Are we there yet?

"You have to read Smoking Gun so you know what to expect," I was recently emailed. "Have you heard what Michele Longo says about Marquis?" I am asked. "You know what Gerry Spence said, don't you?" "Wow, your getting slapped in the forums!" "You know who smacked you on NCO and now is after you anonymously at KAST, or Rust or was it CCM?!?"

Similar to when I found out that I had Hodgkins Disease I am reluctant to read too much. It seems to me that there is only a certain amount of things you can do when you find yourself caught up in a "situation". If you read too much you find yourself overwhelmed and too cautious to take any step. If you don't read or research anything you might try a procedure that has been proven ineffectual, expecting it to have miraculous results and dismayed to find out different.

I reluctantly read the way Marquis has treated those he feels has "stabbed him in back". Yikes! I thought backstabbing meant that the person was acting like a friend while doing some behind the scenes maneuvering. Apparently backstabbing means anyone who does anything without Marquis' permission or approval. 1) He only invited those who supported him to write in to the paper and 2) only invited those who supported him to the budget meeting. Yet, behind his back, I did both and I wasn't one of his supporters. Stab I did, I suppose?

It is funny how people think. I am truly baffled and irritated by how the Daily Astorian operates. It has a comment box at the bottom of each of their webpages. On May 22nd my cousin-in-law wrote a letter to the editor and I posted a reply in the comment section at the bottom of that page using my married name, which I sometimes write under but usually reserve for serious articles on NCO. I don't get the paper and can only read current info or selected pages w/o a subscription. The paper called to verify that I did post the comment and I said yes. The week before I had written a reply to the Daily Astorian's May 17th editorial, What's in the Water at the Courthouse? using my maiden name, the one I most often use when writing to the Daily Astorian or on this blog.

In a small area like ours neither your married nor maiden name hides you (especially when you marry someone you went through school with), but using one or the other recalls a link that is often helpful to the reader. It is laughable that I am being accused of hiding or of trying to "re-invent" myself. I like that one. Yes, if I were going to re-invent myself it would be into a family with, literally, 21 people of my peer group in which I could just blend in. One of the cousins in that group does have cancer, and I wish her all of the best.

It is this constant sense of being harassed that when some say, "whats to be afraid of, why not use your name?" that I think, those must deliberately choose to be ignorant of real life. They also ask, why didn't Scott Reuter's wife use her name when he wrote a letter of support for Josh? I think it is wisdom. If you don't NEED to express yourself that way, why do it? Why take that chance? Reuter's wife's priority is her clients, not Marquis, he is a big boy and I honestly mean that with total frankness. Scott was writing and there was no reason to add her voice to that letter and potentially cause damage or limit her ability to help someone or somewhere else, so why do it? And that is what many, many people think. They've elected a commissioner that they trusted to work for them. They are going to trust that commissioner to do a good job. Most people don't feel an urgency to write any more. They don't feel the need for their letters to be criticized, their motives analyzed, their characters idealized, their feelings minimalized.

So, they contact their commissioners by phone or email, or text message: shs fha oys thx (strip his stipend. fire his ass. on your side. thanks), take care of this, bring it home, put it to bed.