My Conversation With Omaha Councilman Franklin Thompson
The following is a conversation I had, via email, with Omaha City Councilman Franklin Thompson. You may recall that I wrote a blog a while back called "Omaha Is A Joke In Your Town" about Omaha's urging of its citizens to call 911 if they saw someone smoking in public. I sent a copy of the blog to two councilmen who were defending their actions on the Tucker Carlson show on MSNBC. One councilman, Mr. Tuttle, sent me back a response that sounded like a form letter, and didn't really address anything from my email. The other councilman, Mr. Franklin Thompson, did respond directly -- several times. In fact, we had quite an interesting little e-conversation/argument, complete with name-calling and general snarkiness, that covered the next week or so. Here is how it went (I'm listing a couple of paragraphs from my original email, and the rest of the conversation is listed chronologically):
Dear Mr. Thompson:
The city of Omaha, Nebraska has publicly urged its citizens to call 911 if they see someone smoking in a public place.
Obviously, they hopped on the senseless, self-absorbed, do-gooder bandwagon and recently adopted a citywide smoking ban. This is no surprise, as several cities across the nation are adopting this anti-citizen, anti-business legislation, mainly to cater to special interests and to help their politicians make names for themselves over cause-du-jour issues.
I had already heard about this, but wanted to get more information before I said anything about it. So, I just saw the two politicians -- Jim Suttle and Franklin Thompson -- trying to explain themselves on Tucker Carlson's show on MSNBC.......
....Tuttle even had the audacity to say, regarding the ban itself, "We used to look at this as a medical issue, with a medical solution. Then we realized it's not that, it's a political issue that needed a political solution." He publicly admitted that the ban has nothing to do with public health or safety, that it was only political. Case in point: when Carlson said "Thanks for coming on", at which point the guest is supposed to say "Thanks for having me on, Tucker," Tuttle prattled on with "Why, thank you Tucker for having us, and thank you for your interest in Omaha." After which Thompson grinned and pointed at the camera and chirped, "MSNBC!"
These people don't care about you, Omaha. They certainly don't care about the personal freedom of any other American citizen or business owner. They're in this for themselves, and to bring attention to their soulless little city. But I'll say loudly and proudly, "DON'T GO TO OMAHA". Wait, it's Omaha. Nobody goes there anyway. Which is why they started this whole thing in the first place.
Sincerely --
Roger Wallace
www.rogerwallace.com
www.myspace.com/rogerwallace
-------
Dear Wallace The Wonderful:
Wow, is your venom always this lethal? Do you possess the abilities to makea scorpion back down? Can you walk on water?
For the record, during phase one of our city's debate (February 2005) a colleague of mine (no longer elected) went after a full smoking ban. I successfully got ALL BARS exempt so they could continue to smoke forever. The mayor vetoed it and the council failed to override. The mayor wanted a full ban.
A very diligent anti-smoking activist here in Omaha then started a petition to put a more restrictive total ban on the ballot for the people to vote on. Public polls revealed it would have passed by 70% (Nebraska's track record is pretty conservative).
A well organized bar group in town then came to me and asked me to broker a compromise that gave bars an additional 5 years to be able to smoke (in lieu of facing a sure immediate defeat at the ballot box). I brokered the compromise in July of 2006 and the rest is history.
Your abilities to read minds and expose people's true motives must be. . . Legendary!
Signed,
Sneaky, Publicity-Seeking Lunkhead
P.S. I should have listened to my mother and become a mortician . . . .
--------
Dear Thompson the Terrific (a.k.a. "Sneaky, Publicity-Seeking Lunkhead"):
Yes, my venom is usually this lethal, especially when it's concerning what I call the "Bransonization" of America. There is nothing wrong with Branson, MO itself, except when we try to make every city in the nation as clean, sanitized, family-friendly, and whitewashed as it. And yes, I possess the ability to make a scorpion back down -- my shoe. And I can walk on water just fine when it's spilled on a barroom floor.... disguised as beer.
I have to give (unsarcastic) kudos to you for trying to get bars exampt from the smoking ban. I feel that smoking bans for most workplaces, restaurants, etc. are just fine. A pain for the smoker, sure, but understandable for everybody else. But bars -- places where smoking is a generations-old tradition that coincides with relaxation and "good times" for grown-ups -- should be left out of sweeping public smoking bans. Thank you for trying to make that happen in Omaha. But, sadly, score another one for special interest groups.
But, my blog post wasn't about the ban itself. I've written planty of those about the ban in Austin already. This was about the demonization and criminialization of smokers by urging your citizens to call 911 when they see one. It has been drilled into the social consciousness that "911 is for emergencies". When someone is seriously injured, when there has been a crime committed that will be a jailable offense by the offender, when you feel your life and saftey are in jeapordy -- you call 911, and the operator will answer "911... what is your emergency?" By urging your citizens to call 911, you are saying to them that smokers are endangering people's lives, or at least committing a crime for which they should be incarcerated; that what they are doing constitiutes an "emergency". I believe you and I both know that, of all the evil things that public smoking may or may not be, it's certainly not worthy of immediate police and emergency response.
By the way, to respond to your statement "Your abilities to read minds and expose people's true motives must be. . . Legendary!", I'll tell you that, in addition to my goofy blog, I'm also a songwriter, so "reading minds" is sort of my job. It's my business to observe people's actions and, as accurately as possible, speculate on their motivations. So, when I see you, at the end of an interview on prime-time international news, point at the camera and say "MSNBC!" (I'm surprised you didn't wink), my first reaction is, "This is one City Councilman in Omaha that's REALLY glad to be on national TV." I gotta say, that was just plain cheesy, and it took the impact away from whatever points you may have made on the issues. That was your last impression on the viewers -- bad politickin'. That, combined with your buddy Tuttle's "thank you for your interest in Omaha" at the end of the interview AND at the end of his email to me, are what made me say that you guys seemed to be in this for the publicity. I know enough about politics to know that it's 90% show biz, the same as the music business. Good content can be in your favor, but name & face recognition really carry the weight.
You got "publicity-seeking" because of the things mentioned above. You got "lunkhead' because demonizing smokers by putting them on par with rapists and murders is just dumb. But I never called you "sneaky" -- going on prime-time MSNBC to defend your actions is hardly "sneaky".
I also must say that, on one hand, my first reaction to your email to me was that it was a bit unprofessional, and certainly not the response I would have gotten if I was a voter in Omaha. On the other hand, I was impressed that you (or your staff member) actually gave a personal response, unlike your pal Tuttle, whose response seemed like a form letter. I was very appreciative of your candor; it was actually refreshing and I have to say that it took some cojones (as we say in Texas) on your part. Major bonus points for that. Like I said in my blog, you didn't seem like the bad guy here (I think you almost rolled your eyes at a couple of things Tuttle said), you just looked like the guy who was along for the ride. Hopefully you'll use your newly added political visibility to keep "fighting the good fight", and keep the rest of your fellow Council members from doing silly and socially detrimental things (like urging people to call 911 on smokers) in the future.
Thanks & take care --
Roger Wallace
P.S. Maybe you should have been a mortician, like you said -- you probably would have had a few more honest laughs (not to mention more community popularity) than being a politician!
---------
Dear Wallace The Wonderful:
May I touch the hem of your garment (smile)? It appears that you and I have more in common than just possessing big knockers. Both of us are song writers.
For the record, my partner and MSNBC officials twisted my arm to do that show. I said "no" about 6 times before I yielded. Also, the pointing my finger was not a cheesey publicity stunt, rather it was a counter reaction to what I really wanted to say. I wanted to say a few choice words, but instead I went the opposite way with my feelings.
I was bating Tucker with sarcasm, not seeking publicity (i.e., I appreciate people who ask for an explanation of things before they launch into name calling). In the field of pyschology it is called "Reaction Formation." In other words, a person does the opposite of what they want to keep from getting himself into deeper trouble.
By the way, this is the manner I speak to my constituents here in town: cards on the table and speaking the truth. Chances are I won't be in public office very long . . . .
As stated before, I, too, thought the Mayor was nuts for adding on the 911 provision after the ordinance left the hands of the legislative branch. All I can say is that he must have been psychic because it is really working here in Omaha. It wouldn't be my recomendation. but who am I to argue with success? Other than that, there's not much more I can say on that topic.
Again, I must say you are quite the fellow. You really seem impressed with yourself and your perceived abilities.
Signed,
Triple T. (Please Save Me)
P.S. My Ole Aunt Efficiency (from South Carolina) used to give us this nasty stuff called 666 whenever we got ill. Here's to crosssing my fingers and hoping that there is enough potentency in the folk remedy to "knock out the funk" in your venom. The bigger the headache, the bigger the pill. I am THE BIG PILL.
---------
Dear His Terrificness --
Yes, you are a pill, I'll give you that.
1) Can you define "success" in the 911 "smoker emergency" program? Just curious.
2) For the sake of your political lifespan in our "perception is reality" society, you'll probably have to be careful with your "reaction formation" responses. What I saw was a cheesy pointing-gesture, so what I perceived was a local politician from a mid-sized Midwestern town, who just looked grateful & happy to be on TV. I don't have a degree in psychology, but I do have one in speech communication, which also included everything from nonverbal to mass group communication. That, combined with being a politics junkie and socially aware person, maybe gives me a slightly better understanding of situations like that than some people. Not that you're asking me for political advice, but there's my two cents (OK, at least 50 cents by now).
3) Yes, I am impressed with myself. You can't be a good artist (or a politician) without a healthy ego, as I'm sure you're aware. And if you take the time to look at my website(s), you might see I'm not alone. Maybe read some of my other stuff (I've also got a sports blog called "The Yard" at http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/RogerCWallace) , listen to some music, read some album reviews. I'm not the only one who's impressed by what I do, both musically and in my writing. I'm not famous (obviously, since you haven't heard of me), but in roots/Americana music circles I do OK. I don't know if you have any love for country music, but don't be frightened by my cowboy hat -- I hate Toby Keith worse than you do. The type of country music I (and dozens of others) do is real music, made by real people, made for grown-ups and not for teenage girls and the NASCAR crowd. Obviously, not marketing to those crowds hinders our commerical success greatly, but I'm much more in favor of good music than glorified karaoke.
I'm sorry if my "venomous" words stepped on your toes, but much of the stuff I write is inflammatory for the sake of sparking discussion. With literally millions of bands, websites, and blogs out there, a guy's got to do something to stand out -- I never said I wasn't interested in publicity myself! And besides that, I was frankly just flat pissed when I heard about the 911 thing in Omaha, so I wrote a snarky blog and accompanying email. Maybe my language was harsh, but I was just doing what I do. As I'm sure you know from being in politics, nice guys usually do finish last.
I also "perceive" that you're going to need a heavy supply of "Aunt Efficiency's 666 Tonic" if you plan on staying in public office for a while!
-- Roger
---------
Dear Double-Double You:
It appears that the friendly debate boils down to one conclusion: I provide you with local history and make you aware of what my motives really were, and you reject most of the explanation while slightly hedging on a point or two. In other words, I am mostly a liar and you truly can read minds and size up people from a 120 second media piece.
I apologize that my speech and reaction patterns/behaviors don't measure up to your expectations.
May you have success in "whatever it is" you are trying to accomplish.
My name is Franklin T., and I'm out --
-------
Wow, I'm not sure where you got all that from my last email. There was one sentence telling you what I perceived on the day you did the interview, and that's it. I did not call you a liar, and I did not reject your explanation. I did not say your speech and reaction behaviors don't "measure up" to my expectations. Did you even read the email?
I asked for your definition of "success" in the 911 smoker program, and you didn't even attempt to give one. I discussed your "reaction formation" explanation, and didn't criticize it; I only said be careful with it. I then tried to explain a little bit of who I am and what I do, so you would have a better idea of why I write what I write.
There was no "mind reading". I didn't "reject your explanations". And in politics, voters "size you up" from 30 second commercials and 5-second sound bites of speeches. If you have problems hearing a critique of a national TV interview, or even just observations, then politics must be pretty rough on you. I thought we were having a friendly little e-spar conversation, which I respected you for. I have to say that if you're going to play the victim and not even respond to what I actually said, then that puts a damper on things.
To use your words, may you have success in "whatever it is" you're trying to accomplish.
~ Roger
