Mr. Gardner, your view that “long shot candidates” simply file to “publicize” their cause, I find more than a little distorted. When you and I spoke about my candidacy I told you, or referred you to my web site, that shows a long list of activity that goes will beyond “publicity,”
I’ve filed to intervene, as third party interevenor, in lawsuits that involve the “governments’ duty to disclose” records under the PRA.
I’ve filed lawsuits in an effort to try to force the regulatory agencies that are suppose to regulated lawyers and judges – the WA State Bar and the Commission on Judicial Conduct — but fail in their duty.
I’ve submitted “initiatives to the legislature” that would help “reform” our corrupt judicial system.
While I am grateful that you published my candidacy for rep. of the 26th district, publicity is the MINIMUM I hope to achieve. And if your paper will give a “long shot” an equal say during the coming months, maybe some of all that I have worked so hard to achieve will prove I’m more than “talk” and no action.
My point wasn’t that your candidacy was only to publicize your cause. In fact the piece said you both hope to win. You didn’t deny, however, how big this challenge is.
I did think that your primary goal was to inform people of the abuses of the system. I took that from your comment to me, “My expectations are solely to help people who haven’t experienced the same level of dishonesty learn what is happening,” and “It would be wonderful to win, but I’ll take the publicity and helping people understand.”
Of course the “challenge is big”, and you’ve made it bigger. Already been labeled as “long-shots” who paid a fee to get publicity. Thanks for reducing all my work to a publicity stunt.
Perhaps if “longs-shots” were respected and not marginalized our society would embrace ‘challengers’ and give considered thought to their platform.
Your quote “my expectations are solely to help people…” should have been the focus. The reality that “long-shots” are somehow “publicity seekers” isn’t fair.
It’s too bad the vested interests render people who shine the light back on those special interests are quickly marginalized and swept under the rug.
Well, based upon your view that my $400 filing fee was for quick publicity… I guess you feel I got my money’s worth.
And I suppose, given the reality of our political system, I should be grateful … which I am of course.
Mr. Gardner, your view that “long shot candidates” simply file to “publicize” their cause, I find more than a little distorted. When you and I spoke about my candidacy I told you, or referred you to my web site, that shows a long list of activity that goes will beyond “publicity,”
I’ve filed to intervene, as third party interevenor, in lawsuits that involve the “governments’ duty to disclose” records under the PRA.
I’ve filed lawsuits in an effort to try to force the regulatory agencies that are suppose to regulated lawyers and judges – the WA State Bar and the Commission on Judicial Conduct — but fail in their duty.
I’ve submitted “initiatives to the legislature” that would help “reform” our corrupt judicial system.
While I am grateful that you published my candidacy for rep. of the 26th district, publicity is the MINIMUM I hope to achieve. And if your paper will give a “long shot” an equal say during the coming months, maybe some of all that I have worked so hard to achieve will prove I’m more than “talk” and no action.
Thanks for your article
Bill Scheidler
Bill,
My point wasn’t that your candidacy was only to publicize your cause. In fact the piece said you both hope to win. You didn’t deny, however, how big this challenge is.
I did think that your primary goal was to inform people of the abuses of the system. I took that from your comment to me, “My expectations are solely to help people who haven’t experienced the same level of dishonesty learn what is happening,” and “It would be wonderful to win, but I’ll take the publicity and helping people understand.”
Thanks.
Steven Gardner
Kitsap Sun
Of course the “challenge is big”, and you’ve made it bigger. Already been labeled as “long-shots” who paid a fee to get publicity. Thanks for reducing all my work to a publicity stunt.
Perhaps if “longs-shots” were respected and not marginalized our society would embrace ‘challengers’ and give considered thought to their platform.
Your quote “my expectations are solely to help people…” should have been the focus. The reality that “long-shots” are somehow “publicity seekers” isn’t fair.
It’s too bad the vested interests render people who shine the light back on those special interests are quickly marginalized and swept under the rug.
Well, based upon your view that my $400 filing fee was for quick publicity… I guess you feel I got my money’s worth.
And I suppose, given the reality of our political system, I should be grateful … which I am of course.
Just give me a chance, Please!