Please Allow Me to Snivel:
The other day I was greeted by someone with, “Why are you ranting about all of this stupid local crap? It’s boring. I like it when you give the @#$%ing liberals the @#$% they deserve.” I really didn’t have much of an answer for the gentleman, but what I should have said is, “You try coming up with different topics every single freaking week for years on end with a 1,700-word piece. I can’t win, I don’t focus on local politics enough, I rant too much on local stuff, I’m too conservative, I’m not conservative enough, you use too harsh of language, you should be tougher on liberals, you give your wife too hard of a time in the rant. Anyone who likes Trump as much as you do is a fool.” Okay, I feel better now; thanks for reading my whiney venting rant.
I Gotta Do This One:
This newspaper has published two news articles regarding the Sand Canyon Homeowners Association giving its list of members’ email addresses to KHTS. Apparently the owners of the radio station didn’t take kindly to the Gazette’s coverage, as we were made aware last week.
That awareness came in the form of a letter addressed to Mr. Doug Sutton, Publisher, The Santa Clarita Gazette (me) from the “general counsel to KHTS and its shareholders.” It read, in part:
“Please direct all communications to me. Recently it has come to my attention that your paper has published a series of stories designed to place the ownership of KHTS in a false and misleading light because they are looking for more effective mediums to provide information to our community in cases of emergencies. I have two simple questions for you: What is your objection to residents receiving notifications when exigent circumstances exist? What business is it of yours what business decisions my client makes or with whom?”
I take great offense to the accusation of “false and misleading light.” I would ask for a specific fact supporting that statement. It’s really easy to throw out these types of offensive remarks without pinpointing what was incorrect.
My answer to the two simple questions:
Both are irrelevant — as with every news article the Gazette publishes, it was based solely on accurate information and verified, quoted emails. My personal opinion and that of the writer as to the email list sharing is also irrelevant and were not stated in the stories.
In addition, the articles published were without editorial opinion on KHTS’ ability to cover and communicate during emergencies. Our intent, from a news perspective, was the propriety — both legally and implied — of sharing email lists, specifically when people signed up with the understanding that the list would never be shared or used commercially. The articles are very explicit with those points; perhaps the counselor did not read them. (The stories are on our web site: https://santaclaritafree.com/gazette/news/khts-seeks-scv-homeowners-emails and https://santaclaritafree.com/gazette/news/hoas-protect-members-information).
The letter from the attorney also read:
“Unless you have evidence that my clients have violated the law regarding emails, email lists, or opt outs, I request you immediately cease and desist from these irresponsible stories solely designed to place my client, a competitor, in a false and misleading light.”
I know this is not correct legalese, but what the freak is he talking about?! “A false and misleading light” and “irresponsible stories”? I challenge him and KHTS to please point out exactly what was written that was false and misleading? If even just one can be proven, the Gazette will issue a retraction; otherwise, there is no way in hell we will cease and desist from ANY story we deem as valuable news for our readers.
I’ll tell you what irresponsible is. That’s the owners of the station sending out an email to 800 Sand Canyon residents through the homeowners association that “the article in the Gazette about our intentions is inaccurate.” That was done without one damn example of what was inaccurate! (As I ranted last week, the homeowners association refused to send out my rebuttal to this accusation.)
The attorney’s letter further stated:
“I understand that Michael Hogan was misquoted in a previous story and sent you correspondence to that effect.”
The gentleman in question was NOT misquoted and we have the email from him with the EXACT statement, word for word, that was published. As far as the follow-up correspondence he sent, there is no contradiction in the two emails — they are about separate issues.
The attorney’s letter also said:
“I will thereby expect you to not only publish a retraction of that story, but also refrain from any further commentary concerning the station.”
Please be assured there will be NO retraction of the story. And as for any further commentary regarding the radio station, commentary in an opinion column is protected by the First Amendment.
I’m not sure what the Goldmans had to pay for the letter to be written, but we could have saved them the expense, if they just would have submitted a letter themselves expressing their point of view. I would have shared it with our readers. You know why? Because we at the Gazette strive to be fair and balanced, just as we were with the articles in question!
A Miranda Heads-Up:
Lately a lot of the Gazette comments I’ve gotten are regarding the editorial cartoon featuring City Councilman Bill Miranda. The cartoon was pulled last week at press time as we received a late-breaking press release of The Chamber of Commerce completing the Latino Chamber’s final tax return. I wanted to make sure we weren’t being unfair to Bill, in light of the press release, until we had a chance to review it (see story on page 3).
The writer and I are of the opinion that Mr. Miranda has not fulfilled his guarantee from May 12 that he would provide proper documentation two weeks later, as he said on a radio show with Carl Goldman and me.
Recently, in an article he was quoted as saying: “When the chambers merged there was a written memorandum of understanding that stated clearly that the SCV Chamber (not the Latino Chamber) was responsible for submitting the tax report in question. Shortly after the merger the SCV Chamber had to deal with what they felt were more pressing issues and the filing was not made. They are in the process of correcting that and they expect all filings to be done in a short period of time. I have no involvement in the matter.”
No involvement in the matter?! Really? That’s not what he said on various occasions over the last several months. How can he suddenly wash his hands of this now? For the 25th time, on the radio show with Carl Goldman and I on May 12 he exclaimed:
“I have all the proof, we have all the numbers!”
In light of this self-denial, his lack of follow-through and what our evaluation of the tax return found, the cartoon has been reinstated.
“The Rich, Conservative Welfare Queens?” This was the title of Mr. Heath’s column in The Signal this past week. His premise is that we who were fortunate enough to grow up in a good home with a good learning environment and ended up with a conservative nature are guilty of mooching off of the government because of the plentiful tax dollars going to the schools we attended. Now that we’re on “top,” we are hypocritically refusing to help those in need of the same environment.
“When asked to contribute his (our) tax dollars so that students today can enjoy the same opportunities he was given, our hypocrite cruelly refuses. He closes his eyes to their sub-standard education system and exorbitant college costs.”
“With his protest, he proves his true identity. He is a welfare queen, a moocher, fool and traitor to his country, who forged his success off generosity of his elders. But now, an elder himself, refuses to give anything back.”
Where the freak do I begin with that pile of horse excrement? This is a good example of a snowflake student in need of a safe place. This is the kind of thinking that comes from a young liberal who thinks the government is the end all and be all for someone to make it in life.
This dude needs to let his peers know they need to pull up their boot straps and work two jobs while going to school, like many of us did to get through the tough time of education and not rely on the sugar daddy of government to get them through. If someone had a rough environment to learn in or can’t afford the college they want to go to, then suck it up and get after it.
Our tax dollars go to the same school systems our parents’ went to, and if some of your generation struggled because of a lousy environment, it’s too damn bad — get over it! There are countless stories of underprivileged folks that have overcome the pitfalls of a lousy upbringing and bad schools who managed to thrive through the adversity and beyond! (Dr. Ben Carson is a great example.)
We Conservatives are very much against giving more tax dollars to the government young liberals think should save their butts. That government they so worship will just take those extra dollars and piss them down a rabbit hole like it’s been done for every Democrat year they’ve been alive. To say we aren’t compassionate toward others is complete nonsense. Our type of compassion is encouraging young people to work hard, keep your head down and don’t be anxiety-ridden about what help you can’t get from your government.
As far as being a traitor goes, Josh needs to consult the Google dictionary.
Quote of the Week:
Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress said, “When it comes to how we should deal with evildoers, the Bible, in the book of Romans, is very clear: God has endowed rulers with full power to use whatever means necessary — including war — to stop evil. In the case of North Korea, God has given Trump authority to take out Kim Jong Un. I’m heartened to see that our president — contrary to what we’ve seen with past administrations who have taken, at best, a sheepish stance toward dictators and oppressors — will not tolerate any threat against the American people. When President Trump draws a red line, he will not erase it, move it, or back away from it. Thank God for a President who is serious about protecting our country.”