This is an editorial. “I have been told just like everybody else, that when an editorial is written, you have to be the one to prove that it’s not true. You. In other words, if something’s written about me, I have to provide evidence that it’s not true. Opportunities are freely given, so that anyone who is in these editorials could come forth and give their own side of the statement, or their own side of what was going on. No one has responded…..no one. I’m here today because I think it’s important when information is given out that things have to be clarified…..”
Check out this link to the mp3: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WJEDvhKpP-3IsXpAVg_fD8bA29SyC8Sa/view?usp=sharing
By the way, in case you missed it, the quote above is a direct quote from the audio link.
This is representative of the conflicted thinking that’s leading your town into slam dunks and holes they shouldn’t go into in 2021.
And it has been this way for years.
As for proving an editorial, you can’t prove or disprove a subjective editorial opinion. You can only prove or disprove facts, and many people refuse to see the truth in facts when they are discomforting or tarnish their pretense. Ignore the truth and your town will reaaaaally be “in peril.”
From that August 2019 audio….Mayor Jackie Warner defends her participation in a smear campaign against two (later up to 3, sometimes even 4) commissioners, by saying you (well, Larson and Mitchell) have to defend yourself when people write editorials. And offering edits isn’t the same as writing the hatchet articles, so it’s okay for her to throw out edits to clarify the hatchet jobs on her fellow board members.
Warner also defends herself by claiming in other interviews she “rises above it” and “doesn’t discuss it” and in her never-ending circular logic of image preservation. So nothing ever really gets answered, it just gets an edict from on high: step over this and ignore it. And if it doesn’t go away, then do stuff behind the scenes to make it go away.
A few months after this interview, Warner completely “defended” herself from questions on her mayor facebook page by deleting it altogether. It was just a promotional page, really more of a way to show she was dynamic and active and participating around town.
But for her, breaking public records rules and deleting the page was easier than defending herself from any citizens who might question her words and deeds. I guess ignoring people is “rising above it” if you think that’s what that is, and she said it, so even though she contradicts herself in other places, it must all be true. Somehow.
Twisted, narcissistic logic allows her to blame Larson and Mitchell for not responding to Bowman’s hack editorials here. But not responding makes them somehow suspect in her mind, or at least that’s what she wants you to think.
And her repeating it aloud and attributing it to “I have been told just like everybody else….” is supposed to convince you that it’s true. She can hear the words come out of her own mouth, but she doesn’t even come close to living by them. And through it all, she still downplays her own role in helping edit the hack editorials and throws Bowman, Larson, and Mitchell under the bus in her defenses.
Be comforted though. She’s actually trying to pull you, the listener, up on the bus with her, but only long enough to knock you back down when you notice the conflicts in her thinking and her words and deeds.
All this is exactly her way of saying “you have rules you have to follow, but I can follow my own rules. I expect you to follow your rules, which I create and dictate in my own mind, but I don’t even have to play by those rules. I am the queen.” If that sounds like “leading” it’s a sad definition you’re accepting. Please don’t vote. Stay in your homes until the sweet slumber of death rescues you from this cruel plane.
If you see these comments any other way, the Bee would love to hear an explanation that takes all the factors into account. Don’t include just the feelings and events and promises that flatter you or her. Those factors are probably wrong as a worldview choice by which we can all live. Only the few benefit from conflicted logic, and even their benefit is temporary. Most advertising and bald-faced conflicted logic is bad for your overall life, but it makes some small parts or some small people feel good for a minute.
Remember that when you vote in November. Because until then, there will be a steady diet of promotions and shine, but it will still be built on a carcass of conflicted logic and things behind the scenes based on that conflicted logic. Don’t worry, citizens, you’re in good hands. Great hands. Great bloody hands. Until those hands come for you. Everything will be all right if you just keep rising above it and doing your own thing, because you’re perfect just the way you are.