I don’t want to get into "blogger beef" because it never really helps anybody. However, I feel it’s important to take the time and make myself EVER CLEARER when it comes to the subject of Former Star reporter and current blogger Jim Fitzpatrick and his big money donations to Kansas City Mayoral Candidate Mike Burke.
Before this blog reported it, Fitzpatrick’s donations were simply marked with a tiny, brief and very easy to miss note that he contributed to Mike Burke. They didn’t appear on every post, they were part of his overall support AND they were REALLY easy to miss.
But I didn’t miss them. I found that the first significant note Fitz made regarding his Mike Burke love and a detailed contribution disclosure was on Valentine’s Day a week before the election. If you’ve got a link to something earlier with a full dollar figure. Post it. If you are inspired to go looking that you’ll find is a bunch of parenthetical asides that don’t provide any detail at all. Or at least not the same detail Fitzpatrick asks from The Star when he debates which page they should post their corrections on.
And then there’s the subject of blogging, where i would be happy to educate Mr. Fitzpatrick.
See, JimmyCSays hides behind a rather effective comment wall and won’t allow any negative feedback to come his way. That’s not blogging, that’s not internet discourse. That’s straight up fear.
I, on the otherhand, invite you d-bags to try and prove me wrong and what usually ends up happening is that you show the world that most of your thought is nothing more than reactionary racism and envy of my awesomeness. But I digress.
Recently, JimmyCSays answered my post that CLEARLY IDENTIFIED his donations by simply avoiding the question.
He said: "Not sure I completely understand that sentence, but I guess I get the drift."
Don’t worry, I’ve dealt with white dudes condescending to me my whole life and I’ve developed patience.
So I’ll try and make myself clearer. Here is the point that I’m making:
If JimmyCSays ends up getting a job, appointment or even a cabinet position with the Mike Burke Mayoral Administration then he simply used his blog for nothing more than a paid promotional tool and you suckers who defended him have been played.
Now, Mike Burke is the favorite in this race, funny thing here is that I agree with all of the good things Fitz has written about Mike Burke. I think he really is a great candidate and will be good for Kansas City. But I’m not betting any money on it, mostly because I don’t have any cash for the cause. However, I think the "overloards of Journalism" i.e. Charlie Rose would be on my side when noting that an old school media institution like a daily paper or even (gasp) The Star wouldn‘t allow even their columnists to donate such big cash to a campaign and still write on the subject. Sorry, but I know I’m right on this one even though defending white people is pretty much the vocation of every Internet commenter.
And let’s not confine this discussion to Burke. Take a look at Fitz noting all the negatives of Mayoral Contender Deb Hermann and NOT ONCE declaring that he had big money riding on Burke.
Now, there’s still a chance at redemption: If Fitz is willing to accept NOTHING for his big money gamble then he really is civic benefactor and his heart is pure. Remember, I think that Fitz has more integrity in one keystroke than I do in all of my chubby goodness.
But let’s not be children and deny that the question about the real motivation behind such big donations made by a former hard nose newsman is now in play.
There are a lot of things to watch in this Mayoral Race and in the ensuing fallout. This is another way to see if things have really changed in City Hall or it’s itls just the same old pay for play.
We’ll see . . .