Friday, January 18, 2008
Debate goes on.....
Just the opposite is true,as Charles 'popularity' attests-you can read the comments on several posts above, many giving him credit, and many wishing him well. Most people are aware of what Charles does for the community, which is why there are very few critical comments- most are from you. In the cases where he goes overboard, most people simply ignore it and move on, its entertaining at least. And many more give him the benefit of the doubt, especially if you've been on the 'receiving end' of the bureaucracy. It may be melodramatic, but nobody gets hurt.
However, it should be pointed out that Charles did NOT deserve what he got, whether his subsequent actions are overblown or not. That's like taking away all of a poor man's resources and then criticizing him for stealing a loaf of bread. This blog was churning along quite nicely, as you state yourself. Charles was almost singularly responsible for getting a new Residential Tenants Act, and I think that is the real reason for his arrest and ban-he was simply becoming too damn good at being a lobbyist.
Imagine what else he'd get into if that were to continue. He certainly didn't deserve to be fired from a job no matter the reason (unless he wasn't doing a good job, which isn't the case). He certainly didn't deserve to be arrested, even the judge attested to that, and everybody knew it beforehand and yet the government refused to drop the charges. He certainly didn't deserve to be banned from the legislature (unless there is somethign we don't know).
So yes, I defend him, mostly simply because you seem to have a real persecution against him, which should make anybody wonder who you actually are. Like I've said, I criticize him right here when there is something to criticize, and defend him when people like Jennifer state things out of context.
It's actually quite remarkable how little charles is responsible for what happens to him, in most cases he is behaving quite benignly so its strange the government has such a burr in their butts about him. Charles is certainly a pain in the ass, but not letting him into a christmas party and not letting him take pictures with other media is just plain stupid. Who cares if he takes pictures? And he's a member of the liberal party, I know, because I gave him the ten bucks to join-so there is no reason he shouldn't be allowed into their party. He may have been melodramatic in his response, but he certainly 'didn't ask' to not be let in.
But apart from that Charles really doesn't 'get what he deserves'. After all, he doesn't get paid at all, and on many occasions his blog is worth as much as the Irvings papers. Hell, if he did more audio interviews he might well be more of a resource than the CBC..and all this from one guy on welfare.
But its true, I find many headlines over the top. What I'm not yet convinced of is whether Charles is fully aware of that and does it for the sake of a headline and the predictable comments that result-after all, the only thing worse than negative comments would be no comments at all. And I'm not sure which is more entertaining, seeing what Charles will come up with, or seeing the inevitable comments, both are quite entertaining so I get plenty of laughs.
But its a free country, if you think we're all sad for enjoying this blog and thinking it important, great, I hope whatever beliefs you have make you happy. I don't live in Fredericton and its great to be able to see all the stuff going on, its great to see tons of pictures of Mazucca's, which I'll never see again and which only had two pictures in the paper (and of course none on the CBC).
I think its great to be able to see Charles have a blog about the mayor and have the mayor reply. I think its very socially relevant to have pictures showing the state of many trails and sidewalks when they are not plowed-and when they are. I think they are very socially relevant. I don't think its as socially relevant when Charles has posts about Dan, depending of course on what the issue is that he's discussing-this one I think was quite important.
The only thing you've really faulted him for only makes up less than ten percent of the blog. Just go look at the top ones right now, theres a story about bus routes, and numerous stories about drug use. Thats very socially relevant-but I don't really know how you define socially relevant, maybe you just mean he should be only talking about ADD non stop. Apart from that, its pretty clear how socially relevant his blog is, people wouldn't be coming here if it weren't. It certainly isn't THAT entertaining, there's millions of blogs out there and an unlimited source of distraction.
Maybe he does like the attention, good for him, I hope it makes him happy, lord knows money never will, a nice house and car and good reliable food certainly never will, so hopefully he enjoys what little notoriety he gets.