Medlock / Bates

[No Sugar Please]

What is wrong with these two?  Were they abused as children?  Made fun of on the playground one too many times?  Is everything a conspiracy with them?

They talk about how certain other media outlets are biased but please give me a break.  These two are the most biased people with the biggest agendas I have ever seen or hears.  If you don't agree with everything they say, you are wrong and they will use their bully pulpits to ridicule you.  If you call the Urban Tulsa Weekly, KFAQ and their two blogs bully pulpits which is very arguable.  

I loved it when Pat Campbell called out Bates the other morning on his show after Bates suggested on his blog that Pat should have Medlock on Pat's show to ask questions (implying that Pat didn't know what to ask).  When Pat called Bates, Bates sounded like an absolute fool and back peddled all the way.  Good job Pat.  Don't take any of their crap.  But you need to watch out, because if you don't take their crap, you will become the subject of their ridicule.  I'm glad Pat has his own bully pulpit from which to stick up for himself.

Could someone please post a picture of the Three Amigos with the faces of Medlock, Bates and Biggs?    
 

[cannon_fodder]

As a fair warning, Bates and Medlock are both posters here (under their own names).  Speak your mind by all means, just letting you know that you might expect a rebuttal.    For whatever that's worth.

BUT, I agree that Bates enjoys his platform and is not afraid to share his view from it.  I don't always agree with him, and sometimes I think he is too authoritative and less discussion oriented (hah!  I said that).  However, he backs his opinions and PAYS ATTENTION.

I'm too lazy to pay close enough attention to politics.  As much as Bates, Medlock and others can bother me from time to time - I appreciate that they pay attention and call "the man" out from time to time.  Keeps 'em honest.

[Renaissance]

I like that they pay close attention to politics and offer an alternative to Lortonworld.

I don't like that neither seems to ever enunciate an alternative vision for Tulsa.  Medlock particularly seems to be on board with the "downtown=71st and memorial" crowd.

Edit: I wasn't clear enough.  All I ever hear from their respective blogs is "no."  Developments that occur that they don't oppose are met with silence.  In messageboard parlance, they're more like "gloomers" than "sunshine pumpers."

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by No Sugar Please

What is wrong with these two?  Were they abused as children?  Made fun of on the playground one too many times?  Is everything a conspiracy with them?

They talk about how certain other media outlets are biased but please give me a break.  These two are the most biased people with the biggest agendas I have ever seen or hears.  If you don't agree with everything they say, you are wrong and they will use their bully pulpits to ridicule you.  If you call the Urban Tulsa Weekly, KFAQ and their two blogs bully pulpits which is very arguable.  

I loved it when Pat Campbell called out Bates the other morning on his show after Bates suggested on his blog that Pat should have Medlock on Pat's show to ask questions (implying that Pat didn't know what to ask).  When Pat called Bates, Bates sounded like an absolute fool and back peddled all the way.  Good job Pat.  Don't take any of their crap.  But you need to watch out, because if you don't take their crap, you will become the subject of their ridicule.  I'm glad Pat has his own bully pulpit from which to stick up for himself.

Could someone please post a picture of the Three Amigos with the faces of Medlock, Bates and Biggs?    
 

I see that this is your First Post to this Forum

Let me say, Welcome to the Tulsanow.org Forum.

As far as I can tell, the only things wrong with Chris Medlock and Michael Bates is that are not seated on one or more of the multitude of city of Tulsa's Boards, Commissions or Authorities, where they could bring their experience and interest to problems confronting our city.

I think their experience and interest in politics in general and city politics in particular make them excellent candidates for these august bodies which rule on our behalf many of the public policy decisions in Tulsa.

Both have in the past aspired to higher office, with Chris a two-term city councilor, and Michael an unsuccessful candidate for city council 2x.  

Chris was the leadership individual derisively referred to by the Tulsa World a.k.a. The Lorton's World as "The Gang of Five".

The eclectic Gang of Five were 3 GOP and 2 Democrat elected city councilors desirous of REFORM.  

They actively asking questions about city water policy, board/authority/commission appointments, and other city actions such as taxpayer funding of Great Plains Airlines, which went bust after only three years and $40 million in our tax dollars.

For asking too many questions, especially about city water policy and GPA, a group of local developers and builders and the Lorton's financed a Recall effort under our City Charter's then extremely liberal Recall provisions.

Chris and Michael survived Recall with a grass-roots anti-recall campaign, and brought light on various opaque city policies and practices by showing who the Puppet Masters are directing city government policy.

Like lack of a city Ethics Policy for city employees and appointees.  Requiring appointees to boards, commissioner and authorities to actually LIVE in the city of Tulsa.

And, 40 Year water contracts to subsidize growth in Tulsa suburban incorporated towns like Jenks, Owasso and Bixby.

Both men are native Tulsans, although I think Michael may actually be from Catoosa, but has lived in city of Tulsa for decades.

They attended public school hereabouts, although I think Michael may have graduated from the prestigious Holland Hall private school.  

Chris went to college at UCAT and TU majoring in Business, and Bates graduated from M.I.T. with a degree in Computer Science.

If you don't agree with them, both have blogs where you can posit your views.

www.medblogged.com

www.batesline.com

[inteller]

i think someone is pissed that they have been catching our local cronies and thugs red handed.  I bet if Medlock hadn't uncovered the plane trip Patrick took with a lobbiest on board, it owuld have never been mentioned.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

I like that they pay close attention to politics and offer an alternative to Lortonworld.

I don't like that neither seems to ever enunciate an alternative vision for Tulsa.  Medlock particularly seems to be on board with the "downtown=71st and memorial" crowd.

Edit: I wasn't clear enough.  All I ever hear from their respective blogs is "no."  Developments that occur that they don't oppose are met with silence.  In messageboard parlance, they're more like "gloomers" than "sunshine pumpers."

If that's all you hear from me, you have selective hearing. I regularly boost businesses and events that add life to the city. I devoted my May 21st column to several exciting new developments -- Joe Momma's downtown location, the opening of Ida Red on Brookside, progress on the First Street Lofts. During the discussion of the Channels, I suggested alternatives that would create the kind of urban riverside experience Tulsans seem to want.

In the last week, most of my blog entries have been about the District 2 County Commission race because that's the hot story right now -- the most immediate opportunity Tulsans have to do something that will make a significant change in local government. But I've also plugged the grand opening of Ida Red, announced a free Sand Springs concert by the Pendleton Family Fiddlers, saluted Absolute Best of Tulsa wins by the Coffee House on Cherry Street and Callupsie (and close calls for Shades of Brown and Tulsa World music blogger Jennifer Chancellor), and even tried to fix up the Golden Driller with the Goddess of Oil.

Last month I wrote a glowing review of Joyner's soul food place at 21st & Memorial, saluted Ron Warnick and Emily Priddy for their Route 66 honors, Brady Village for being one of the best places in the country to buy an old house, and the College Hill Associations of Merchants and Professionals.

At the same time, I get e-mails all the time from people who are upset about some foolishness or injustice at the planning commission or the county courthouse or City Hall. They ask me to look into the issues, figure out what's going on, and to shine some light on the situation. I do what I can, but there are only so many hours in the day. If we had a daily paper that was about the business of afflicting the comfortable and comforting the afflicted (instead of vice versa), I wouldn't have to spend so much of my time on negative stuff.

While it's true that I've never articulated a vision for the city in some sort of comprehensive manifesto, I think it can be found in what I've written, even if in a piecemeal fashion. Maybe I should write a book.

Sometimes I think that people who call me 100% negative are focused entirely on massive taxpayer-funded projects. "Where's your vision?" really means "So where's your plan to fix Tulsa with hundreds of millions of dollars in new taxpayer-funded construction?"

You're not likely to see me back any such plan because grand project plans usually don't fulfill the dramatic promises made for them. Instead I subscribe to Roberta Brandes Gratz's notion of "urban husbandry." If I may quote myself:

quote:
In the late '90s, journalist Roberta Brandes Gratz traveled to cities cross the U.S., looking at examples of successful and unsuccessful urban revitalization efforts. She identified two basic approaches to reviving urban centers: Project Planning and Urban Husbandry.

Project Planning involves massive amounts of money, mostly tax dollars, for massive public works projects like arenas, downtown malls, and convention centers. Politicians like this sort of thing -- it's big, it's visible, and at the end of the day, there's something that can be named in honor of whoever persuaded citizens to raise their own taxes to build it.

But the big Project Plans rarely work. They don't create lively places that are self-sustaining. Often big Project Plans destroy the beginnings of urban rebirth that, properly tended, could take root and spread.

To the effective alternative strategy Gratz saw at work across the country, Gratz gave the name Urban Husbandry. Like gardening, Urban Husbandry involves working with the life that is already present in a place. It involves identifying positive trends and building on them, working with human nature, not against it.

A big Project Plan imposes a sterile sameness on its surroundings. Urban Husbandry makes the most of the uniqueness and variety present in a place.

Urban Husbandry doesn't have as much appeal for politicians and the media, because it involves a lot of little, low-profile efforts to improve an area. Nevertheless, all those little efforts have a larger impact than the big projects on making a city more livable, lively, and attractive.

As for Pat Campbell, I think he's doing a great job. I've been pleased at how much time he devotes to local issues on KFAQ, and in particular at his willingness to cover PLANiTULSA, doing in-depth interviews with John Fregonese and Robin Rather.

Still, he's only been here three months, and even the quickest study can absorb only so much local political lore in that time, so why not bring in a fellow KFAQ host with an encyclopedic knowledge of local politics to help with the debate? Especially when one of the debaters is a politician like No Sugar Please's Aunt Randi, who has a tendency to give answers that sound reasonable, unless you happen to remember the event or her own statement that completely contradicts her point.

I meant no insult to Pat by what I wrote, and Pat knew it. In fact he e-mailed me that afternoon to say he wasn't really upset with me, but it made for some good talk radio.

[tim huntzinger]

. . . what happens when Mikey drinks a Cherry Coke . . .

[MichaelBates]

No, Tim, that's what happens when No Sugar Please's Aunt Randi twists and spins what's written in black and white in a legal document.

Anyway, it was a Coke Zero.

[RecycleMichael]

I will defend Michael Bates because he is entertaining. I like his Tulsa history stuff, his western swing columns and respect him for fighting for neighborhood power in neighborhood decisions. We argue often, but I respect him all the time (except for the week or two before general elections where we support different candidates). I also like that he writes for Urban Tulsa, the top alternative paper in the region. I have started writing a weekly column again for a little paper and know that it is hard work.

Chris Medlock pales to him. He works for a low-rated radio station (dropped another slot in the market this quarter), and does nothing but name-drop and act virtuous. He has also started threads on his blog attacking me and has been rude to me in person. I feel no reason to be nice back. Maybe I am just missing something, but if he left town, few would miss him.

I haven't listened to Pat Campbell enough to have a good feel about him. I thought he kind of struggled with the Randi/Sally debate the other day, but it was probably too hard of an assignment. The interviewees were not easy. He has a good voice, and even though we disagree politically, he seems to try to make valid points.

[tim huntzinger]

Holy smokes, was it the red dye, then? []

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I will defend Michael Bates because he is entertaining. I like his Tulsa history stuff, his western swing columns and respect him for fighting for neighborhood power in neighborhood decisions. We argue often, but I respect him all the time (except for the week or two before general elections where we support different candidates). I also like that he writes for Urban Tulsa, the top alternative paper in the region. I have started writing a weekly column again for a little paper and know that it is hard work.

Thanks for your kind words, Michael. I always enjoyed your pieces for Infinity Press. Where can we read your new stuff?

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

I've been pleased at how much time he devotes to local issues on KFAQ, and in particular at his willingness to cover PLANiTULSA, doing in-depth interviews with John Fregonese and Robin Rather.

When and where are these Partners and Advisors meetings? Is the public allowed to attend? Are there agendas and minutes available for public review? Are they being recorded for TGOV? Do they even have to comply with the Open Meetings Act?  I sure would like some answers to these questions.

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates
Where can we read your new stuff?

I write a 400 word article on environmental stuff for the Tulsa County News. It is a west Tulsa County paper that comes out on Wednesdays.

400 words is the hard part. When you don't know what you are talking about it is hard to know when to stop.

[mrhaskellok]

Why do people post threads that simply amount to "I don't like him so I don't agree with what he says"  Or the converse, "I don't agree with what he says so I don't like him."

Perhaps I missed that course in speech and debate but I can't grasp the concept of how that furthers anything constructive.  It sure doesn't make those that you support look better for having you fighting their PR battles.

Now, if you want to bring up specific things they they said you didn't agree with, then we can have a discussion... otherwise it is senseless, childish whining.  Of course, you may like that kind of dialog or are not able to debate the issues.  (hmm sounds like someone else I know.)  

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael


Chris Medlock pales to him. He works for a low-rated radio station (dropped another slot in the market this quarter), and does nothing but name-drop and act virtuous. He has also started threads on his blog attacking me and has been rude to me in person.

maybe because you are one of the mayor's patsies?