|
Change
Nov 3, 2006 13:20:57 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 3, 2006 13:20:57 GMT -5
As I previously have said, Bradley is not the greatest, there is lots of room for a great one to emerge.
Damn Straight! So Carlos, get your ass in gear and stopping messing around. Get elected, man!
|
|
|
Change
Nov 3, 2006 17:39:04 GMT -5
Post by Carlos Murray on Nov 3, 2006 17:39:04 GMT -5
"I still don't understand why not a council seat?"
Please (((Leisha)))! I have tried to explain this for the last 12 years. (And in fact quite a while before that. Way back to about 1982.)
My main proposal has not changed in 5 Elections. Although getting involved in Internet Discussions has caused my idea of "Direct Democracy" as a form of Govt. to evolve into something much bigger, (And simpler!) than the methods I was originally proposing.
(That is the one aspect of my Candidacy that I can "PROVE" the media has Intentionally avoided printing or talking about. They have intentionally avoided portraying my ideas with any semblance of accuracy. And because of the fact that I am known by so many people, when they do quote me, they make it a point to twist my words so badly that people think of what I was quoted as saying as truth because it was written in the Newspaper. (It must be true! Or they wouldn't print it! LOL!)
For the most part. Those who have made a point to have actually heard what I said are of a completely different mind-frame.)
The Media have made it quite obvious that they are "INTENTIONALLY" trying to twist whatever I have said in an effort to make me look stupid! They're not just misquoting me!
(IMHO) They are intentionally "Defaming my Character" in an effort to convince those that might decide to vote for me to change their mind and Vote for someone else.
(Would you like me to provide a couple of dozen examples of this?)
My number one proposal is to get the Public involved in the actual decision making process. Not just to provide input and suggestions. But by becoming involved in an extensive discussion of whatever issues are being discussed. (AND ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO CAST THEIR OWN VOTE ON THEM!)
Like I said at the Library on Monday. Under this kind of system, the poorer person renting a room somewhere in the South end would have exactly the same power as the wealthy Person living in a mansion somewhere on the Lakefront. (I think that the wealthy will never "WILLINGLY" allow such a thing to happen!)
Up to this day the Sarnia Observer has never printed the idea with any kind of accuracy. The closest I have seen them come was during the last Election.
In one story they printed, "Carlos Murray wants to set up a web site with email addresses for people to write to Councilors with their opinions." The story went on to say, "City Hall already has a website with email addresses for all of the councilors. So he is proposing nothing that doesn't already exist. Why is he even running?" (Or something like that?)
As anyone can see. This is not what I have been proposing at all. What I have been proposing, (Only 1 of many ways to accomplish it.) has been to create a massive Message Board for people to carry on discussions between themselves and Elected Officials on issues. And getting to cast their own vote on them.
As a Councilor. I could only let the people be involved to the point of Casting 1 Vote on Council. The idea of Direct Democracy could only work if it applied to the entire Council.
One reporter at the Observer asked me what would happen if the entire Council Voted against the idea of Direct Democracy? But it is of no importance. The Mayor decides the manner in which the Council is to operate.
Also, (In a sense) my own Candidacy is a sort of referendum about letting the General Public be involved in making the decisions. If I am elected and Council (As well as others.) try to stop the idea from going forward. I think you could expect something resembling a revolt by the people to get their voice to be heard and their Vote to be counted as equal to anyone else's. Just as I have promised them.
IOW I think that my running for Council would not clique up with what I am proposing to do.
(I hope I can expect to not have to keep answering this Question/Suggestion.)
"Didn't Bradley get around 14,000 votes and Joe Murray got less than 8000 for his seat on council."
The one biggest obstacle I have seen is the fact that you get to Vote for 4 people in each of the Councilor sections. But for the "Mayor" position you only get to choose one.
I have had several people tell me that they wanted to vote for me in the last election. But they were so scared of splitting the Vote and allowing Rose-Ann Nathan to be Elected that they Voted for Bradley to prevent it from happening.
"So Carlos, get your ass in gear and stopping messing around. Get elected, man!"
FWIW (((fumanshu))). I don't think there was ever a time that I was "messing around". But I think that if I had the Observer quoting my statements in any way less than trying to make me look stupid. It would make this long strange trip be a whole lot easier!!!!
Peace! DG
|
|
|
Change
Nov 3, 2006 19:36:11 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 3, 2006 19:36:11 GMT -5
Maybe you just need to speak more clearly in order to avoid confusing the local media. You must stop assuming that they know what you're talking about; they probably really don't.
I would say that you should speak a little slower. Remember to breathe. Inhale through your nostrils, hold, and exhale through your mouth. Breathing like this is a relaxation exercise.
It's important that you speak slowly and clearly. If it helps, smoke a joint before the debate on Monday. Just relax and speak clearly.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 3, 2006 20:01:48 GMT -5
Post by Carlos Murray on Nov 3, 2006 20:01:48 GMT -5
"Maybe you just need to speak more clearly in order to avoid confusing the local media. You must stop assuming that they know what you're talking about; they probably really don't."
So sorry fumanshu. But there is no possibility that the local Media doesn't know what I have been proposing. I have told them many times. Not only in public forums. But also in private interviews. They are not unaware of my "MAIN" proposal in any way shape or form. They simply choose to either not quote me. Or to intentionally "misquote" me every chance they get.
Like I said, "If you want to see a whole bunch of examples. I can easily provide you with several of them."
I like to think that I was very articulate at the City Hall Meeting a week and a half ago. If they didn't pick up on my proposal to tap into the Ontario Energy Fund (?) I think I can safely say that they did so on purpose. I doubt that anyone listening had any problem hearing what I was saying,
(Especially when I have been repeating it for the last 12 years!)
|
|
|
Change
Nov 3, 2006 22:57:15 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 3, 2006 22:57:15 GMT -5
I just finished watching the debate at city hall on Cogeco's video on demand, and I don't think that you were very clear with your message. If I were a newspaper reporter -- which I'm not -- I would have probably erringly misrepresented your platform as well.
Judge for yourself. If you have digital cable, you can watch the Chamber debate at any time by selecting it in the video on demand portion of the digital service. It's available free of charge to all Cogeco digital subscribers.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 4, 2006 4:54:22 GMT -5
Post by Carlos Murray on Nov 4, 2006 4:54:22 GMT -5
Thank you (((fumanshu)))! Your advice proved to be quite valuable. I have had "Digital" Cable for about 2 years. But I always thought that the VOD portion costed extra money. So (Until about a hour ago.) I have never made use of it.
I just finished watching the "Debate" as you call it. (It is more properly called a "Candidates Meeting". I can't see Sarnia ever allowing an actual "Debate"!
At an actual Debate, Candidates ask each other questions. And the conversations can become very heated!!!!!
Well I just finished watching it and I beg to differ with you on some points. But one thing that I did notice when I heard my own voice is that I have a very slight lisp.
(When I was a very young kid, I went through Speech Therapy to correct for the problem I had pronouncing my S's. I have always thought that the problem was gone. But I just heard my own voice and noticed that it was still there. Only slightly!)
On your point about me speaking more slowly in order to be understood. I didn't see that as a problem at all. I think that most of what I did say was pretty clear. And I can see no reason why the reporter from the Observer would not have been able to hear what I had been saying.
My point about making sure that there were jobs available for younger people, (High School kids) in order to provide work/work experience in order to keep them from getting involved with Drugs or other Criminal activity came across very clearly. (IMHO)
And the statement I made about not allowing the USA to Dictate our "Foreign Policy" was very clear also. As well as my point about getting local people to invest in local Companies. Eliminating the need to approach Companies that already existed.
(Well! Approaching pre-existing companies is gr8! But I see it as an alternative that we are able to approach local investors to Create Brand New Companies that Produce products that will be needed in the near Future Society.)
I think the reporter from the Observer heard everything I said just fine. He just decided to avoid including it into his story about the event.
I've actually kind of gotten used to it! This is not the 1st time the Observer has intentionally omitted my comments from their Coverage. I have had one idea in the past that in stead of writing a Story about these meetings. They should simply get a transcript of the event and publish that. Then the people would get an exact rendering of the things that the Candidates had said.
(This is not that difficult! There are Software that will take a recording and transform it into text.) -----
The one thing that people don't seem to understand is that these "LIVE" events are my only chance to let the public actually hear what I am saying and proposing. And the structure of these events gives me a limited amount of time to say what I have to say. (3 minutes opening at this particular event.)
You suggest that I speak more slowly!? I already know that I cannot rely on the Sarnia Observer to quote me with any semblance of accuracy. So I am forced to "CRAM" 20 or 30 minutes of stuff I have to say into the 3 minutes they are allowing me. So I have to speak more quickly. If I didn't, I would only get half of what I have to say said. And still only those watching the event will ever know about it anyway.
I personally think that my accusation Directed at Joe Murray about lying under OATH in order to get his name on the Ballot should have been the Headline of the next day's Paper. But the reporters said they were concerned about getting involved in a "LIBEL" suit.
My complaint is documented at City Hall. I made a written complaint to the City Clerk. And I have their written response. Which they also have on file at City Hall.
Again the idea of "Journalistic Integrity" comes into question? They have had no problem printing Libelous and Defamatory things about me for the last 5 elections. (12 years!) But when there is something that is Documented at City Hall about another Candidate, they won't print it! (Sounds kind of BIASED to me!!!)
Needless to say, I have found the Coverage of my own Candidacy over the last 12 years to be absolutely appalling. But under old law there was nothing I could do in the form of taking Legal action.
The old law was that you had to have the money to pay a Lawyer ahead of time in order to file Suit. But the most recent laws allow Canadian Lawyers to take a case on a Commission Percentage of the final settlement.
Just last night I sent a message through an on line site about Election Law in Canada. Asking what responsibilities the Media had regarding coverage of Candidates during an Election? I have not received an answer yet. But I do have plans to go ahead with a Suit against the Sarnia Observer for damages they have done to me over the last 12 years. "Defamation of Character", "Character Assassination", "Libel", "Personal Damages". (The list goes on!)
(And the amount that I intend to go for will be astounding!) That is only for the manner in which they have portrayed me over the last 12 years. Not anything that they say (Or neglect saying?) from the moment they are told of my intent. Any more misrepresentations from that point on will result in a very extreme increase to the amount of the suit. -----
I don't mean to sound like a whiner! But there is only so much a person can take. These people know their own responsibilities under Election Law. I think it's time they started following them! -----
Like I have said before. Please take a few minutes and go to the Sarnia Public Library (Christina and Wellington) and look at the Front Page of the Sarnia Observer on May 14th, 1994. You will be very surprised on how much the Paper has changed their attitude about me from that day to the day, (Six months later!) that I 1st put my name in for Mayor!
Well I'm tired of my own ranting by now. So I'll just finish up.
Peace! DG
|
|
|
Change
Nov 4, 2006 13:04:29 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 4, 2006 13:04:29 GMT -5
I don't think the papers have any obligation to you Carlos. In all honesty, they don't have to give you any print whatsoever. If they were so inclined, they could cover the election as though you didn't even exist. They don't even have to mention your name as a candidate.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 5, 2006 1:26:58 GMT -5
Post by Carlos Murray on Nov 5, 2006 1:26:58 GMT -5
Hmm? I think that would actually be fine. But the fact is that they have printed things about me. And anyone that can think for themselves can obviously see that they have intentionally twisted my words. I probably would have been better of if they hadn't printed anything about me. I am personally under the impression that a lot of people that would have voted for me changed their minds because of the defamatory nature that the Media has publicly portrayed me as over these 12 years.
I recall some of the stories from the '94 Election especially. All the way up to the Election they printed some pretty Libelous and Defamatory things. And that is really what I am ticked off about. Then the day "AFTER" the Election they printed a story about a Poll they had done at the High Schools. (They actually did the Poll about 2 weeks earlier. But waited until after the Election was over to print it. Pretty responsible journalism! EH?)
The Poll said that among High School Students I had placed a very close 2nd to Mike Bradley. Now I realize that most High School Students are too young to Vote. But there are still quite a few 18 year olds in Grade 12 & 13. (And "ALL" of those kids are now 12 years older!)
One would think that if they had those Poll results 2 weeks before the Election they would have written about them. They did print about many other Polls among other groups. Why leave that one until after the Election? Or why even print it at all?
Like you said, "They don't have to make any mention of me at all!" But IMHO that kind of thing is destroying the whole idea of Democracy. -----
During the last Provincial Election, Andrew Falby ran in our Riding under the banner of the "Freedom Party". One of the Major "All Candidates" meetings was held in the Banquet Hall at the Hotel that was once called the Canterbury Inn. (What's it called now? It was the Ramada at one time!? That place changes names more often than some people change their underwear. LOL!)
Andrew got equal time to speak. Just like everyone else. And there were people there from all kinds of Media. TV, Radio, Newspapers, etc. You name it! They were there! But when the coverage came out, there was not one bit of coverage on Andrew Falby whatsoever. Not in any of the Media!
Robert Metz (Freedom Party London) told me that the Sarnia Observer refused to allow them to make use of Paid Advertising. They told him that the Paper was officially backing the Conservative Party. And would not allow them to advertise in their publication. (I see that as very wrong!) -----
Yes! They could have given me no coverage at all. But the fact is that they have. And IMHO 99 and 44/100ths of it was intentionally printed to Defame My Character. And I think I can prove that reasonably well.
What most people don't know is the difference between a Criminal Case and Civil Litigation. In a Criminal Case, guilt must be proven "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt." But in the case of Civil Litigation, Guilt needs only be beyond 50%.
You may recall O.J. Simpson being found Not Guilty in the case about the murder of his Ex-Wife and Ron Goldman. But still "Her" Family took him to court and won several Million Dollars.
I'm guessing that if I can ever get something started on this, the Sarnia Observer will be wishing that they had never written anything about me at all. The fact that they "DID" write things about me that were grossly inaccurate has really done nothing but provide me with ammunition to use against them. (If I should decide to proceed!?)
Let's just wait and see!!!
DG
|
|
|
Change
Nov 5, 2006 13:28:56 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 5, 2006 13:28:56 GMT -5
Like you said Carlos, if Osprey Media (owners of the Sarnia Observer) had actually defamed or libelled you, there are legal options available for you to pursue. If you choose not to exercise those options, you are essentially permitting them to continue covering your candidacy and platform in whatever manner they so desire. The ball really is in your court. If you elect to do nothing about your allegations, then you are as much at fault as they are.
On another note, I would point out that local residents are looking for leadership in a mayoral candidate. They are wanting a mayor that will take action when something unsavoury occurs in the community. You are quite adept at pointing out perceived wrong-doings, but present yourself as one who is incapable or unwilling to take action. This inaction speaks volumes for the kind of leadership that Sarnia's residents should expect from you. And this, I would argue, is a key failing in your election bid.
If the people of Sarnia elect you on November 13, will you continue to whine and do nothing as our mayor? I'm inclined to believe the answer to be in the affirmative.
Voters in Sarnia have very little to judge you by, Carlos. You have absolutely no history of leadership. You have never been involved with anything that has amounted to any significance. Your tolerance of your own downtrodden state leads one to believe that you will conduct yourself similarly in dealing with the problems of others. Not a very attractive or saleable position to be in.
I am well aware of the fact that some people believe your ideas to be decent and worthy of consideration, but I'm really forced to believe that you are incapable of moving your ideas beyond the concept stage. Voters don't want whiners as leaders, they want doers. And the simple fact that you saw fit to place your name on the ballot, just isn't enough to convince people that you deserve their votes.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 8, 2006 4:59:56 GMT -5
Post by ryyback on Nov 8, 2006 4:59:56 GMT -5
(((Leisha))) "His license plate may say BIGKAHUNA but he is only a legend in his own mind!!!"quote] I think Joe's BIGKAHUNA EGO will prevent him from winning. I used to be neibours with Joe, and his is full of himself at times. Lots of energy but also lots of EGO.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 8, 2006 9:00:10 GMT -5
Post by leisha1 on Nov 8, 2006 9:00:10 GMT -5
Thanks, your evaluation is appreciated , it has been mine for some time.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 8, 2006 13:52:50 GMT -5
Post by fumanshu on Nov 8, 2006 13:52:50 GMT -5
I think Joe's BIGKAHUNA EGO will prevent him from winning. I used to be neibours with Joe, and his is full of himself at times. Lots of energy but also lots of EGO.With all due respect, Sarnia has no shortage of egomaniacal twits. Too bad there's no market for such people; Sarnia would make a killing.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 8, 2006 14:29:20 GMT -5
Post by leisha1 on Nov 8, 2006 14:29:20 GMT -5
fumanshu, I like you Trudeau quote!
|
|
|
Change
Nov 8, 2006 17:55:20 GMT -5
Post by Dean Robinson on Nov 8, 2006 17:55:20 GMT -5
Interesting article in today's paper. Carlos wants to be Prime Minister. Wow I just read this I dont know where to begin. It looks like the paper is using Carlos's own words to screw with him, it's like a dare to sue them knowing that they are not crossing the line s by printing his words. OK read it and let me know what you think but remember be nice, as Bradley stated Carlos deserves Respect After all he spent his money election after election to run.
|
|
|
Change
Nov 9, 2006 0:14:39 GMT -5
Post by Carlos Murray on Nov 9, 2006 0:14:39 GMT -5
Thanks Dean! FWIW I saw the story and I think it is the worst story they have ever ran on me. This is too much! And I "AM" looking for a Lawyer to proceed. They have truly gone "TOOOOOOO FARRRRRR"!
|
|