Tuesday, December 15, 2009

You know that chore you keeping putting off because you dread doing it so much?

Yeah, so blah blah blah something about how racist Nate Dog Mo was last night during his visitors section comments blah blah blah insert joke about how his jokes bombed and it as kinda uncomfortable/creepy/awkward blah blah blah Wild Bill thinks he should be banned from ever speaking again blah blah blah please don't trash the 5-minute rule prematurely guys.

And then David covers the Schnurr factor here, which was totally BA.

By the way, Jimmy's look'n pretty fly these days....one might surmise he's getting into fighting shape.


  1. The old 50's movie promos used to say "YEARRRRS IN THE MAKING". Well, controversy regarding the golf course issue started in July of 2008. The contract given to the operator of Richardson's golf courses was questioned by a city resident as to its excessiveness and fairness and equitability to the City of Richardson. The report delineating the excessiveness in that contract was never presented to the City Council by management. In February of 2009, the citizen gave to each elected official that report. The report called for an independent audit of Ronny Glanton Incorporated, Inc., the operating commpany of the Richardson golf course. It called for a study by the National Golf Foundation to determine whether the contract the City had with Ronny Glanton, Inc. was fair to the City and was reflective of remuneration paid to other operators of like municipal golf courses. The City's reply was that everything was just perfect, nothing was amiss, the golf course is in the best possible hands and any changes would be detrimental. It then mandated the scope of a survey by a Rockwall golf course appraise which precluded remuneration comparisons. That individual's report failed to mention the course is estimated to lose some $98,000 plus this fiscal year, and some $82,000 plus in in fical year 09-10, and the contract operator says at least $100,000 will be needed to replace greens on Course One, which have been in poor shape for years. The City thought they had effectively blown that study off. But now here it is again. Councilpersons cannot deny they had the information before. They cannot deny they asked management how to answer questions about this. So now here we are again with another individual- a former City Council candidate - questioning golf course and liquor entity questions. Sorry, you fellows on the dais--it is not going to go away and guess what: Every one of you has been made aware of this situation. You have no denial.

  2. Word has it that Jim Mallet first spoke with his councilman, Gary Slagel, in February, 2009 - and Slagel's response to him was to brush it off and tell Mallet that Bill Keffler was going to take a look at it. Huh? When? In the next century? Wasn't Bill Keffler the source of the problem?

  3. William J. 'Bill' McCalpinDecember 15, 2009 at 9:33 PM

    Oh, Destiny, I didn't suggest that he never be allowed to speak again in the Visitors Section, I just said that if he ever said racist stuff like this again, they should throw him out...and once the citizens see and hear what he said (video feed cued to Nathan), I am sure most responsible Richardson residents will feel exactly the same way...


  4. You do have to admire NateMo's dedication in wearing a cast to accent his hamfisted parable execution.

  5. We may not like what someone says or how they say it, but they have the right to say it. As to "racism"? No.

    This is more of the sensitive, sanitized politically correct speech that seeks to stifle expression.

    So, if the mayor refers to one HOA president as a "f-ing faggot," is that racist hate speech too, Bill? (Because he does.)

    I mean, if we are going to apply a standard to expression in Richardson, let's apply it uniformly, okay?

    And, Wild Bill, what about calling residents "a-holes"? That's okay with you, but Nathan's comments aren't?

    And, what do with do with Gary's mockery of Andrew Laska that stoop to immitations and junior high antics. That's okay with you, too?

    The list of people Gary dismisses: women (presumably only good for screwing in the TI parking lot), and Asians (a complete indifference to the cultural nuances of the east side), to name a few.

    The one consistent thing about you Bill is that you will defend the mayor and council to the nines but throw any voice of dissent under the bus for any reason. And, you do it with such arrogance. Did God die, and leave you in charge?

    Nathan made one antecdote, but the mayor has a colorful history of questionable verbal gaffes... If anything, Gary got a mirror reflection of himself. If you want to hitch your wagon to someone, at least pick someone with integrity.

  6. I just watched the Visitors video.

    Jimmy S - did well. As did the two speaking of the City Attorney and the lady at the last, talking of the budget. Hard questions. And not a single word of response from the Council.

    @Anon 12:50 PM
    Nathan - wow. As a self-described "good Caucasian ambassador" - whether that was in jest or not, it was just darn weird.

  7. Will...agreed. Weird.

    But not half as weird as the contempt demonstrated by the council toward the residents.

  8. William J. 'Bill' McCalpinDecember 16, 2009 at 1:35 PM

    Dear anonymous,

    Once again, the anonymous posters prove why they insist on remaining anonymous - because they generate tons of nonsense, gossip, rumor, and lurid stories that they hope people won't investigate too closely.

    Your first point is a misinterpretation of the Texas Constitution, which clearly states "Every person shall be at liberty to speak, write or publish his opinions on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of the privilege..." So even the Texas Constitution does not grant an unlimited right to say whatever you want. Nathan should be and must be held accountable - by the public at any rate - for his speech. Unfortunately, there is a cadre of people who post anonymously, precisely to avoid responsibility for their speech as called for the Texas Constitution, the "law of the land" as Nathan always says. Yes, I mean you. I am sure that you claim to be a proud, law-abiding citizen, yet your anonymous posts fly in the face of the spirit of our Constitution, and all your wailing and moaning won't change that.

    As for your other comments, I have no personal knowledge of them, and I hope you understand that with all the inaccurate and untrue statements that are made daily by anonymous posters to the various blogs, I am not going to for a second take your word for anything. In fact, it is precisely these sorts of comments that have forced the Dallas Morning News to start cleaning up the posts on its Richardson blog by removing posts that violate their site guidelines.

    As for your statement that I "will defend the mayor and the council to the nines", I reply that I defend them when they have been defamed. Nathan accused John Murphy of breaking the law as President of COG. I proved him wrong. Nathan accused the entire Council of breaking the law in discussing Bill Keffler's compensation in executive session. I proved him wrong again. Nathan claimed that the Chase Bank Building at 100 N Central (where some prominent Richardsonians office) was in foreclosure. I proved him wrong yet again. The only reason I haven't proven most of his other nonsense as wrong is that is takes a lot more time and effort to definitively prove him wrong than it does for him to just make stuff up. But it's coming.

    As for your statement that "[I] throw any voice of dissent under the bus for any reason", this is just nonsense and shows that you don't know me. The anonymous bloggers have repeatedly conveniently forgotten that my first letter to the Richardson Echo was a criticism of the Richardson Coalition's editorial about the Council action relative to the SOB issue. Oh, you're going to argue that I was defending the Council there, too..well, yes I was, the Council of Mayor Steve Mitchell with Council members Dennis Stewart, Pris Hayes, and Rhea Allison. So to imagine that I am in lockstep with any one group is ludicrous - as any adult knows, just because some anonymous person writes some nonsense on a wall in the dark of night, "that don't make it so".

    As for my alleged "arrogance", clearly, based on your behavior, anyone who disagrees with you in any way must be "arrogant". Such a word is a badge of honor coming from you, whoever you are.

    Thank you for once again proving that I am doing the right thing in the public forums.


  9. Hey Bill, we're still waiting for you to answer David. What's the matter, cat got your tongue? Or did you figure out you were wrong?

    Every single time you are taken to task, you spew self important constitutional analysis, AND you whine about anonymous posts. Boo hoo.

    Grow a pair.

    And, I do have knowledge, as do others of Gary's very public, very regular verbal mishaps.

    The elephant in the room is that yes, Nathan looked like a douchebag. But as far as douchebags go, I nominate you for president. Bill McCalpin, President of Douchebags.



  10. You guys are lucky I'm not the DMN blog.....

  11. @Anon 1:53 PM

    Once again, focus moves from the important items brought up in the Visitors section to personal attacks.

    Keep it up, folks, and we'll all wake up after the next City Council election and wonder "How did those guys all get reelected again???"

    Stick to the facts. Don't get drawn offside by mud slinging.

    1. Find candidates
    2. Encourage candidates
    3. Fund candidates
    4. Knock on doors, do the unglamorous work

  12. Ha Ha Destiny, It's your turn for Wild Bill. Have a wonderful day Destiny! :)

  13. ooopps, meant for that post to be anonymous if for nothing else, to give Wild Bill more........

  14. Willy, Willy. I know you too well to give your comments more than a casual laugh. You consistently miss the point and quickly direct some bumptious comment toward those who challenge any of the people you "grew up" with. Thanks for the countless hours of amusement. It rivals giving the dog one of those little Listerine breath strips.

    For the dimwits, I said I attempt to be a good Caucasian ambassador when surrounded on the DART train by derelicts, mental cases and troublemakers. I would challenge anybody to match credentials on diverse experiences in ethnic environments. Only those mired in the shallow world of liberal racism would take "Caucasian ambassador" out of context. (That's how we flush your kind out, Willy) Which, given what we know about you, doesn't seem out of character.

    So many of the positions and comments you take and make would place you squarely in Bill O'Reilly category of "Pinhead" because the Patriots fight for the things that made THIS country great. And yes, THAT is the "law of THIS land", not some liberal, stump-sighted, slack-jawed misinterpretation that suits the purpose of the moment. There are other countries where a person can feel much more at home with that set of values. Not that a population of those with that kind of integrity hasn't been nesting up on this side of the pond (that's the Atlantic, Willy, not the fountain in the middle of Santa's Village).

    One of the beautiful things we enjoy as CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, is freedom of expression. It never ceases to amaze me how some lay claim to this while in the same breath berate others for exercising it.

    You need to spend a little time in the trenches to understand. You know, get out of the house a little more often. And, not just to make a trip to the Dairy Queen. See the world. It ain't flat, and it doesn't end at the City limit.

  15. Can I get somebody to nominate me for Vice President?

  16. Bill McCalpin is real piece of work; a real embarassment to his family and so-called friends (e.g. John Murphy) - those who know his well-respected parents say even they think that he's an embarrassment.

    Personally, I'd like to see one shred of evidence of him "defending" the prior mayor or former members of the council. Let's see if Wild Bill can produce it - or is it going to be silence - like him not responding to DC-TM's comments on his blog. We are still waiting.

    Wild Bill is fully aware of Gary Slagel's indiscretions. They are fully documented. Sadly, what he fails to say in his essays is that he simply DOESN'T CARE. For someone who claims to be an educated man, he just doesn't "get it".

    Perhaps, it is this - we all know that the Richardson Coalition has promised him John Murphy's council seat when Murph finally retires (in, what 2021 - after 30 years of service - OMG). What Wild Bill doesn't know is that he ISN'T electable, even with the Richardson Coalitions's endorsement - and who is going to take the Richardson Coalition's word for anything? Those wonderful elderly men would never lie to anyone would they...?

  17. You mean the "respectable" former Mayor, don't you?

  18. "One of the beautiful things we enjoy as CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, is freedom of expression. It never ceases to amaze me how some lay claim to this while in the same breath berate others for exercising it."

    I'm enjoying the irony of this statement.

  19. anon@3:29
    Call me stupid. But, I don't get it. Please explain yourself.

  20. anon@3:41
    ok, here goes:

    "Willy" described Mr Morgan's comments before City Council as weird. A rude comment about Mr Morgan's words to Council, I suppose.

    Mr Morgan then takes "Willy" to task with some rather personal comments. (bumptious, dimwit, pinhead, stump-sighted, slack-jawed)

    Does "Willy" have the freedom to say "weird"?

    Does Mr Morgan have the freedom to say "bumptious, dimwit, pinhead, stump-sighted, slack-jawed"?

    They both have that freedom. As Alanis would say "Isn't it ironic?"

  21. Now THIS is fun ... fake Nathans posting as "Nathan", and the real Nathan posting as "Anonymous"... starting to get LeCarre-ian in all the convolution...keep it coming!

  22. William J. 'Bill' McCalpinDecember 16, 2009 at 6:42 PM

    Well, "Me", you're still anonymous, so every time you call me names instead of presenting evidence (sorry, your anonymous assertion that you have personal knowledge is of no value), you just prove that I'm right...thanks...

    As for David, in his blog some time ago, when once again I was getting flamed with all this nonsense from anonymous posters, David suggested (as I recall, it's been a while so I'm not sure how it happened) that I should do my own thing. After that point, I have mostly stayed out of the blogs in order to work on my own project...you'll see it shortly...


  23. Anon @ 12/15, 9:24 (waaaay up front)

    According to what I recall, it was October 6, 2008 that Mr. Slagel requested the Golf Report report not be delivered to other councilpersons "for a couple of weeks" not February, 2009. As anon said, City management never did give the Council a copy of the October report, they just provided them with their whitewashed reply. Somebody needs to bring back to light the numbers in that report showing Glanton's cut and expenses. It's the only time I understand the City asked Glanton for his personal numbers. Jimmy quoted Monday night Mr. Keffler's now infamous words, "We choose not to audit" Mr. Glanton's company. After Mr. Schurr's unfortunately cut off remarks where he wished to apprise the council regarding the problems of the golf course and its liquor license, just why is it Mr. Keffler "chooses" not to audit, and our Council apparently agrees? Most entities suffering negative comments regarding their business practices -- and having nothing to hide -- welcome an outside audit. Like Jimmy calls for, I'm in favor of a public meeting where the real problems regarding the Golf course and its increasingly money losing operation are discussed. A public discussion of these issues and others where the City prefers not to provide information can only clear the air.

  24. William J. 'Bill' McCalpinDecember 16, 2009 at 6:56 PM

    I can't tell if this is the real Nathan Morgan or not, but it shows a consistent ignorance of who I am and where I've been. Just the comment that I need to expand my horizons is ludicrous, if you knew anything about my background.

    So, rather than talking about me, since the anonymous posters aren't the least bit interested in the truth, how about returning to subject of free speech? Hmmmn, I think I'll go next door to the lovely couple (he's Caucasian and she's African-American) and their delightful three-year-old daughter, and I'll show them the video clip and ask them if they think it's offensive. Then maybe I'll give the nice young husband Nathan's home address so that he can explain his, er, views to Nathan face to face...you know what the State Constitution says, "...being responsible for the abuse of the privilege...". Man up, Nathan, and take responsibility! ;-)


  25. That's interesting. Wild Bill telling someone to "Man Up". Given that he has been carrying the Richardson Coalition's - and John Murphy's - water for the last year, I find it extremely ironic and hypocritical for him to make this statement.

    Bill, in his 2000 word essays, fails to EVER address the fundemental questions that are raised, namely the lack of ethics and integrity by Gary Slagel. He seems to ALWAYS gloss over that. How can he write with such "righteousness", yet defend a man (Gary Slagel) who has NO morals or ethics? Explain that, Wild Bill. And, your explanation should NOT include the words "show me proof", because it is documented EVERYWHERE.

    Why don't you just humor us all - and save us time here - and just say that ethics DON'T matter to you.

    -A FORMER friend of yours

  26. William J. 'Bill' McCalpinDecember 16, 2009 at 8:12 PM

    hahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh, please stop it! hahahahahahaha! You're killing me!! hahahahahahahahaha! You make an anonymous post and then expect ANYONE to believe that you're really my former friend??? LOLLOLLOLLOLLOL! No, that statement is as false as evey other statement you've made! ROTFL!ROTFL!ROTFL! What a hoot!


  27. Bill, even though in your ultimate douche-baggery, you are powerless to control the uninformed masses...you did something really stupid (like you always do...but, I digress).

    You just threatened Nathan on this blog. In fact, you not only threatened him, but you stated you would entice another person.

    For someone so "enlightened," you're a real douchebag.

    Surely, in your infinite (!) wisdom, you are familiar with Texas case law, with you being able to quote the Texas constitution (like a true douchebag.) Care to guess how many felonies you threw down?

    Look Bill, for months, you've been jumping on blogs and FREAKING OUT. If it's not the whining, then it's the lectures, then the abuse of interweb abbreviations, and you park on these blogs all day. Dude, get ahold of yourself. Your letting your douchebaggy emotions overtake you. Take some meds, get laid, or find a therapist, but don't surf the web if you can't ride the waves.

  28. Calling someone a douchebag 80 times. Really helpful. Some people need some therapy.

  29. Here's a threat:


    For serious, y'all are wearing me out and exhausting my inbox.

  30. Please, let it be Bill...

  31. Yes..YEs...YES....

  32. Destiny, I think I am in elementary school again when I read your blog. Are these really adults commenting here are have I been transported into a www. black hole of juvenility? Wow, is that really a word in this black hole? hahahahaha!

    What is wrong with you people? (deep sigh)

  33. Oh and Mr Bill of the black hole: Sometimes you sound like a knowledgeable person and then someone can just willingly drag you into the drama and you become a different person that is kinda scary. Down right scary!!!

  34. Shut up poop face.

    .....only kidding, you walked right into that one :)

  35. Destiny is well practiced at taking care of juveniles. :)

  36. To be honest I quit reading the comments like 15 back. I told Laska that and he was appalled. Maybe you all should head over to the Echo for a bit. He's mature, read/screens his comments, stuff like that. Plus I hear they have a complimentary breakfast:


  37. See! Told you she knew how to deal with them :)

  38. I'm still looking for a nomination here. Can I be VP douchebag?

  39. Destiny, I just love you!!!

  40. Can a person be a racist because of their race?

  41. Is it not ironic, out of all the concerns aired about misinterpretations and violations of Richardson's Home Rule Charter, how Willy dug through the Texas Constitution to find the phrase "being responsible for the abuse of the privilege" to roost on. He's really torn up that freedom of expression can really be free from the retribution of him and his friends. My heart bleeds purple peanut butter for you, Willy. I can't tell you how much I hurt for you.

  42. Yes.


    damn, I lost my train of thought....

  43. @Nathan Morgan

    I've never read the Texas Constituion nor Richardson's Home Rule Charter (does Richardson HAVE a Home Rule Charter?).

    I give up. You, Nathan or faux-Nathan, are the smartest one in the room.

    And with that ... I'm going to take advantage of the complimentary breakfast at Andrew's place.

  44. will

    If people don't educate themselves on these foundational documents so that they speak from a base of knowledge, Andrew's breakfast buffet is probably the best place for them. They'll be in good company. Might I suggest also adding the (relevant) Texas Statutes to the reading list? They have (largely) the same effect relative to the Texas Constitution as City Council Resolutions and Ordinances (read these too) do to the City Charter. While studying up, bear in mind, they are all under the heading of binding State Law. By the way, there is no test. We are living it. And, yes, there are many who make it to the front of the class by cheating. There are also others who get mocked for being stupid enough to think rules matter in a crooked society.

  45. The rules are the rules, right? Wrong.

    When Jimmy Schnurr or Nathan are up, the rules apply. If not, it's another standard. I don't know them personally, but it seems like they at least care about this city.

    I don't always agree with anyone all the time on every blog, but even though the comments here are silly, they are mostly true. I'm not sure why Bill tries to come on these boards. If he's trying to convince someone of his opinion, he needs to stop. He's only hurting his argument. I can't stand people who think they are so smart.

    I'm not putting my name down because the mayor is a psycho, along with most of these characters on the council. It's really sad. The rest of us are busy trying to live, and working out our lives around two jobs, and the mayor and city manager get big bucks to raise our taxes and make themselves rich.

    Four houses on my street sold this past year. My friends moved to Plano or Fairview. The just can't stand the way Richardson has gotten more and more crappy, with the schools and all, and how old everything looks. I won't stay here after I have kids.

    I'm tired of how Richardson is. Does anyone know how long this guy has been mayor?

  46. 16 years? Served on the council for 22, I believe.

  47. The mayor is not getting rich by the salary he gets. Council members get $50 a week.

    But the mayor is trying to get rich by using his connections to peddle his software and his company, CapitalSoft by using his political connection.

    He used those connection in Collin county to get them to purchase software they could not use. He tried the same in Dallas county with Ken Mayfield, but never got it onto the agenda for lack of a second.

    Now the mayor and the city are tangled with Choice Facilities Partners. Another conflict of interest item. He will never learn. He seems to be all about self-promotion, taking care of problems in Richardson comes as a secondary matter.

  48. Threads like this are why Ed Cognoski finally gave up trying.

    Destiny, you know me, I twittered you about this post earlier today, but I don't want to put it here because I don't feel like associating my name with all these hateful comments.

    and for you others, no, I am not Ed.

  49. What WAS Ed trying to do?

    Funny how those Slagel-supporters shout "hate" when the truth about Gary Slagel is put before them. They just refuse to believe it; it is always "lies", "hate", "someone elses fault" - well, folks believe it. There's nothing in the anonymous @ 11:12 a.m. post that isn't true - it's ALL documented - TV, newspapers, you name it. Not sure what kind of additional proof they need.

    The only way to describe these kinds of reactions from Slagel-supporters is to say it is like turning your kitchen lights at night and seeing the cockroaches scatter; they can't handle the light.

    I'd say the same goes for Anonymous at 3:37 p.m. - I am not saying that they are a cockroach; I am saying that they simply can't handle the light (truth).

  50. Hey, anon @ 3:37...

    "Ed" was pretty hateful, so evoking his loss as some kind of lamentable event is pretty rich.

    For those who don't like the tone of this thread, I encourage you to look at all the blogs: Ed's, DMN, David's and this one. Every single time Bill jumps onto a thread with his lectures and long stories...this happens.

    Here's a solution: Bill can have his own blog!
    He's free to wax coalition 24/7 if he chooses.

    If Bill's jumping in to convert, he needs to tap the brakes. This blog and others will continue to be a hostile environment for those who act as apologists for people who use and abuse the taxpayers of Richardson.

    And, rest assured, screen shots of Bill's comments are being saved all over this city. I can't wait until John Murphy retires or keels over dead, and Bill steps in to save the day. Bill's threats, ramblings, and utter lack of integrity will be on display for all to see.

    The mayor, council, and "leaders" of this city set the tone...for all of this. Gary has been slinging mud and sharing his foul mouth for over 20 years. Murphy gossips like a little girl, and routinely defames the citizens.

    That horrid RC mailer fueled the contempt many of us have for the COR. And, now they want to complain about how they are characterized?


    What is said on this blog is mild compared to the vulgar spew that escapes Gary's mouth on a daily basis. Remember, it was just days ago he told the residents near the transfer station the were "assholes."

    The RC can dish it out, but they can't take it. Same with Gary. Murphy, and pathetic little Ed.

  51. Well said, anonymous at 11:12 a.m. and 3:49 p.m. The few remaining Slagel-supporters are running scared these days. Many who supported Slagel's sham "last-hurrah" campaign are now turning their back on him.

    Today, all Slagel really has left are Richardson Coalition (RC) mouthpieces, Andrew Laska and Wild Bill McCalpin. Forget about trying to reason with these two lu-lu's. It is pointless.

    While extremely likeable guys, these two - Andrew and Bill - would never believe anything "bad" about Gary Slagel, or, for that matter, John Murphy, no matter what kind of proof you provided them! And, when faced with the truth, they either don't respond or change the subject.

    The biggest question that I have is WHY are these two so embedded with Gary Slagel, John Murphy, and the RC? For them to throw all common sense and reason out the window, Andrew and Bill must have been promised some good stuff.

  52. OMG - Gary Slagel has the foulest mouth of anyone I know. He called our HOA president and members of our HOA "as*holes" for coming to speak at the council meeting. This was after he had the police officer haul the visitor who spoke back in to the council chamber to hear Slagel lecture him.

    Surely, this can't be acceptable behavior for an elected official, particularly the MAYOR. How can residents put up with this?

    Miss Susie

  53. @anonymous at 3:49 - don't forget about cockroach Chuck Eisemann who is the "puppetmaster" behind the Richardson Coalition.

    Chuck's the one who is responsible for putting Gary Slagel back on his throne. Anyone who would put $20,000 of their own money in has got to have some kind of financial skin in the game. One day, someone is going to connect those dots between Eisemann, Slagel, and the city. We already know the connection between Slagel and the city. NBS

  54. While Jesus was well-known for the miracles he performed, there was one character who stood out from the throngs of those who witnessed and believed. His name was Thomas, as in "doubting Thomas". Even in the face of countless witnesses, Thomas could not bring himself to accept who Jesus of Nazareth was and the things he did. And so it is that we have a few among us who refuse to see the truth, even when surrounded by numerous witnesses. But, in this case, the person doing the deeds is on the opposite end of the rightious spectrum. I hear there's still time to change you ways, Bill. I also hear that God looks mighty dimly on those who have been shown the truth and continue to misbehave. Of course, you don't have to believe me, or what's written in the oldest text on human history known to mankind.

  55. Chuck got his name on a building. He owes keffler, the slag and the rest of them. Might be that is why eisemann would spend $20K on the election. Pay back for getting his name one the biggest financial black-hole in Richardson. EGO.

  56. You know, despite all the lamentable name-calling on this string... it's encouraging to see that the sheep of Richardson are finally waking up.

    After years of blindly putting up with Slagel's heavy-headed, foul-mouthed, self-serving ethics abuses, it seems that the veil has been pulled from their eyes. The fine people are finally waking up to the truth. And the puppets that blindly follow his bidding need to be turned out to pasture.

  57. Hey Willy, you have raised my curiosity. We've seen lots of rants about anonymous postings, trashing people you say "have something to hide". I'd like to take you up on your presumptive openness, with nothing to hide. Aside from these windbag rants you post, your work to re-elect John Murphy (again!), and your wife's knitting, I just realized we don't really know much about your background. Why don't you tell us about your worldly credentials. That is, unless you have something to hide.

  58. @anon 12:47 AM

    Once again, irony raises it's head. An Anon poster asking for someone's credentials.

    Anyway... Are you asking ME? 'Will'? Or are you asking 'William J. "Bill" McCalpin'?

    That's two different people. So please, Anon, clarify who you are asking.

    I think some folks might be confusing the two of us, including Mr N. Morgan (whether or not the real or faux N. Morgan).

  59. I don't recall any windbag rants or whining about anonymous postings out of anyone besides wee Willy McCalpin. Are you proposing to pick up his torch? The irony here is that Willy likes to pontificate the virtues of openness, and proclaim his credentials (if we only knew) as being beyond reproach, but he hasn't bothered to back up his blather. There is a theme here. He also makes unsupported claims that overwhelming evidence of corruption in Richardson City hall is just a bunch of sour grapes. The challenge to back up his claims with facts has stood unanswered for quite some time. I really don't think he will answer this challenge to the "if you only knew" act either. It doesn't matter if a post is made anonymously or not if the facts are substantiated. What's the point? Do you want to address the truth and issues of importance, or quibble about the insignificance of anonymous posting of accurate information? Where would we be without Woodward and Bernstein? Deep throat wouldn't have had anybody to talk to.

  60. Will, I am reasonably sure anon @12:47 is speaking to "Wild Bill." I never have see you take off on wild rants or anything like that. You always seem to be very sensible in your remarks. I could be wrong, but that is my take on it.

  61. Yeah, that's my take, too. Will is always very measured and has productive input. Wild Bill? Not so much.

    And, Wild Bill alludes in his 5,000 word creative essays to his high level of education and life experience. I think if that's where you hang your saddle, then you need to put it out there.

    I've always thought people who go around bragging about how smart they are are usually pretty dumb, but insecure. And, if he's such an expert on life and politics, maybe he should be in the UN or something. Richardson is too small a sandbox to waste that kind of talent.

    I'm just sick of seeing Wild Bill re-invent history (like in the SOB post). He shows up, everywhere, spouting off a bunch of made up stuff, and people are sick of it. He always complains about anonymous posts, and always makes himself out to be a victim. That's not a leader or someone who is going to get my vote, ever.

    I'm glad someone finally called him out on this blog (and got him to leave).

    As to the original topic, Nathan's comments. Well, Nathan's marches to a different beat. It's part of his charm. Would I vote for him? No. But, does he keep things interesting? Yes.

    As to Will, he seems like a very fair guy, and I would like to hear more of what he has to say.

  62. Like I have said to many who tried to get me to quit, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to make progress. I'm not running in a popularity contest, or even applying for a job. What I am doing is trying to get people to think for themselves instead of swallowing the stories being told by those who would sooner tell a lie than face the truth. This culture has, unfortunately, grown in several North Texas communities. Richardson is but one. The legal advise crew "guide" many of them around the pitfalls of public scrutiny and take shelter under the skirt of those who would be better suited pursuing careers as trial lawyers. All I know is how to do research and get to the facts. I can't make people accept them. I can only repeat them from my base of knowledge, however deep or shallow that might be, thank you.