On January 10 the Oshkosh Common Council will have the opportunity to let the citizens have a say as to whether it is time to bring the troops home. The city attorney, who earlier claimed that the referendum question was not a matter of direct legislation and only 4 council votes could place it on the ballot regardless of how many petitions were gathered, now claims that had the petitioners collected enough signatures the question would have automatically been placed on the ballot. (The petitioners collected almost 2,000 signatures, not enough for direct legislation but a huge amount regardless; additionally, Oshkosh citizen Doug Boone collected close to 3,000 signatures in opposition to the war over the summer before the beginning of the referendum drive).
Thus the city attorney has provided the Common Council with a narrow technicality on which to reject the referendum question. I think each member of the council should ask him or herself, before voting on January 10th, whether the best way to honor the fallen fifty is to resort to narrow technicalities.
- Amherst: Uhl III, Eugene A. Specialist 15-Nov-2003
- Beaver Dam: Straseskie, Kirk Allen Sergeant 19-May-2003
- Beaver Dam: Cantafio, Ryan J. Private 1st Class 25-Nov-2004
- Black Creek: Eacho, Donald W. Sergeant 1st Class 04-Mar-2005
- Brookfield: Schram, Matthew E. Major 26-May-2003
- Calendonia: Wyatt, Daniel R. Lance Corporal 12-Oct-2004
- Casco: Thiry, Jesse L. Corporal 05-Apr-2004
- Cleveland: Kiser, Charles A. Staff Sergeant 24-Jun-2004
- Clintonville: Hansen, Warren S. Sergeant 15-Nov-2003
- Columbus: Kurth, John F. "Hans" Captain 13-Mar-2004
- DeForest: O'Donnell, Shane K. Lance Corporal 08-Nov-2004
- Ellsworth: Hoyer, Bert Edward Private 1st Class 10-Mar-2004
- Fairchild: Kaufman, Charles A. Specialist 26-Jun-2005
- Fond du Lac: Tollefson, John O. Specialist 27-Jul-2005
- Fountain City: Bossert, Andrew L. Sergeant 07-Mar-2005
- Grant: Halverson, Andrew Private 1st Class 09-Oct-2004
- Green Bay: Edinger, Benjamin C. Sergeant 23-Nov-2004
- Hudson: Smith, Benjamin A. Specialist 02-Nov-2005
- Janesville: Schneider, Sean M. Private 1st Class 29-Mar-2004
- Lena: Frye, Nichole M. Private 1st Class 16-Feb-2004
- Loyal: Olson, Todd D. Staff Sergeant 27-Dec-2004
- Madison: Maida, Mark A. Sergeant 27-May-2005
- Madison: Kading, Matthew R. Sergeant 1st Class 31-Oct-2005
- Mayville: Wendling, Michael J. Specialist 26-Sep-2005
- Menomonie: Wolfe, Jeremy L. 2nd Lieutenant 15-Nov-2003
- Milwaukee: McGlothin, Michael A. Specialist 17-Apr-2004
- Milwaukee: Soltau, Adrian V. Corporal 13-Sep-2004
- Monona/Madison: Simon, Chad J. Staff Sergeant 04-Aug-2005
- New Berlin: Witmer, Michelle M. Specialist 09-Apr-2004
- Oneida: Jerabek, Ryan M. Private 1st Class 06-Apr-2004
- Oshkosh: Vroman, Brent T. Private 1st Class 13-Dec-2004
- Oshkosh: Jansky, Benjamin D. Captain 27-Jul-2005
- Oshkosh: Wallace, Andrew P. Sergeant 26-Sep-2005
- Platteville: Splinter, Christopher J. Major 24-Dec-2003
- Plum City: Diesing, Trevor J. Sergeant 1st Class 25-Aug-2005
- Racine: Poelman, Eric J. Specialist 05-Jun-2005
- Rice Lake: Sturino, Paul J. Specialist 22-Sep-2003
- Sheboygan: Prening, Brian P. Corporal 12-Nov-2004
- Sparta: Gaunky, Anthony Alexander "Alex" Private 1st Class 18-Nov-2005
- Spooner: Gabrielson, Dan H. Sergeant 1st Class 09-Jul-2003
- Stevens Point: Mattek Jr., John J. Lance Corporal 13-Jun-2005
- Suamico (Green Bay): Hunt, Isaiah R. Private 1st Class 15-Nov-2004
- Sun Prairie: Scott, Joshua Michael Chief Warrant Officer (CW2) 27-May-2005
- Tomah: Stevens, Andy A. Sergeant 01-Dec-2005
- Waukesha: Warner, Richard D. Lance Corporal 13-Dec-2004
- Waukesha: Warns II, Robert P. Corporal 08-Nov-2004
- Waupun: Bosveld, Rachel K. Private 1st Class 26-Oct-2003
- Wausau/Rhinelander: Martin, Stephen G. Staff Sergeant 02-Jul-2004
- West Bend: Cornell, Todd R. Staff Sergeant 09-Nov-2004
- West Bend: Wichlacz, Travis M. Lance Corporal 05-Feb-2005
13 comments:
Oh for pete's sake.
Let's just get it over with. I found the Reickman blog annoying and have not paid much attention to it once I saw what it was about. Oh sure I've referred to it alot, but I haven't read the theing. Following a link now I just saw that I have been called a Basement Mouse Jockey on the Big Box Blog and that Justin Mitchell tried to speak on my behalf, etc. Stew thinks I'm broccoli...Lord, have mercy.
Here's whats wrong" with the Reickman blog - fast and dirty - no big essay. And, I'll try to get to the "grasp the medium" comment I made too.
Real blogs exist in a meritocracy. You start out with maybe your Mom reading and if you suck you die. If you have a strong voice and something to say that people want to hear, you survive. You don't need credentials, title, etc.
It's the Authentic Voice that does it.
Reickmann clearly does not want to compete in a meritocracy, he wants to arrive "on top". Entering the medium with fanfare and pomp published in his Corporate Venue.
Not really blogging as most people see it - blogging as Management hopes they can make it.
Stew has Terminal Corner Office Voice.
There will be sycophants that will resonate with this, but there always are those.
Stew's numerous attempts to shore up position for himself by trying to control the "competition" are ludicrous. Real bloggers don't so that to each other. You might rip a guy to shreds, but if you're not witty it just sticks back on you.
But Stew, he wants to set up some kind of little clubhouse where Icky Kids can't play. But we're still here and we still have our own ball. We don't need you, sorry.
And that "safe environment"? For who? Who will benevolently control this Safe Environment?
Why Stew of course.
There are office boys who have successfully and authentically become bloggers (i.e. Scoble) but they don't do it that snotty ball hog way.
Trying to say who's good enough, repeatedly, and keeping that corner office voice - that's using the Blogger software but it ain't bloggin'.
If you're into credentialism and my broccolian Basement Voice bothers you, go read 'Blog' by Klein and Burstein.A damn good book
They rip Stew-type blogging to shreds in page after page.
'Nuff said.
Oh. except the President of the United States has been filmed flippin' a guy off, and we all know what Dick Cheney said. So by Stew Standards these two guys, should they start blogging, would not meet the Northwestern standards 'cause they're just too darn naughty. The President of the United States pal, flippin' people off. Guess we won't be seeing any references to HIM in any Gannett publications.
There, all done.
Jody,
I'm in agreement with most of what you're saying, though I wonder about the accuracy of the statement that "real blogs exist in a meritocracy." I think that may have been true in the early days of blogging. What I'm finding is that real blogs, especially those that deal with politics, exist in a kind of "team" atmosphere. And these teams are based on the most vulgar and simplistic possible definitions of liberal, conservative, etc. If a blogger is useful to a "team," then she can post absolute garbage and it won't matter--the other team members make sure her posts get lots of hits. The "team" trend has been mostly destructive, in my opinion.
We're seeing this phenomenon play out among the so-called "conservative" blogs in the state. Apparently, getting linked on the Charlie Sykes site dramatically increases a blogger's readership. And Charlie only seems to be interested in a blogger's ideological correctness: take the proper swipes at "liberals," mouth a few platitudes about the free market, display outrage at the secular humanist war on the sacred, and you are then on the "team." There's really no merit involved, at least not that I can see. So-called "liberals" do the same thing, of course, usually requiring only a basic Bush bash for team membership.
What's funny about the corporate blogs that you mention is that they try to portray themselves as somehow "above the fray," as if they are some kind of referee encouraging fair play. But they're just another team, really, for whom victory means transforming the discourse of the blogosphere into the same tepid, establishment tripe we find on the typical editorial page of America's high circulation newspapers. --Tony
Well, okay. First recall I was kind of ticked off when writing and had originally intended to write a full essay on the Reickmann blog as the quintessential B.S. Big Box Blog in our neck of the woods, but then decided just to ream in a post. My concepts could have been developed much more fully. But really it's been done so beautifully in the book (Blog by Kline and Burstein - if he reads that and his Dick Cheney doesn't drop right off, he ain't understanding English)
When I have read about blogging, the word "meritocracy" doesn't seem to quite mean Quality in exactly the same way a professor of communications might use the word. Just quickly the elements seem to be
Engaging voice
Verbal skill (and not strictly the book larnin' kind) and probably most importantly,
Filling the Void (meaning both Viewpoint AND Facts)
A void left by the complete failure of corporate media to truly function as the fourth estate. To be an authentic facilitator of the democratic process. This has been referred to by some as a sacred trust and there's just going to be a public outcry if these guys defecate on the altar time and again. Blogging = Public Outcry. We don't even have to be good, we just have to be there. J'existe, man
I am not familiar with the team blog you mentioned. So there is a big fish with some parasites hanging on. Time will tell if the big fish is making a tactical error by taking this route. I guess I'd have to assume he originally rose in readership because he was perceived as good, he filled a void. Rock stars don't always handle their success well, I guess bloggers don't always either. Yes, linking like that (is it called linkfarming maybe?) is done by some people to make the most of how Technorati ranks blogs, but it is seen as tacky by many people and like I said, time will tell if he is gaining or losing from those decisions.
About the "above the fray" business. There are going to be Objectivity Mavens for a long time yet. Unfazed by all the evidence that there is no true objectivity, they persist. "MY group is right", not because they reflect my personal views but because They Are Objective. You can plop all the "observer influences the observed" literature in front of them but no, they continue to genuflect before the Scientific Method. (They should read up on particle/wave issues which are a profound illustration of this concept but won't because the Packers are on) A nice article on the objectivity illusion can be found here -http://www.applelinks.com/mooresviews/objectivity.shtml
And IMHO, more critical to the failure of the newspaper industry than than the "tepid tripe" found on the Op-Ed pages is the betrayal of the public trust as regards content choice. It's what they select out and frame as news, the public diet itself, that is the abomination that has led to the rise of the (in many cases fly-by-night) citizen journalist. People are desperate for something else, something authentic, and will flop around trying to provide that for themselves and their peers since the industry adamantly refuses to do that.
And you don't gauge the success of this effort by micro-focusing on individual blogs and their quality or lack thereof, but by looking at the citizen journalist effort as a collective mass across all ideologies. It is a huge success. Huge. People who don't like that idea can try for denial, insulate themselves in yes-men, but folks, the Emperor has no Clothes and a lot of people see that.
I have recently begun to do news gathering for a local citizen radio program that is VERY new and we are learning as we go. I pretend no expertise. However, as a result of this few weeks experience I can tell you with certainty that there is alot of news and viewpoints out there that are not reaching the public via the Big Boxes. Local and National Benevolent Daddies select it out, and you get the intellectual equivalent of a McDonald's meal in your local paper. You might feel full, but.....
Also - another interesting bit. I read on a newspaper industry website that Gannett is particularly squeezed by the recent hemmorhaging of readership because, while other corporations can respond with "belt-tightening", Gannett has already (for reasons I don't know) in past years tightened up about as far as they can go and have very little wiggle room. I feel the Stew blog is a patently obvious attempt to turn your very active blogging community into an extension of his own newsroom for self-serving purposes. I am personally not going to enable this. I'm not going to read his crap, henceforth his name shall not cross my keyboard. He can say stuff about my Mama, he can urinate on my flower garden. I shall not acknowledge. Attention lends influence (so do links people!) and in Jodyland, Stew is no more. Y'all do as you see fit.
Over and out.
Jody,
Sounds like you need to start off 2006 with some new hobbies. You are taking yourself way too seriously. I believe most of these blogs are read for entertainment purposes.
Jack Straw
Jack, come on, Jody's clearly just in looooooooove.....
Star Jones
whatever.
I think it's sad the number of deaths and I think it will have to be a high number before we decide to do anything.
We havent felt(nationally) a great deal yet.
yet.
We did actually feel a lot! It was called 9/11. Before that the USS Cole, before that the WTC bombing(first time), etc, etc.
Let's compare the number of deaths in the same amount of time as the Iraq war from:
Cancer
Car Accidents
Drunk Drivers
Abortion(know this will be a hot topic)
I don't see a lot of uproar in the media about these issues. Let's have some perspective here!
While we are at it how about comparing other wars( i know war is not good, but we have to compare). Let's face it, you just can't stand George Bush! Whether he is doing something good or bad you will never give him any credit because you hate him!
Jack Straw
Hey there Jack Straw -
If blogs are read for entertainment purposes then I guess Dan Rather did NOT resign as a result of bloggers etc, etc. I imagined that.
I do NO take myself or my own blog seriously, anyone can see that. Seriously.
Yo, Star Jones,
You mean you can tell I'm in love with Stew Reickmann and am expressing pent-up sexual tension for him through hostility and biting sarcasm the way they did in 1950s films? Or perhaps more like the adorable (like me) Meg Ryan did to Tom Hanks did in "You've Got Mail"?
I blush at my own emotional transparency.
I also Thank God I can post to blogs from here in France.
Luv, ya -
"Meg"
Hmmm, I see I still have the typing and grammatical skills of Hitler in that last comment.
Can anyone really understand what Jody is saying most of the time? She makes some good points and others are very much off the wall and out there. But why is it necessary for her to talk way over most readers heads? She was more entertaining before she tried becoming a female Tony Palmeri. That is not mean to be a cut on Tony. He is highly educated and makes great points but doesn't write so you can't understand him. Not so with Jody.
I just remember when Jody appeared on Eye on Oshkosh last Spring to discuss a consultant's study on Chippewa Falls government. Of course, once on the show she admitted that she had never actually read the study that she was commenting on. That was rich.
Eye on Oshkosh Junkie
Actually, Jody did not come on the show to discuss the study, in and of itself. She was invited because she was concerned about issues going on in her community that related to Stephen Hintz, our former mayor who, through his consulting agency, is involved in the government in many communities.
She was also invited on to address her concerns about some of the stonewalling being done by her own elected officials. If memory serves me correctly the study was mentioned as a PART of that discussion. I don't recall why Jody had not read it, or if she had even been privy to seeing it.
But whether you like Jody or not, one has to give her credit for being honest. After all, she could have tried to fudge her way through things the way so many people in life do. But she didn't.
And no matter what anyone thinks of her, she does have the courage of her convictions to sign her name. I understand why some people don't, but she puts her name out there and takes the heat when it comes, to whatever degree it may be.
Thanks for being an Eye on Oshkosh junkie.
Thank you Cheryl,
At the time of the Eye taping I had
1.) Heard the Job Proposal discussed and quoted in council meeetings.I had participated in those discussion myself.
2.) I had watched as votes decisions were made by the council based on this Job Proposal.
3.) Read references to and quotes from the Job Proposal in our local paper.
The Proposal had a huge impact on politics in my community. It was completely appropriate for Cheryl to ask questions about the Job Proposal on the Eye show. I took my resposiblity to be truthful very seriously and while I realize it is the cultural norm to view an answer of "I don't know" is a sign of weakness, I do not. I beleive it is a sign of weakness to be so enamored of holding on to your "position" that you will bullshit to do so. I plan to say "I don't know" again in the future. So you can look forward to that.
Shortly after the taping of the show I went to city hall and paid $5.60 for a copy of the full Job Proposal.
It was not a study.
A study is an objective assessment. This was a Job Proposal done by a For-Profit company (PAA - The Hintz Family).
It was an assessment of how our council could benefit by contracting with this firm for a fee. I will NOT call it a study for the "I don't Bull-shit" reasons stated above. If there is bullshitting being done, lay it at the proper door.
In the Proposal, which I and other Osh. residents have now read, PAA did make recommendations regarding cuts to police and fire protection services in Chippewa Falls, which many of us objected to very strongly.
I found that ironic, since I beleive Mr. Gordon Hintz ran on a platform of maintaining police and fire protection in his own community. That appears to be a double-standard to me. One set of values at home, another when there is a profit to be made.
The remarks you do not understand are likely inside jokes aimed at blog regulars and friends. That sort of thing can happen on any blog. I won't stop that, I'm having fun, so are they.
Nor am I here to be liked, except by the afore-mentioned friends, whom I do love dearly, but (unfortunately for some people) in a non-carnal fashion.
Thank you again Cheryl.
Post a Comment