Comments on: A hero, a gun, two of man’s best friends

By: rlederman

rlederman — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:38:24 +0000

I don’t miss the point. I said good that the union didn’t back the guy. You do miss the point that I was being sarcastic about firefighters using 9/11 to defend everything.

It’s my opinion that they overuse it. It’s an opinion. Opinions are neither right nor wrong, Buster. Just opinions.

By: Buster

Buster — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:21:13 +0000

I have been schooled.

I take back my “thanks for the opportunity to discuss”. You miss the point and revert to wanting to discuss how the lowly reader doesn’t understand the educated techniques of the opinion writer. At least it is consistent among the trade.

You were wrong in this case. That fact does not change. And I know what to expect out of you when you opine in the future. Even if you are wrong, you will still be right. No matter what.

By: rlederman

rlederman — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:13:28 +0000

Since you seem to need it spelled out, Buster:

I believe unions, especially those for municipal workers, protect those who shouldn’t be. I think firefighters and police too often want to portray themselves as heroes, in every instance, and you’re anti-American for suggesting otherwise. I made a rather sarcastic point about a firefighter who clearly should have been fired by saying the union would say “9/11! 9/11!”

I use sarcasm, Buster. It’s what I do.

By: Buster

Buster — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:08:23 +0000

I think that is a far cry from my point. Your opinions of firefighters and public employee unions came through loud and clear. The fact you were wrong in this instance accentuated your point.

State your point whether I like it or not. There is nothing I could or would do to stop you. I don’t think I ever hinted that you should not do so. I guess it was too much to hope you would blog your appreciation for those officials doing the right thing.

Accountability for actions and “opinions” goes both ways. Thanks for the opportunity to discuss.

By: rlederman

rlederman — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 23:49:49 +0000

So, to be clear, Buster, to meet your expectations, I’m only to express my opinion when you believe I should hold that opinion? So if I think firefighters and their unions are a bit too self-congratulatory, I shouldn’t say so because you don’t like it?

By: Buster

Buster — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:58:22 +0000

And you do a good job of opining… But generally, opinions are backed up by facts, especially when published in the course of journalism. If your post would have said “We will see if the union chooses to defend…..” or “I hope the union chooses not to defend this guy, but their track record on that issue is not good”, that would be a completely different discussion track. But you specifically chose to use the word “will” to condemn the union before they were even involved in the issue. Guilty before even having the opportunity to respond.

I am not a firefighter and I don’t belong to a union. I am simply a reader disappointed that an educated news man would immediately assume, because this was a public employee who is a union member, that there was no chance for the fire department or the fire union to do the right thing.

I am aware you are not a reporter, and this opinion piece is not the local news section. But I still expect class and accuracy from my hometown newspaper staff, and maybe, just maybe, an opportunity afforded to public officials/employees to “do the right thing” before it is assumed they are only capable of the worst. There are those that care and fight the good fight.

By: rlederman

rlederman — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:45:20 +0000

No, the rally was not to support a firefighter who rightly should have been fired. Nor did I say it was. It was to make sure we know all firefighters are heroes.

I’m flattered by your praise, but let’s not confuse my job. I am an opinion writer. My opinion of unions — particularly municipal employee unions — isn’t always high. Sarcasm or no, I made that point. But, again, Buster, my job is to opine.

By: Buster

Buster — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:49:36 +0000

Was that rally conducted to wrongly defend an employee(s) that should have rightfully been fired? Or to even support firefighters who were a disgrace to the fire service and should not have been supported?

I understand sarcasm, but this doesn’t seem to be on point. I don’t understand a news man who chooses to rant about issues that have not taken place. I always thought better of you than that.

I had my doubts about whether the CFD fire union would or would not support their FF on his discipline, but I didn’t jump to conclusions. And it concerns me that a news man such as yourself would.

By: rlederman

rlederman — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:53:35 +0000

Yes, because right after 9/11 firefighters in, say, Lima, didn’t all come together to hold a rally for themselves, because no firefighters anywhere have ever used the politics of 9/11 for their own gain. I stand corrected, Buster.

By: Buster

Buster — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:40:58 +0000

Your condemnation was directly at the fire union, which did not do what you described. I still have not found a case, or series of cases where fire unions “…invoke 9/11 (New York, Washington, D.C., FYI) to justify defending ….” their employee.

I don’t disagree with the concept that public unions at times defend employees who rightfully should be fired. But your comments were made directly at the fire union, Columbus in particular, and they were wrong.

Just to make sure I understand correctly: you stand by commentary that is factually untrue: “rest assured that the union representing Columbus firefighters will invoke 9/11″. That tells me all I need to know.