Bullock Texas State History Museum
Really Just Contempt for the People
RECEIVED Mon., April 14, 2014
Dear Editor,
City Council's decision to delay the meeting of April 10 in order to hobnob with celebrities drew a gloat from Michael King, who crowed that "it appears the anti-fluoridation ranters will have to wait a bit to deliver to Council another rhetorical fusillade," [“Council: Water Into Whine,” News, April 11].
One has to question the judgment of an editor who considers this newsworthy information. Here are some recent numbers: During the Citizens Communication of March 6, zero people out of 10 spoke about fluoride. At the March 20 Citizens Communication, it was zero out of 9. On March 27, it was one out of 10. Two people out of 10, including myself, were set to talk about fluoridation on April 10. When Citizens Communication was canceled, we were offered a speaking slot for next week and took it, but apparently three people prepared to talk on other subjects lost out.
What this says to me is that Mr. King shares the contempt for the entire Citizens Communication process that the Council is renowned for. Contempt for the process is really contempt for the people. And that's not very progressive, is it?
City Council's decision to delay the meeting of April 10 in order to hobnob with celebrities drew a gloat from Michael King, who crowed that "it appears the anti-fluoridation ranters will have to wait a bit to deliver to Council another rhetorical fusillade," [“Council: Water Into Whine,” News, April 11].
One has to question the judgment of an editor who considers this newsworthy information. Here are some recent numbers: During the Citizens Communication of March 6, zero people out of 10 spoke about fluoride. At the March 20 Citizens Communication, it was zero out of 9. On March 27, it was one out of 10. Two people out of 10, including myself, were set to talk about fluoridation on April 10. When Citizens Communication was canceled, we were offered a speaking slot for next week and took it, but apparently three people prepared to talk on other subjects lost out.
What this says to me is that Mr. King shares the contempt for the entire Citizens Communication process that the Council is renowned for. Contempt for the process is really contempt for the people. And that's not very progressive, is it?
Rae Nadler-Olenick
