I started attending local events, rallies, debates, and trying to give my perspective. I felt quite qualified to give my persepective and opinion. All of us are.
But sometimes politicians don't like people who express their opinions, especially when the opinion is less than flattering, and especially when it's their own words that come back to bite them. Mudflatters may recall back in December when Rep. Mike Doogan really got under my skin. I had posted previously about Mr. Doogan by posting his reaction to the Palin nomination, promoting his appearance on a local radio show, and talking about the certainty of his reelection. But I don't always agree with him. The post where I took him to task was entitled "Are You People Nuts? Lessons in Email Etiquette."
The jist of it all, is that being really rude to people via email does not make them like you, nor does it make you look good. And legislators have a certain vested interest in looking good. Taking the high road when you're an elected leader is always a good plan, because flying off the handle, or mouthing off at people and insulting them results in the dreaded....bad press, and bad public opinion. Neither of those things helps the political goals of being liked, and being reelected.
But here's where it gets interesting. After the initial opinion piece in Mudflats, I started hearing from fellow bloggers that Mike Doogan was trying to figure out who I was. It seemed strange to me, because really, all I'd done was take his own words and actions and comment on them. Anyone was perfectly free to disagree, or comment on the piece. "He's rabid," one blogger told me. Wow. Rabid? I guess I struck a nerve. Over the past few months, I've had other messages through the grapevine that he was trying to figure out who I am.
I have to confess, that while I understand the curiosity factor, the fact that an elected representative was this preoccupied with the identity of an anonymous blogger had me puzzled. He wrote a piece for the Alaska Dispatch talking about "accountability". The thought was that if I was anonymous, I was not accountable. In what way, I wondered. I'm not a journalist. I'm just, as we established before, me. This is my opinion. If he were around, we could ask the "anonymous blogger" of his day, Benjamin Franklin what he thought about this. Using the "screen name" Mrs. Silence Dogood, Franklin was able to put out thoughts and ideas that were weighted on their own merits, not attached to a particular person. Sometimes it's easier, if you don't want to think, to attack the person, rather than the idea. I think Franklin would heartily approve of anonymous bloggers.
Not to mention, of course, the authors of the Federalist Papers. What does Doogan think? We should ignore them because they published anonymously? They were somehow "illegitimate"?
Of course not. He thinks no such thing. He's just an infantile jerk who's feelings were hurt because somebody dared to point out he was acting sort of foolish, and he spent months just looking for revenge.
Even if he's not a clinically defined malignant narcissist, he's still clearly mentally unfit for office. He needs to go. And so does any other public official with a similarly skewed view of his own self-importance vs. the importance of members of the public whom he is sworn to serve.
Just to make perfectly clear how sick he is, you can check out the email exchange Phil Munger posted. You can see it began because Doogan appeared to be doing something laudable, but even with that auspicious beginning it didn't take long for him to establish himself as a total asshole. Here is Munger's first email:
Dear Rep. Doogan,
Although I wasn't one of the many concerned Alaskans who have written to you about possible executive ethics actions being addressed by the upcoming session of the Alaska Legislature, I've had an opportunity to read a response you sent out to a number of people who had sent similar mailings to you. One part of this communication from you interested me:
Third, I intend to move forward with legislation to prevent a
re-occurrence of some of the problematic behavior that has arisen
from the mess commonly called Troopergate. That legislation will
define more closely what is a public document and seek to prevent
public officials from shielding their communications by using
private email accounts, and the state from stifling public access
by charging an arm and a leg.
This is an excellent idea, Rep. Doogan!
I would like to recommend that you consider also looking at tightening travel regulations for the members of the chief executive's family. Gov. Palin's trip to New York City in 2008 with one of her daughters, to speak very briefly on one day, then spend the work week in a pricey hotel with her child, at taxpayers' expense, shouldn't merely be unauthorized, I feel it should be criminal activity entered into the "fraud" statutes of Title 11.
I am also disturbed to read of Todd Palin's access to confidential personnel files and other sensitive materials, as described by ex-commissioner Walt Monegan, in his statements to investigator Steven Branchflower.
Although I am not a constituent, as an officer of the Alaska Democratic Party, I eagerly await your reply to my earnest query.
Sincerely,
Philip Munger
To this, Doogan responded:
Philip:
Read your email. Thanks for sending it. You expressed several opinions, but asked no question. So what query would you like me to
respond to?
Mike
Munger responded with a well-organized, detailed reply. Doogan replied:
Phil:
Thanks, that's a much better set of questions. Now, why are you asking? Running low on fodder for your blog? And if it's not for the blog, why are you asking me instead of your own representative?
Mike
PS: Who writes the Mudflats blog?
Munger responds with a long, respectful email, exlaining his concerns as a citizen and activist, along with the reason he's writing Doogan:
Mike,
I'm asking because you are the first member of the House who has expressed interest in any of the issues I feel fall under the general cover of executive ethics reform, to the point of beginning to articulate a proposed bill.
If you check with Kay Brown, you'll find out that I have expressed explicit interest in the issue that you brought up in the email I referenced, since the issuance of the Branchflower Report. She can also verify that I hoped as early as mid-October, to interest Democratic Party legislators in taking the mantle of so-called "reform" away from Sarah Palin between now and May, 2009.
I feel you and I both have the responsibility of keeping her away from ever again getting as close to national office as she came between August 29th and November 4th, 2008. As you may know, Rep. Doogan, your district went for Obama by over 200 votes.
In regard to why I don't bring this up with Carl, - I have.
Although I like Carl Gatto and his wife as neighbors, I feel he will do little to bring executive branch legislation to the fore. I'll be back in touch with him about this between now and the opening of the 2009 session.
As a Democrat, and as one who seeks to help build a Democratic Party majority in the Alaska legislature, I hope members of my party in the legislature can be at the forefront of needed reform legislation, whether it be of the executive branch, or more fine tuning of your own branch.
I am not "running low on fodder for [my] blog." As you've probably figured out, I posted my initial letter to you on this at Progressive Alaska. But at this point, I only hope to develop a constructive dialog with you on reform legislation, with a final goal of helping our legislature getting it passed, and am only hoping at this point, to be able to put a far more positive face on how you're dealing with this than have others.
I've had my blog for almost 14 months now. Some of my readers have a higher regard for it than does the proprietor. I try to learn from my readers and from those who comment, and to make headway in the craft of essay writing. Unlike legislators and ADN columnists, I get to swear openly from time to time.
He then adds:
A friend of mine writes the Mudflats blog. He or she lives in a neighboring district of yours, not mine. There is concern that to go public might be detrimental to Mudflats' professional and/or business situation.
Doogan responds:
Phil:
Thanks for the response.
I think that if blogging might be detrimental to the "professional and/or business situation" of the person writing Mudlfats, then he/she shouldn't be doing it. But even if it is, are your arguing that it's okay for people to stand in the shadows and shout into the public debate? What next? Hoods and torches?
How does you keeping this person's name a secret comport with your "let's put everything on the blog" ethic? You are talking out of both sides of your mouth, Phil. As long as you are going to pick and choose what information you make public, there's really no reason for me to communicate with you.
Good luck with your own representative.
Mike
So, there you are! After all that, Doogan blows of answering any of Munger's questions, as accuses him of being duplicitous. "talking out of both sides of your mouth."
Phil can't quite believe it, possibly. Or just wants to be sure:
Rep. Doogan,
You indicated earlier that you wanted my interest framed as questions. Now you seem to indicate you don't intend to answer them. Or am I misreading your statements, "As long as you are going to pick and choose what information you make public, there's really no reason for me to communicate with you," and "Good luck with your own representative"?
Phil
And Doogan responds, pretty sealing the deal on his asshole status, if not a full-on NPD diagnosis:
Phil:
Sorry if I only indicated that I would not answer them. I will not answer them for you.
Mike
We should be very clear. People like this should not be representing us. They are not mentally, emotionally or morally competent. They are, in fact, downright evil. They represent a very small percentage of the human race, and it seems likely we will know how to prevent them from being created (via abusive treatment in childhood) so that we can rid ourselves of them within a generation or two. But for now, nothing less than public shunning will do. And holding office is totally out of the question.
At the end of her post Mudflats writes:
And with that, Mudflatters, I need to take a little time off to assess things, and take stock of how life will be changing for me and my family.
We can all understand that. But we can also wish for a speedy return to blogging. We don't want Doogan feeling an ounce of satisfaction for what he's done.
And as for Mudflats herself: Illegitimi non carborundum! |
