course that's redundant. Second of all, Bobby, I'm with you on that next sentence. As a fellow citizen I would like you to have more understanding, too. More understanding about a lot of things ...
Curm I Want To Know:
You ask: "How is it legal to sell tickets for Ogden City's new mall site and give that money to candidates running for city council?"
I don't know that it was legit, nor did I suggest in any of my posts that it was. But I also am not as well informed as I'd like to be regarding the terms under which the City made The Junction available to EO for a fund raiser. I gather from what others have said that the Administration has been less than forthcoming when asked to provide documentation... oh, say, like a contract?... regarding its making the facilities available to EO.
Dan S:
Damn. You get all the good press. I wish Mr. Geiger would call me skinny in a broadcast e-mail.... [grin]
Stop the Republican SE:
Your criticism of the SE's coverage of the tragic deaths are way off base, I think.
You write that "The Ogden Standard Examiner has sunk to a new low" by "Sensationalizing the suspects ". How did it sensationalize them? By reporting on their backrounds, criminal and gang histories, etc.? That's just good basic crime reporting. You'd be right to go after the SE if it did not report that.
You ask "How dare these reporters and editors give the parents of the suspect the time of day? They allow these parents of the suspects to blame this on the POLICE." Again, getting statements from the families of those arrested is pretty standard stuff in crime reporting, if the families are willing to talk to reporters. Often they are not. And reporters don't get to "allow" or "not allow" the people they interview to say things. As for reporting the suspects' families' attempts to blame the police: do you really think that has helped those charged or is likely to win them or their families much sympathy? I don't. If the SE wanted to do the families a favor, it would not have printed their accusations blaming the police. But doing those families a favor by covering up their accusations against the OPD was, again, not the reporter's job. Reporting them was.
The stories have been good, so far. However much you'd prefer to hear from only one side of those involved in a tragedy like this, reporters have an obligation to do more than that if they can. That can, I agree, lead sometimes to a wimpy "he said/she said" kind of journalism. But that didn't happen here. The SE went digging far beyond simply reporting the statements of the families [of the suspects and the victims].
I've pounded the SE for poor reporting occasionally in the past, but its coverage of the tragic events has so far been, I think, pretty good.
Bruce Edwards spray painted his own building?
Please explain, Commie Boy, what's wrong with that?
It's his building isn't it?
Curm,
Your just like the S E... Full of hogwash.
The S E needs to stop going into the out house and flinging poo at us.
Here I mentioned (on the SE site) that I wished to be on Bobby's email list and within hours a classic rant is provided here, at home, on the WCF.
May I offer a comment?
It was good. SoooOOOoooo good.
It's been too long. Bobby, don't be a stranger.
Nobody acts stupid like you do.
Nobody.
So very, very good.
Dear Dan, did you intentionally omit awkward? Now that short deck is writing bios it would be shame to waste part of the description, he's probably spent six months and half a deck working that up.
I'm a liberal. I think this doosh bag passenger should get charged with the homicides as well. Quit making things political. Different people have different views on different situations, the end.
People that are INNOCENT don't run from the cops!!!
People that are INNOCENT don't flee the seen!!!
People that are INNOCENT don't assault an officer!!!
Who cares what his side of the story is.. He is a gang member, he was involved in a robbery, assault on officers, killing 2 innocent kids, and whatever else they have on him.. Why is he even out of jail? And now he is going to go on the news and say what a great kid he is and if he was driving he would have stopped. Mabey so but he needs to be jail for years, he chose to go down that path in life...
Why is he even out of jail?
It’s because of the republican "less government" bullshit.
Seven Reader comments moved to new thread
Rudi
I got a laugh out of the headline for this thread:
"Faulty Logic, by Bob Geiger"
As if there were any other kind of logic issuing forth from the fevered little brain of this jokester!
CAVENDISH LIKE SHORT LITTLE GEIGERS POLE MATTY A CLOSE 2ND ITS A HORRID THOUGHT BUT HOMOS WILL BE JUST DO IT IN YOUR TRUE HOME TOWNS NOT O TOWN
Someone shouyld copy and paste it to Decente in Japan so they can see how their CFO acts so un-honorably in their name.
Curious:
I wouldn't do that. Mr. Geiger has as much right to take a stand on public matters as you or I do. Take him on on what he's pleased to think are his good arguments.... it's easy enough to do, since his arguments aren't very good at all, and his evidence in support of them, such as it is, isn't very compelling either.. But going after a man's job because he's opposed to you on political or government matters? No.
There've been a lot of suggestions on WCF or the SE site by people suggesting those who disagree with them should be fired, lose their jobs, etc. Going after someone in elected office by means of challenging him at the polls is one thing. Suggesting someone you disagree ought to lose their job, or going to their employers with complaints about their disagreements with you about politics and policy? No.
Post a Comment