Let’s Party Like We Live in Lubbock!

I would love to write a longer post, but I’m busy getting ready for the grand opening of “Charles’ Dive of Booze, Loose Women, and Legalized Drugs.” Tonight is improv night, so come on by and enjoy the comedic stylings of a bunch of UP mayors, past and present.

Here’s an artist’s rendering of what my street will look like. My place is the one in the middle. Oh, and half-price shooters for anyone dressed as Elvis!

105 thoughts on “Let’s Party Like We Live in Lubbock!

  • November 3, 2010 at 10:56 am
    Permalink

    I think you all are over exaggerating what is going to happen with these new laws. The city still has the right to approve or deny businesses a liquor license.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 12:40 pm
    Permalink

    I think it was meant to be sarcastic.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 12:50 pm
    Permalink

    Did you see that Baby Dolls is looking for space on Hillcrest?

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 1:11 pm
    Permalink

    As a black member of this mostly white community, I feel it highly offensive that you would compare this neighborhood to the past that i previously escaped. Do I have to keep escaping shadows of my former past? My ancestors were shoved into slave ships and brought over here for you people. Be happy that you can buy alcohol in your neighborhood now. Just because you can buy alcohol you assume I will buy a Colt 45 and drive around in my “low rider” and sell drugs to kids. This is completely racist of you and I am offended.

    Reggie

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 2:22 pm
    Permalink

    Coty, you are correct that I was being sarcastic. Reggie, were you? Because if not, I honestly don’t understand your post.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 2:37 pm
    Permalink

    @Charles,

    “Reggie Nagel” pulled the same schtick on the vuvuzela post from months back. Had to go back and look, but I definitely remembered it being similar. So, I think it was a joke. Just not a good one.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 3:19 pm
    Permalink

    There will be a line around the block to buy pool cue chalk.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 3:37 pm
    Permalink

    @ Bc — You’re correct, that Reggie pulled that goof before here: http://www.parkcitiespeople.com/2010/09/07/vuvuzelas-need-to-go/

    ————————-

    Reggie Nagel @ September 7, 2010 at 8:00 pm

    The vevuzelas played at the scots game were not only offensive to my African American race, but to every young believer of the teachings of Malcolm X and Dr King worldwide. The instruments should be banned along with the name-calling towards the African American players on the opposite team. My grandfather always told me not to let the ignorance of inferior beings bring me down, but this vevuzela blowing has gotten to the point where lives are being lost and the virtues in which we live by and follow everyday are being destroyed simply because 21st century caucausion males think they have the right to do whatever they feel is morally acceptable in the country that was practically discovered by African Americans. My ancestors did not travel across the oceans in a crammed wooden boat towards this country that should have the decency to respect the thoughts of other races just to be violated and abused like a fly. So, America, think twice before you make a sorry attempt at lowering my peoples’ self esteem. That is all.

    Sort of funny. What is really funny, though, is that he got Charles to bite on that thread, too:

    Charles @ September 8, 2010 at 9:52 am

    Merritt’s right. Mindlessly blowing a horn at all times during a sporting event has nothing to do with rooting for your team.

    Scots student is right: he can blow his horn to “speight” the parents (which, in fact, demonstrates that it was never about supporting the team in the first place).

    Reggie: I have no idea what you’re talking about.

    Merritt haters: on her behalf, thank you, and keep on reading.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 4:31 pm
    Permalink

    @bc, you forgot this post from the same thread:

    Reggie Nagel @ September 9, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    Well hpstudent 2, I have all the right to come to any Highland Park High School event I please considering my son attends the school. I will not stand for anyone trying to hold me back from going to the football games and I would appreciate it if you white fellows would stepp of my black ass. I’ll have you know I am a proud sponsor of several African American based corporations and if you would like to email me regarding a problem you have with me, I would be more than happy for you to contact me at either of the two work sites of mine.
    ht_p://www.becauseimblack.com/
    ht_p://www.blackpanther.org/

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 4:49 pm
    Permalink

    I’m just a simple, trusting soul.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 6:42 pm
    Permalink

    Chris,

    The city CANNOT deny the liquor license, that comes from the state/ TABC

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 8:13 pm
    Permalink

    After knowingly writing false accusations against the Mayor of University Park, after rudely insulting most of the previous mayors, and after publishing, racking, and distributing last week’s edition containing knowingly false and damaging information, recklessly and wrongly prejudicial to the campaign reputation of Opponents of the propositions written on the front page of the paper, (campaigning and editorializing in a space normally reserved for news), I would think those associated with the paper would have the good taste – if not the good sense – to drop the subject of Lubbock.

    The paper was wrong, and knows it!

    Clearly I was wrong about how low PCP was willing to sink.

    I’m told by people in and out of the news and publishing business that “journalistic ethics” are quickly becoming an oxymoron in our society – an unfortunate return to the bygone over century-old days of highly-partisan publications.

    I thought Park Cities People subscribed to a higher standard. Obviously, I was wrong about that, as well.

    Pity.

    Of course, if Friday’s PCP contains a story about the multiple violations of Texas law by the proponents of the propositions, then that at least demonstrates some sense or attempt at balance.

    But, I think I’ll be wrong about that.

    “Regrettable.”

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 9:34 pm
    Permalink

    P.S. Charles, my comments weren’t actually directed at you. In fact, I enjoy your writing and wish you would be featured more often.

    I think the paper needs to drop the subject of Lubbock, or plan to see it where they won’t enjoy it. But, I would hope to otherwise not inhibit your choice of subject matter.

    Your sense of humor is quite refreshing and enjoyable.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 9:34 pm
    Permalink

    N.F. it’s time to stop complaining that a sign, that failed to contain a disclosure that you shouldn’t place it on a public highway, had any effect on the election. It is also time to forget that an extremely inflamatory mailer with a guy grabbing at a stripper on it containing falsehoods was produced by your side. I was encouraged to see the mayor’s quote in the paper to the effect that the people have spoken. The early voting percentages were similar to the election day percentages–the PCP article had no effect. It was truly not close. To be honest, if anything, I think that it would have played badly if they would have published that you had such limited support and that 90% of the money came from Roy Coffee and Dick Davis. I am hopeful that your side will take the olive branch and allow UP to come back together and not be vindictive.

    Reply
  • November 3, 2010 at 10:47 pm
    Permalink

    @N.F. Give. It. Up. While the rest of us are enjoying our beer and wine purchased from a slightly more convenient location, you and the Former Mayors Club will be drowning in your own bile at the DCC or in the back room of Dunstons, or wherever it is that you spend you time. Cheers!

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 12:07 am
    Permalink

    Buddy, If you look on these pages, no olive branch has been offered. In fact, it’s been the opposite. Generally, it would be accompanied by an apology for the outrageous personal statements lodged at the mayors. I doubt that will be forthcoming.

    The violations of law are much more serious and numerous than the failure to put disclaimers on signs, also a serious matter and a violation. Whatever the campaign or others do about that is up to them.

    I’ve already congratulated the other side, and stated that the ball is in their court to make 100% good on their assurances – which I hope they will do. That’s a very different matter than ignoring the unethical, dishonest, and damaging actions of the paper.

    It is also a matter of ethics that the paper used news space in the paper to campaign for one side, slant stories, fabricate stories, and fail to report significant events such as the other side’s multiple and serial legal violation which go back for months.

    Again, I would think the paper would want to avoid the subject of Lubbock. It certainly owes Dick Davis an apology on that matter.

    Neal, Neither. I don’t belong to one, and haven’t been to the other in a number of years. I’m not drowning in anything, and I doubt the former mayors are anything but philosophical about the vote. They can certainly speak for themselves.

    It seems to be the other side that has a problem, if their postings here are any indication.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 1:10 am
    Permalink

    Neal, For some reason my other message didn’t post.

    I don’t hang out at either. I’m not a member of one, and haven’t been to the other one in many years. My family has been involved in the restaurant and food service business for years, so I don’t get my kicks hanging out at places where they serve food.

    I’m not drowning in anything, and I doubt the former mayors are.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 6:06 am
    Permalink

    N.F. is so obsessed with Lubbockgate. It’s not the point that the mailer was or was not picturing Lubbock or that Davis knew or didn’t know what location was on the mailer…..The point is that it was 100% misleading and everyone who sent it out knew that and still sent it out. Amateur Scare Tactic Hour. The amount of violations on the Anti side is almost as staggering as the amount of false information they distributed.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 6:55 am
    Permalink

    I would expect more from Mayor Davis than PCP. Obviously, the Mayor tried to use his position of power and financial status to influence the populus. It didn’t work out, so N.F. has to keep up his rant. Come on, time to grow up.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 8:31 am
    Permalink

    @NF,
    This is a blog. People are free to state their opinions on it. Since most of the comments here you deem as “disrespectful” towards the mayor(s) came from private citizens and not PCP employees, it is unlikely that you will see an apology for them printed in PCP. I hope that you will be able to move on and direct your energy towards other pursuits.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 8:40 am
    Permalink

    N.F. Certainly nobody owes Dick Davis or Roy Coffee an apology. It sure looked to me like they tried to split the community. At a minimum, they threw themselves out there on this. On the bad side, that flier put out by Coffee/Davis was inflamatory, deceptive and insulting because it mischaracterized our position. If it wouldn’t have been distributed (twice I might add), I can tell you that I’m pretty sure you never have heard one blog from me and I would not have put in that much work on the other side. I think that it moved others on the “For” side to action. I think that it cost you votes, but I’m pretty sure that even that was not why your side didn’t win. Those laws were relics of a by-gone era and the residents here felt like that they didn’t need to be controlled any more in that way. They sprang into effect shortly after the repeal of Prohibition–that was a long time ago. I have a pretty good guess that if there had been no campaigning by anybody that they would have passed. Just look at Dallas and all the little towns around Dallas and Fort Worth where the same Props were up for votes, it passed everywhere in similar percentages.

    I know that you feel strongly about your views, but the Props did pass. That certainly won’t be overturned in our lifetime. I know that you don’t want it to come off this way, but you are sounding like sour grapes. Let’s move on. I think most on your side have, but there may be some vindictive people on your side. Your job is to settle down and help settle them down. It’s what is best for the community. Nothing that anybody did on either side of this made a real difference on anything except bringing it to a vote, once done, it was destined to pass.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 8:51 am
    Permalink

    @NF

    Get over yourself already. Please.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 9:17 am
    Permalink

    @Neal, easy on the DCC! And Dunston’s hosts a mean game of dominos!

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 10:15 am
    Permalink

    I’ll type this slowly for some of my friends who don’t read well.

    There are very similar pictures around Texas Tech, in Lubbock, of neon signs on clubs and bars in the city and around the university. The places have grown up in Lubbock because of liberalization of the liquor laws. But, they were a perfect fit to demonstrate what could happen in University Park.

    As I understand it, the campaign decided to be sensitive to Lubbock and Tech graduates in U.P., and had the artist find generic club and bar signs in picture.

    It wasn’t an outrageous comparison; it was an ideal comparison. Lubbock and U.P. are both relatively small, quiet, and peaceful cities. Both host successful universities. (In the end, I don’t have the impression either comparison would have changed much. But, that sidesteps the point.)

    What Dick Davis saw on a layout of the brochure was the Lubbock and Texas Tech photos. He did not know of the decision to use generics, and never saw them before he got the brochure at his house.

    Thus endeth the wild, disrespectful, vacant, and incorrect speculation of what happened.

    One final note. I’m told Park Cities People knew this before printing and/or distributing the paper.

    End of story.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 10:31 am
    Permalink

    Buddy, If you’ll read around on this blog, you’ll see we’re saying virtually the same thing about the election. I think it would have passed with or without opposition, unless it had come much earlier. Even then, I’m not sure it counter-arguments could overcome the huge number of people who hated the wet/dry nonsense.

    I wouldn’t any more campaign for or vote to reinstate either of these sets of laws, and I think I know very few people who would. We may need a few other laws (alcohol sales near schools) to make sure life as a “wet community” doesn’t pose other problems. But, I wouldn’t turn the wet/dry clock backward for anything.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 10:41 am
    Permalink

    BusyGuy, My suggestion that PCP owes Mayor Davis and the entire Anti side apologies doesn’t bleed over to other “private” posters, and wouldn’t. What they do with the leadership of the campaign is their business.

    Some of these folks are normally very nice people, and don’t hesitate to apologize when they are wrong. A couple of them aren’t man enough to apologize under any circumstances. Life’s just that way. People are different.

    I congratulated the Pro side for prevailing, and already moved on. The campaign is over. I think discussing the after-game aspects of what will happen now is interesting. But, you don’t have to be a part of that if you wish.

    PCP is another matter.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 10:43 am
    Permalink

    I am so glad Mayor Davis and Roy Coffee spent $24K of their own money and lost decisively. Call it Shadenfreude, call it karma, call it justice. They mirespresented the facts, used scare tactics to make their point, and lost credibility to many of the citizens of UP.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 11:11 am
    Permalink

    D, Check that mirror on getting over yourself. The Anti side presented worst-case scenarios for what COULD happen if the worst occurred because these laws were liberalized (change).

    I read all their stuff, and saw nothing misleading. Talking to the TABC, everything they said MIGHT happen certainly could. I’m not sure probabilities are part of what amounts to advertising in liquor elections.

    I believe you’re wrong that the Mayor, former mayors, and other civic leaders lost credibility for standing up for what they believe to be best for University Park. That’s how our city became the great place it is.

    It’s also far more honorable to use money from a campaign from U.P. citizens than to accept corporate contributions from special interests outside of University Park, and then hide them from the public.

    I’ve always believed private citizens could spend their money however they wish. I call it “freedom”.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 12:13 pm
    Permalink

    @Hpparent: Rest assured I love both, especially Dunston’s! Mmmm, Dunston’s. Anyway, I was just trying think of stereotypical places where angry old people might go to commiserate, and to see if N.F. would take the bait. Mission accomplished.

    I put this quote from Instapundit.com on another thread, and with every additional comment it proves more and more true (click the link below for context):

    “But [Barney] Frank’s childish behavior provides a good lesson in how to deal with the political class. Mock them, and don’t treat them with the respect they — wrongly — feel is their due. They’re not used to being challenged. Keep it up, and odds are they’ll either quit, or embarrass themselves fatally.”

    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/109147

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    Permalink

    Neal, You’re among the most entertaining people on the planet. No matter how utterly wrong you are, you still have the ability to convince yourself that you’re right.

    The situation with Barney Frank has not one thing to do with the former mayors or University Park or anything else. Yet, you’re convinced you’re a genius for posting this utter nonsense about a criminal.

    You directed a post to me about hanging out at the DCC or Dunstons, and I politely replied I was not a member of one, and haven’t been in the other for many many years. Yet, you call this “taking the bait”.

    You must have had a really interesting childhood. People like this are all around us, but you seem to have a really bad case of it.

    At Quantico, Virginia, I knew a training supervisor who had your same gift. He could rationalize a nuclear explosion if he accidentally caused he. “Sometimes In Error; Never In Doubt” was a perfect description.

    When you grow up, have you considered comedy?

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 2:00 pm
    Permalink

    I think that everyone involved with the Anti side mailer owes each citizen that got it an apology for trying to pull some B-Team scare tactics full of lies at the last minute.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 4:42 pm
    Permalink

    But was Barney Frank for or against the propositions?

    And as for this angry guy, I like to hang out at Mi Cocina. Too bad my wife doesn’t like it as much as I do.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 4:45 pm
    Permalink

    AvidReader, I’ll tell you what I’ll be glad to do for you. Because I think we should keep this mindless, pointless, aimless, senseless, bullshoot going for as long as possible, instead of moving on with life since the election is actually over, here’s what I’ll do:

    If you’ll post which “last minute” mailer you’re talking about, quote precisely the sentence or phrase you say is a lie (as opposed to opinion, cautionary possibilities, or other advertising-style language constructs), write next to that what the actual truth is and cite why it is a fact that exposes an intentional lie on the part of the campaign, I will see if I can find someone associated with the campaign who will take the time to respond to me with an explanation why that sentence or phrase was used, and why they didn’t believe it to be a lie.

    They have no obligations to answer my questions (or your questions), but I’ll take a run at it for you.

    As far as apologies go, I have yet to see anyone on either side issue apologies, especially PCP which certainly owes apologies to the Anti side. So, I wouldn’t hold my breath on that part.

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 7:30 pm
    Permalink

    Let’s all catch a breather, ’cause N.F. ain’t going away unless he threatens Merritt, Max or Buddy (and PCP needs to track him down through his IP address). And, I think he’s smart enough that he won’t.

    Here’s reality with a “wet” community:

    Traffic in Snider Plaza will NOT increase (and, you won’t need additional police officers)

    Kids will still drink alcohol
    a. that mom and dad give them
    b. that they steal from mom and dad
    c. that they get from SMU fraternity parties and Bill Turner’s Boulevard Bashes

    They will NOT buy booze at Tom Thumb, but will go get drunk on Greenville and drive home like the former HP Quarterback a year or two ago.

    People “not like us and not from here” will not start hanging out at 7-11, drinking hooch from a paper sack and ogling over our hot middle-aged women who work really hard to compete with the SMU co-eds (which is very much appreciated by this red-blooded Liberalizing Republican.

    Life will continue to move on. Buddy will not become a millionaire selling in a Unicard free environment. Max won’t open up a wine section in the back section of his yoga studio. Tom Thumb won’t carry malt duck, mad dog 20/20 or Mickey’s wide mouths.

    Hmmmmm. What else? The list could go on and on and on. But, reality is that our community is no better or worse off.

    In the infamous words of Rodney King “can’t we all get along?”

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 8:23 pm
    Permalink

    Coty, I don’t know what your problem is, but you’ve got your head up your tailpipe if you think I would threaten someone on a public message board over a simple difference of opinion.

    I haven’t threatened anyone here, and I wouldn’t even think about it; not just because of the legal side of the matter, but I think it’s both stupid and morally wrong. As well, many of these people are my neighbors and/or people with whom I do business.

    You need to get a grip, pal. You’re way off base to suggest I’d make a threat against someone.

    Enough said!

    Reply
  • November 4, 2010 at 10:27 pm
    Permalink

    N.F., between “catch a breather” and “Here’s reality”, Coty said that you’re smart enough that you won’t threaten someone.

    In response to his overall messages – life won’t change much and “can’t we all get along?” – you suggested he had his “head up his tailpipe” and “need(s) to get a grip”.

    Good to hear there’s been enough said.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 9:29 am
    Permalink

    N.F., “They have no obligations to answer my questions (or your questions).” Um…one of “they” is the Mayor and he sure as heck does have an obligation to answer other citizens questions, but it sounded nice in your post. In answer to your request for specific details, no. I have no obligations to answer your question. The mailer was fully misleading and if you couldn’t see why in the first place, no amount of discussing is going to pull your wool back. I really enjoy having N.F. around since we haven’t seen as much entertainment since the Drip coffee woman or the yearbook publishing genius.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 9:38 am
    Permalink

    I’m with Coty. I, too, appreciate drinking hooch from paper bags and ogling our hot women. Well, I’m paraphrasing here.

    These are activities that could bring us all together: red, blue, sober, drunk, whatever.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 10:26 am
    Permalink

    Sharpay, I don’t think you read that moronic and insulting post carefully. But, my terse and very deliberate response to Coty had only to do with the portion of his post dealing with threats.

    The rest of it is mostly useless; some of it will be very wrong.

    The 7-11 across from SMU will most likely not sell any form of alcohol. Call it a lucky guess.

    I, for one, hope Buddy does become a millionaire. One of the reasons for having this election, mostly not discussed in what little debate took place, was that alcohol and licenses will be much cheaper for many who sell it now. That will improve the profits of those who now sell it, and I’m all for their doing well.

    One of the interesting aspects of this election is what I would call a “silent consequence”. If you ask some people why they voted For the propositions, you mostly hear getting rid of Unicards and the private club hassles. But, some believe they can control any new places selling alcohol from popping up, and can keep out bars, etc. (We’ll see about that.)

    The Unicards aren’t a surprise to anyone. But, the Anti side apparently put people on-notice about some unwanted consequences that “could” happen, and to watch for.

    U.P. grocery stores stocking and selling alcohol will have a problem. There’s not enough room in those stores now to stock routine items people want. So, there’s no room for alcohol unless they sell it out of trucks parked in back. There is no way they can make the aisles even smaller; they did that. (It looks like they were merchandised by American Airlines.) They can’t build second floors; zoning won’t permit that. I’m sure they’ll figure it out, but customers will be giving up several items they now have available there.

    University Park won’t expand the commercial sector of our city, and nobody wants it to. The war over anybody trying to sell alcohol across from SMU would go nuclear, so that’s probably not going to happen.

    We may get some new restaurants; that’s a good thing. But, I think they’ll be on Lovers Lane; not in Snider Plaza.

    So, who knows what may happen.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 10:35 am
    Permalink

    AvidReader, I didn’t think you’d take me up on my genuine offer. You didn’t disappoint me.

    Since the mayor didn’t have anything to do with producing graphics, as I understand, I doubt he could answer. I think if he knew, he’d be more than glad to respond.

    You said there were “lies”; and apparently it’s only your opinion that it was “misleading”. Big difference.

    I do know (since I asked) that TABC, an academic source, and an actual restaurant owner were used for fact checking. So, if there were any “lies”, somebody gets an unpleasant note.

    I’m glad you’re here, as well.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 11:28 am
    Permalink

    Give me a break, N.F. You can’t be serious that the mayor didn’t closely review the flyer. If that is in fact true, he’s got a problem as an office holder and as a professional Who would allow their name to be put on any dovent without closely reviewing the FINAL product?

    I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest Buddy or Max – or both – run for office. I’m tired of this drivel about our saintly city leaders. The least they could do is man up and admit they might be a little out of touch. Not to memtion, honesty and transpaency do stand for something – even if you’re posting anonymously to a blog ;).

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 12:01 pm
    Permalink

    The Beard, I’m not your best witness on this, but I “heard” that the Mayor told Park Cities People that he agreed with the substance of one of the mailers/flyers/brochures, but didn’t approve the graphics. I don’t which one. I don’t know if there were others.

    But, I’ve got a great idea. Next time you run into Dick Davis, just ask him if he recalls reading and passing on any deliberate lies in a mailer or some other campaign piece. Since the wording was being fact checked, as I found out, I can’t imagine in a million years he thought anything went out that was an intentional lie. But, just ask him.

    Hint: The guy has a reputation as a great lawyer. So, I’d be more specific on the claim you’re asking about, and wouldn’t use the word “liar” to him. Just a thought.

    I think it would be great if Buddy ran for the Council. I don’t think Max Fuqua could get elected. I doubt both could be elected because of the math – if I correctly remember how U.P. does its council positions.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 12:40 pm
    Permalink

    I’m still surprised anyone would approve an advertisement in something other than its final state. It’s his name. It’s representing his viewpoints. And yes, the details are important.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 12:42 pm
    Permalink

    Oh, and, Mayor Davis, you might want to step in here. N.F. Is doing you no favors here – zero, zilch, nada…

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 1:36 pm
    Permalink

    Oh, it was a genuine offer? In that case:
    You can access the mailer on one of Merritt’s earlier posts.
    Page 2: “The character of University Park is in danger of being lost forever….” This line is right on top of 5 pictures; one of two guys putting dollar bills on a stripper, one of a car pulled over by cops, one of a large neon sign that says BAR, one of an odometer with the speed numbers replaced by the words buzzed and drunk, and the last of Beale street and the numerous neon signs.

    Misleading. There will never be a strip club on Hillcrest or in the park cities for that matter. There will not be neon signs popping up like on Beale street, ever.

    Page 3:
    “Passage of these bad laws would do nothing to improve our excellent community and WOULD IRREPARABLY HARM University Park FOREVER.” Um…no explanation needed.

    “Please join with us in protecting UP and our TEENAGERS by going to the bottom of your Gen. Election ballot and voting NO against these two destructive and harmful changes in our laws.” Ridiculous. Someone else said it earlier, our teenagers that drink would never go buy booze from Tom Thumb or 7-11 or try and sneak drinks from Bandito’s. The kids in our community are not dumb enough to go post up at a Banditos table for tequila shots when their neighbors and parents friends are at the table next to them. Dumb. The underage drinkers will continue to get their booze by stealing from their parents, getting it from their parents, or continue to go over to East Dallas/Fitzhugh/Greenville to get their booze.

    “Greatly increase city costs for law enforement and emergency services.” You admitted yourself that they will not need to hire any new officers just because Tom Thumb will sell beer now. Fail.

    “Significantly decrease property values.” Show me another community that is similar where this happened, and no, Lubbock is not similar other than it is small and has a college.

    “Erode the positive stewardship of UP children, young people and students.” What parents will stop instilling values in their kids because stores are selling beer now? Fail.

    Page 4:
    Dick Davis repeats in a quote a line from earlier:
    “Neither proposition will do anything to make UP better, and WOULD IRREPARABLY HARM our city FOREVER.” I can already feel our city getting worse and there is no going back because this harm is FOREVER. Like I said, amateur scare tactic hour.

    Had a little time on my hands so this is just the one mailer. Maybe you can’t see how misleading and ridiculous this is because you are too involved with the Anti side.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 1:38 pm
    Permalink

    I would be the worst politician on earth. The pay certainly ain’t gonna work. Also, too many skeletons. I’m out on that deal. Other than campaigning for Ronald Reagan in the ’76 primary when I was a kid, that is my first and last election. I like businesses where everybody gets along and politics certainly ain’t it!

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 1:43 pm
    Permalink

    NF is the family member that you are obligated to invite over for holidays.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 2:00 pm
    Permalink

    Too late, Buddy. You are hereby nominated!

    I’m now of the opinion that N.F. is actually a PCP writer in disguise. I find myself coming back here to read the comments solely to see what hairball thing she says next. My current favorite is that Tom Thumb isn’t going to be able to find space to put the alcohol. Um, yeah, I’m sure that Tom Thumb will have no problem determining what items are less profitable than beer and wine and making the change … it’s called capitalism. Very nice traffic boosting strategy, Park Cities People!

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 2:16 pm
    Permalink

    AvidReader, You need to explain why the specific passage that offends you is a deliberate lie instead of opinion, cautionary language, or advertising writing, and what the truth or actual fact is making it a lie. A “lie” would be saying “All of the proponents are drunken sots and abuse reptiles”. It is not a lie in a brochure to say “If this law passes, it will do great harm to our community.”. That’s an opinion, or a cautionary statement.

    Also, a picture of what appears to be a girl standing on a bar or something, is not a lie. If someone added, “This is exactly what University Park will look like in five years” it still wouldn’t be a lie. It might be a bad prediction, but it’s not a lie. A lie would be a picture of Attila The Hun and a statement that said he was coming back from the dead to over-run SMU and turn it into a theme park and restaurant serving ancient versions of beer. (It’s a lie only because it’s impossible.)

    “We have the best wings in town” may or may not be a fact. But, it’s an opinion in advertising. A lie would be, “We have the only wings in town made from magic chickens”.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 2:23 pm
    Permalink

    Buddy, You might be surprised!

    The Beard, I’m not here as a favor to anyone, any more than you are. I represent only my own opinions.

    If you don’t like Mayor Davis, or have questions about what he did or not do during the campaign, why not simply ask him. He’s certainly a better source than this newspaper.

    I have friends in both camps. I simply believed the propositions passing wouldn’t make U.P. a better place, and could present additional potential harm for our children.

    Those with another viewpoint prevailed, I’ve been assured I have nothing to worry about, and the ball is their court. Works fine for me.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 2:43 pm
    Permalink

    @Merritt, You are my secret crush, but I’m taken.

    @N.F., I threw out the “lie” comment to combat your ridiculous repeated generalizations that the Pro side broke all kinds of laws to just show that anyone can throw out comments randomly. I will agree with you that nothing in there is technically a “lie”. I will stand by the fact that most of the mailer was intentionally misleading and overtly full of generic scare tactic techniques. Your response is devoid of any comment on my uber takedown (that’s right I gave myself props) of your premise that nothing was misleading, but thank you for an extended report on how advertisers and politicians get away with not telling the truth but not fully lying.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 2:43 pm
    Permalink

    PurdueResident, Since I do most of the grocery shopping for my family, I’m in the U.P. Tom Thumbs quite a bit. They already don’t have room for the routine things people want, and they are constantly out of things. Thanks for the lesson in capitalism, but I know a lot more that topic than you do. Trust me on that.

    The Tom Thumbs have every right to turn half their stores into wine and beer sections if they wish. That’s free enterprise. People like me who need to buy other things will simply vote with out feet and go to the big Tom Thumb across from NorthPark, or Albertson’s on Mockingbird, which has a much better selection to begin with.

    The new Tom Thumb at Inwood Road and University will be a great store. I met the new manager the other day, and I think it will be a great asset to our area of town. It will also carry a much larger selection of beer and wine than the old Simon David, or either of the Tom Thumbs in U.P. will ever be able to offer.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 3:09 pm
    Permalink

    @N.F. Have you considered practicing what you preach – reaching out to Max Fuqua for his opinion in person just as you’ve suggested ad nauseaum for others to reach out to the Honorable Dick Davis? You may also consider taking your battle to President Turner and SMU to find ways to fight substance abuse on campus. From your passion, I sincerely believe you could do a service to the University. Something tells me, however, that you’re not brave enough to stand up and deliver when you’re unveiled.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 4:02 pm
    Permalink

    I’m with you @PurdueResident, just when I thought this guy couldn’t get any more absurd he writes a big, fat, inane paragraph about the Tom Thumb’s aisles being too narrow SO WE’RE ALL SCREWED BECAUSE OF THE BOOZE.
    @N.F. I don’t think I’m alone in finding your particular way of nattering on completely repugnant. Are you perhaps a student doing a paper on being an internet troll?

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 4:41 pm
    Permalink

    NF: The definition in the dictionary of a lie is: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
    Therefore if you show a picture of a girl standing by a bar (as in your example) and say “This is excatly what UP will look like in 5 years”. It is a lie. You are intending to deceive your audience.
    Just remember, it’s not all about facts. Your intent has a lot to do with lieing. And we know the intent was to scare people.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 9:33 pm
    Permalink

    AvidReader, I studied advertising, among other things, in college and graduate school. You also learn those things about “careful” wording in law school. I can explain why advertisers get away with certain things. I’m as amazed as anyone else at what some politicians get away with. I’m shocked at what lawyers get away with.

    All of the Texas law violations I cited about the Pro side were absolutely true and accurate. I looked at the reports filed by both sides with Dallas County, and there’s no question the Pro side violated all kinds of laws. (The Anti side violated none. You wouldn’t know that about both reading Park Cities People. )

    I wasn’t aware your uber had been taken down. I hope it’s better.

    If those on the Anti side honestly thought what they said was possible, even though it was a worst-case premise, then I don’t think it was misleading. It certainly wasn’t a lie. But, it’s difficult to imagine people like Dick Davis and Roy Coffee intentionally lying about something.

    I’m also just discovering some misleading information out of the Pro side. So, I wouldn’t point that finger just yet.

    I’m trying to get hold of the pictures of Lubbock that were shot by an amateur photographer to see if there really are neon lights, etc.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 9:46 pm
    Permalink

    Coty, You’re a funny guy. Exchanging posts with you is like having a conversation with Inspector Jacques Clouseau, but without the snappy fake French accent. But, there is no mistaken that wonderful sense of being right in the face of generally being wrong. But, you really are an enjoyable person.

    It’s up to Max Fuqua to reach out; not me. He doesn’t have to reach out to me; that’s not necessary. I don’t represent anything; he represents the Pro side that won. He represents the merchants, and what happens about alcohol is in their hands. I think the reaching out needs to be done with the Mayor and with the leadership of the community.

    For myself, I’ve congratulated those who prevailed, and said I hope they were correct about what would NOT happen.

    We’ll see if Max Fuqua is man enough to reach out to Dick Davis, the former mayors, and stand up for the Mayor in the face of unfair and extremely ugly things said about him. I doubt he is, but we’ll see.

    On a personal basis, I’m considering becoming more involved with SMU and HPISD on substance abuse matters. But, normally, my time is pretty limited. However, I volunteer a great deal and do what I can.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 9:54 pm
    Permalink

    kmom, I can only imagine that your probation officer on the self-abuse with a Dominican tangerine case does not know you’re using his computer?

    I just got home from the Preston Center Tom Thumb. I asked where they would put the booze. Two of the clerks laughed, and said there was no room. One said she thought it might replace the ice and the cards at the front.

    You’re welcome to your own opinions. But, you don’t know jack about the Tom Thumbs in the Park Cities, or have a totally warped idea of spacial accomodations.

    Either they expand the stores, or they will have to remove items currently being sold. It’s a matter of physics!

    Are you always this rude to people you don’t know, or did I win the louse lottery?

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 10:05 pm
    Permalink

    If I were Nancy Drew and looking for N.F., this is the profile I’d look out for:
    – female
    – married to someone close to the mayor, maybe even someone who wants to be mayor
    – lawyer who gave up career for her family
    – children older than elementary age
    – gregarious with strong opinions

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 10:29 pm
    Permalink

    Another Mother, I believe the Anti side presented a range of consequences they believed could happen if the two propositions passed. At one end of that range were things that would certainly happen; at the other end, worst-case consequences that COULD possibly happen. In my opinion, neither end of that scale was impossible.

    Lubbock, Texas, went wet, and Lubbock and Tech now have all kinds of bars and clubs and sleazy places to deal with. The Anti side, here, didn’t want University Park to go through that same thing. Can you blame them?

    I sincerely do not believe there was an attempt to be deceitful. I was serious when I asked another poster to point out any “lies” , and I would see if I could determine why the Anti said what it said.

    It’s also no small matter that the Pro side violated several Texas laws, but the Anti side violated none. The Pro side also misrepresented through its paid outside agents, many of them unable to speak reasonable English, what the petitions were all about.

    To be honest with you, I wouldn’t turn back the clock to the wet/dry days for anything. But, I have real concerns going forward what the impact will be on under aged drinking, and the proliferation of places in our community serving alcohol.

    Reply
  • November 5, 2010 at 11:14 pm
    Permalink

    Sharpay, You’re scary! But, “Nancy Drew”? Give yourself more credit.

    Great musical, by the way. Surely you don’t take after that character in EVERY way.

    If you’re talking about the dogs, spelled a little differently, great watch dogs and the definition of loyalty.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 8:06 am
    Permalink

    NF. Please stop defending the mailer. It was deceptive and a scare tactic that backfired. The passion that your are hearing in these blogs reflects that. No amount of words will change that. Davis and Coffee insulted people intelligence by distributing it and unfortunately hurt their leadership role in the community. I pointed out in my previously produced email to the mayor 2 statements in the mailer as objectively untrue. But for now let’s just assume that the mailer contained things that were not technically lies and just contained things that if you took the wildest scenarios could possibly be true. You could still say at a minimum that the mailer deceptive and not based in practical reality. You could also say that the people that produced it were not forthcoming with what they believed to be the truth if the props past. If they did believe it, they would be selling their houses right now because of all the disastrous consequences.

    To your credit, you have not accused the pro prop side of telling lies or being deceptive. You instead just call things the pro side did as illegal. But what were those illegalities? They are things like a sign should have contained a warning that it shouldn’t be place on the highway. The pro side was a grass roots campaign done by non professionals–of course their is going to be minor unintentional crap like that.

    What’s worse? I believe that most reasonable people would conclude that an intentional attempt to mislead them as to what the probable results of the passage of the props would be is worse. If the anti side gets vindictive you will only be further damaging Mayor Davis regardless of where it comes from. Nobody will work with him if he continues to be viewed with disdain by a significant number of citizens.

    It’s time to move on. Hope you guys accept the olive branch which means we can all move on. If you guys decide not to, the bitterness will last for a long time against Davis and Coffee, instead of fading.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 9:44 am
    Permalink

    Well, well, well, it turns out the picture of Lubbock posted by Merritt Patterson was intentionally misleading for sure. It also turns out that she and PCP owe Dick Davis an apology (not just some cheesy retraction buried on the 8th page by the sleepers). He won’t get it, but that’s hardly the point.

    The campaign artist, following normal practices, doesn’t release unpublished artwork (such as groupings of photographs for brochures). But, here in one place are the original photographs of bars, clubs, and probably a dive or two in Lubbock and near Texas Tech University that he originally had to use. I’m told they were shot by some innocent, unsuspecting, and uninvolved amateur photog as a favor to someone in the campaign.

    As soon as I get his permission, I’ll post the URL.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 10:00 am
    Permalink

    Sharpay, I think I love you…..

    N.F., I must’ve be driving blind…and, on my cell phone..when I’ve been in Lubbock a couple of times this year and I don’t recall seeing all the neon, glamour and glitz. That’s not to say it’s not there, but like many campuses, it has restaurants and other retail establishments across the street.

    BTW, Sharpay, I think N.F.’s profile may also include being one of the many Longhorn “faithful” in the PC that is so disgruntled right now, they’re turning to other modes of entertainment since Mack’s boys are playing worse than the Aggies (used to be the Bears).

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 10:17 am
    Permalink

    Morning Buddy! Thought about that campaign again?

    On the mailers, everybody has an opinion, and I respect most of those opinions. I stop short when people who are normally of good will and nice folks start accusing other good people of being evil, deceitful, etc. That’s generally not the case, and I try to stand up for people wrongfully accused – especially when I know better.

    When (and if) you see the picture of Lubbock, I think you’ll find that their fears of what MIGHT happen are not far-fetched. All kinds of clubs, lounges, and “dives” has popped up out there since alcohol became so popular.

    The laws broken by the Pro side go far beyond sign disclaimers. I detailed the ones I knew about and/or found on my own somewhere on this site. But, they include hiding the source of money, concealing expenditures, raising and spending money without filing a treasrurer first, not filing a PAC when required, expenditures that some would find questionable, failing to file statutory reports, etc.

    You also did not run a “grassroots campaign”. Taking thousands of dollars from outside corporate special interests is NOT a grassroots campaign. Your side did send out a flyer that distorted the American flag on one side, and pimped it out pushing alcohol on the other. That’s no less advertising than what the Anti side did (except the Anti side wouldn’t deface an American flag). (Most of us think of grassroots as being very different than what was done. But, I’ll leave that up to the experts.)

    Frankly, the Pro side didn’t need much of a campaign. I think people were so glad to get rid of the wet/dry areas that the election was decided well before it was even called.

    If I opened a restaurant, I would be expected to follow the law and not serve food and drink until I had all of my permits and had followed local, county, and state laws that applied to my business. Operating a PAC is no different.

    I haven’t seen any olive branches, and I don’t need any. They need to be extended to people like Roy Coffee and Dick Davis (and a few others). I’m also not angry at any merchants for trying to increase their profits. That’s the very point of business; profit maximization. I WANT you to be a millionaire (and to pay many CPAs trying to keep it!). Creates jobs.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 10:21 am
    Permalink

    Buddy, sorry about the spelling and English errors. Multi-tasking on two keyboards without enough coffee is not for the faint of heart.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 10:25 am
    Permalink

    NF. For gosh sakes. The man was told they were not Lubbock by me. He was sent proof they were not Lubbock by me. Yet he continued after that to maintain that they were Lubbock. Are you sure you don’t want to drop this and move on? We are willing but you have to show willingness.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 12:02 pm
    Permalink

    Buddy, This newspaper, for which I have lost huge respect, and a few people I do respect, are under the impression that Dick Davis lied or is some kind of moron for not knowing the final pictures on the mailer/brochure they sent out were pictures including Memphis. (Not all were Memphis, I just learned.)

    Dick Davis was told by the campaign the pictures would be of Lubbock and near Texas Tech, and for reasons already discussed. The pictures were shot and made available to the campaign, and the Mayor was apparently aware the artist was working on them. The first composite photo matched with the copy was exclusively of Lubbock.

    Dick Davis was, I’m told, not told the pictures would be swapped for generic pictures available on the Web to show sensitivity to Raider fans in U.P. Not knowing the pictures had been swamped, and likely not an expert on Memphis (or other drinking spots), Mayor Davis repeated was he was understood the case to be.

    Then Merritt Patterson got into the act, and things went further to the gates of Hell of wrongly accusing Davis of being some kind of moron or liar – both untrue.

    I’ve seen the pictures, and I’ve asked permission from the photographer to make the URL available. There before God and Man are the pictures, and the date stamp Oct. 13, 2010.

    I don’t expect anybody to do anything. I especially don’t expect the paper to do anything, as sad as that is. (When you can’t trust a paper to be honest, fair, and balanced, it becomes the first step in caring less what it prints and claims to be news and whether it survives or not.)

    Anyway, I’m waiting to hear from the photographer to get permission to release the URL.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 12:11 pm
    Permalink

    NF You seem like a nice guy, but you are a bit of a hopeless case. When I was a young boy and I wanted something to be true so much that I refused to believe the real truth, my mom would sing a line from an old Sinatra song, “Fairy tales can come true–they can happen to you.”

    Frank Sinatra–Young at Heart

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 12:52 pm
    Permalink

    I agree with N.F. Mayor Davis did not lie. He just didn’t know.

    Which is what you get when you’re appointed to be Mayor by some archaic political machine called a community leagues (sounds like something on Saturday morning cartoons).

    Yes, he’s accomplished, sincere and kind. Yes, he’s been involved and active with the community and the city council and other committees selflessly volunteering of his time. Yes, experience usually trumps inexperience.

    But, the last time I checked, we’re in a democracy and I’d be thrilled to see an election where the community league candidates and the likes of Steve Cook, Steve Metzger (candidates earlier this year), Max Fuqua, Buddy and others were judged on ideas, experience, merit, etc.

    It seems the City’s “Arbor” placed extra weight on the fact that someone has lived here for “67 years” versus “less than 10.” What does that really matter? Come on. Just ’cause you grew up here, went to SMU and are third generation doesn’t carry much weight versus others who have lived here for five years and want to see their community continue to be a desireable place to live and raise a family. I think it would even be more fun with an occasional tree house in the front yard, or God forbid a basketball goal within sight. The elder statesmen continue to rob a potentially wonderful environment of children having fun in front yards in the name of “property values.”

    Gone are the days of the community league, political machines and deception. The next election will see a Mayor, yes a Mayor, chosen by the populus and not by the community league. And, he or she will be under 45.

    Wow, I feel like I veered far off tangent….until I realized that Mayor Davis is out of touch with the masses. Remember, our AVERAGE AGE in UP is YOUNGER than Southlake.

    Let the moms and dads of school-aged children involve themselves – even though we’re busy as can be with life – and not let the slated candidates dictate our future. Lest, we become them in 30-40 years and the cycle continues.

    BTW, N.F. I do love your spirit. You’re like a pit bull on a lamb chop.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 1:13 pm
    Permalink

    N.F. If there are indeed legal issues you should file a formal complaint – providing detailed descriptions of the violations. If you’re not willing to do that then pack your bags and leave this discussion. You’re full of as much voracity and accuracy as Mayor Davis’ flyer.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 4:32 pm
    Permalink

    The Beard, I feel it’s up to the campaign to file a complaint, not me. It’s a matter of violating Texas law. As far as veracity goes, if you really care about what happened, take a few moments to drive down to the County Elections Department and get a copy of the reports yourself. Don’t take my word for it.

    None of that changes the fact that Dick Davis didn’t lie to anyone where the subject of the Lubbock pictures are concerned, and I’ll decide for myself when to enter or leave any discussion.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 4:50 pm
    Permalink

    Coty, I appreciate your having the integrity to speak up about Mayor Davis.

    University Park and Highland Park have rather unique election processes, and are both Council-Manager cities. So, the city council acts more like a Board of Directors, with the operational authority vested in the City Manager.

    It’s certainly possible that individuals not endorsed by the Community League could be elected. But, I think it would be very difficult to pull off. For the most part, the citizens of U.P. like the way their government runs, and U.P. IS one of the best places to live in the country.

    As long as property values are stable and stay up, as long as public service response is virtually instantaneous, as long as garbage collection and brush collection are efficient and timely, and as long as taxes are reasonable, the population stays pretty satisfied and happy.

    According to something I just read a few days ago, the commercial sector of the city is less than 5% in land, and I would think even a smaller percentage of U.P. citizens own commercial property or operate businesses and live here.

    I don’t know about a mayor under 45. I suppose that’s possible. Around here, that’s pretty young in terms of mayors. But, it would also be really expensive.

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 6:12 pm
    Permalink

    N.F., why is Max Fuqua, who has remained largely silent on here since the election, required to apologize to Dick Davis or the former mayors for anything? That is just stupid.

    Also, do the mayors know you’re on here “defending” their reputations? Because you’re doing a terrible job. You claim to be close to the mayor (my hypothesis is that you live in his house), but don’t you realize that with every additional post, you’re making him look like he associates with whackjobs and cranks? You’re killing his reputation. Seriously, I haven’t seen this much verbiage from one commenter on a D Empire blog since Sandra Crenshaw went off her meds.

    If the mayors have been so grievously wronged, why have they sent out a flailing crank to defend them instead of defending themselves? Anyone can comment here as long as they follow PCP’s rules, including Davis and the former mayors. If they want to defend themselves from comments made here, they should come here and do it. (Whether people that old can successfully operate a computer is entirely another question.)

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 7:12 pm
    Permalink

    Here is a screen shot of the pictures shot by an amateur photographer of bars, lounges, clubs, “dives”, etc., in Lubbock and around Texas Tech, intended for use in the first brochure put out by the Anti side. I’m told there were a number of photographs, but these make the case:

    http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa419/NFL-AWFOTOLL-C/LubbockBarPix10_13SrnShot2.jpg

    The photographer is still thinking over whether to release all of the photographs, publicly, which would include releasing his name. But, these do the job.

    Enough said!

    Reply
  • November 6, 2010 at 9:27 pm
    Permalink

    Finally, and most importantly, this is a copy of the fax and emails Dick Davis sent to PCP and Merritt Patterson on Wednesday, October 27, 2010, in advance of last week’s paper being printed and/or distributed, and in advance of Merritt Patterson’s piece falsely accusing Dick Davis, obviously attempting to make him look dishonest and/or foolish. She and the paper were informed of the truth; and they apparently ignored it.

    It is already known that PCP knowingly printed on its front page as news a story beyond totally false, malicious, and incorrect against the Anti side of the campaign. That’s already been discussed and proved. But, this fax also demonstrates other information generated or written in the paper or on the Web by the PCP and/or Merritt Patterson was known to be false and misleading and demonstrably untrue.

    It is up to Dick Davis whether he wants to accept a cheesy Page Eight weak excuse for an apology disguised as an explanatory retraction. But, intelligent readers of the paper will not buy that for a minute should they ever find it where it was hidden.

    In my view, PCP has previously enjoyed a good reputation in the Park Cities community. Thanks to Reid Slaughter’s genius, and Wick Allison’s excellent instincts and enterprise, we are most fortunate to have two local newspapers in a day when good print journalism is a victim of the economy and the Internet. Sacrificing that reputation to suck up advertising from U.P. merchants, which appears to be what is happening, and at the expense of both the truth and fairly balanced reporting, is beyond sad and “regrettable”. Trust me on that!

    Here’s the URL of the fax:

    http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa419/NFL-AWFOTOLL-C/DavisFaxToMerrittP10_27_10_01.jpg

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:14 am
    Permalink

    Neal, Speaking of meds, did you forget to renew your own? You ask me a question and then launch into some strange verbal dementia about my living with Dick Davis and commenting too much to suit you (which just breaks me up, by the way – but I’ll try to get over it).

    Nobody sent me here to do anything. I have less been defending Dick Davis than I have been critizing PCP for its outrageously unprofessional journalistic conduct, and getting the record straight about why they were wrong about Davis. (That just scratches the surface.)

    You also have a reading comprehension problem. I haven’t claimed to be close to Dick Davis. But, I guess it’s necessary for you to make stuff up when you need new material.

    Max Fuqua has not been silent since the campaign. He’s just been posting under his other posting personalities. But, I’ll bet you knew that.

    I can’t imagine why Dick Davis or any of the mayors would want to comment here. But, your stupid and rude comment about their age leads me to wonder about yours, as well as other things.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 2:34 am
    Permalink

    Neal, I was just funnin’ ya about your meds. Since you’re a hall monitor or something around here, and know just how much everybody has posted back to Sandra Crenshaw days, and who’s posting too much or too little, I’ll bet you pop your pills right on time, and even have auto-reordering so you never run out.

    I guess I should be grateful that there’s somebody here that takes the time to critique posts by others, knows who is and isn’t posting and when, and keeps up with where everybody hangs out.

    Do you have a special Hall Monitor chair, and one of those white belts hanging from your shoulder, and a pith helmet and stuff?

    You really are a funny guy. So, I don’t want to give you a hard time. It’s just that I get this mental image of Inspector Clouseau in a crossing guard uniform when I think about your monitoring who posts when and how much.

    Don’t forget to set your clocks back so you won’t get off schedule on your pills.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 9:24 am
    Permalink

    N.F. Once again you prove how asinine you are. You made the comment a few minutes ago about the makeup of the Park Cities being only 5% commercial and high property values – very unique and NOTHING like Lubbock. That was at the heart of so much of the rancor over that silly flyer. A lot more than a wet-dry election would have to happen before that had even a remote possibility of becoming a reality.

    A more plausible result would be that Snyder Plaza might look a lot more like HP Village. That’s assuming that our protectors (the Community League) let Chase be redeveloped.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 9:46 am
    Permalink

    N.F., thanks for the pictures. It looks much more tame and mild than Snider Plaza. I guess you said it best in a reply to me previously, “enough said.”

    BTW, thanks for the URL to the community league. I happen to know it quite well.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 10:49 am
    Permalink

    N.F., I’m EXACTLY like Sharpay – tall and blonde and I have a brother. But I married the nicd the cute guy with great hair and

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 11:05 am
    Permalink

    conspicuous consumption is not my style. The Sharpay moniker was bestowed on me by my now-middle school-aged daughter when the first HSM was a hit. I’ve thought of changing it several times but haven’t found another that fit, and “thebloggerformerlyknownasSharpay” is too long.

    Nancy Drew was a favorite childhood book series and current favorite of my younger daughter. I still admire how cool-headed, logical and polite Nancy Drew is. She would analyze issues, was not detoured by misleading information and avoid jumping to conclusions, much like many in our voting community.

    I agree with Coty, you are tenacious. And you’re certainly loyal.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 11:11 am
    Permalink

    Grammar police, please excuse the typos. I’m typing with one hand, the other is holding a sleeping feverish preschooler.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 11:40 am
    Permalink

    The Beard, As I understood the argument to be from the campaign, U.P.’s going wet could generate and create the same kinds of bars, clubs, and lounges that have sprung up around Lubbock and Texas Tech. That’s a rational concern for the welfare of students, property values, and taxes for public safety.

    We have a symbiotic relationship with SMU. In this discussion, what is particularly important is that U.P. remain a place where parents feel their children are safe. (Most of the students are more interested in Greenville Ave. Go figure.)

    But, they generate a large amount of business and sales in U.P., and our community is extremely supportive of the school. That includes doing what we can to keep students safe at the school and in the neighborhood.

    As nice as it might be, I don’t imagine Snider Plaza will ever look anything like H.P. Village. For Snider Plaza to go that far up-scale in appearance or products and services, the rents would have to be much higher, and the costs of renovations would be a fortune. The parking is horrible much of the day and early evening, and the economy isn’t good for those kinds of changes now, or quite some time into the future.

    I’m all for anything that can be done to resolve the Chase Bank building mess.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 12:00 pm
    Permalink

    Coty, You can see why the pictures, at those distances and times, weren’t ideally suitable for making their point. I agree they look almost tranquil, even with the neon lights.

    With the signs and neon blown up, and aggregated into a montage in some fashion, they could probably look not dissimilar to the pictures that were used, assuming much much higher resolution. But, at least they clear Dick Davis of the inference he was lying or some kind of mental midget for thinking Memphis at night and Lubbock by day look similar.

    (Actually, Lubbock at night is more like Memphis than University Park; just smaller. They do have some pretty undesirable bars in the place and around the school.)

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 12:46 pm
    Permalink

    @NF,
    I’ve never received a fax (or e-mail) from Dick Davis.

    And why do you have access to the mayor’s files?

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:01 pm
    Permalink

    Merritt Patterson, I don’t have access to the Mayor’s files. I was told about the fax; I asked for a copy of it. As I understand, it was both faxed and emailed.

    Might I assume not receiving it means you also knew nothing at all about it?

    If that’s the case, I’ll take you at your word. But, I’m surprised someone can send a fax and email from the Mayor of University Park to the paper and they simply vanish into thin air. (I haven’t seen it, but I’m told the fax verification receipt shows it was sent and delivered.)

    I appreciate your letting me know.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:10 pm
    Permalink

    N.F. What are you smoking? Your Lubbock pictures look nothing, and I mean nothing like the Beale Street pictures used in the mailer. It’s not hard to guess why the opposition didn’t use them–they were not scary enough. There is no way that anybody could confuse the Lubbock pics and the Beale Street pics–wasn’t that Merritt’s point?

    Now why can’t you get this?

    Oct 24, 11:35am: I sent the Mayor an email criticizing the use of the pictures in the email.

    Oct 25, 10:20am: The Mayor sent an email back to me claiming that pictures were Lubbock.

    Oct 25, 3:03pm: I sent an email back to the Mayor providing him evidence that they were not Lubbock, and further, proving that it was Beale Street in Memphis.

    Oct 27, morning (according to his letter): He continues to insist to Merritt that the pics are Lubbock.

    Oct 27, after she spoke to the Mayor: Merritt starts the blog.

    You can continue to write your nonsense all you want and point all the fingers you want at other people–BUT, THAT WAS THE CHRONOLOGY AND IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION.

    Why the Mayor denied it, I have no earthly idea. But nothing that you or the Mayor have written has even touched on that. Frankly, the letter that the Mayor wrote after that makes him look worse on this point. You have absolutely no footing to criticize Merritt on this.

    Now I would like to stop speaking on this subject, but I do feel the need to correct you on this point, because the chronology is a fact–not my view, your view or Merritt’s view.

    Give it a rest forever and let’s move on.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:21 pm
    Permalink

    Sharpay, Sorry about the little one. Hope he/she is better soon.

    The first letters of your name, “Sharp”, certainly accurately portray you. I thought you were an FBI profiler or something (in a good way).

    Great dogs; tenacious, protective, loyal, long on personality.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:29 pm
    Permalink

    Good point. Why does NF have access to the Mayor’s files?

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:47 pm
    Permalink

    Buddy, As I’ve said many times before, I have good friends in both camps. I don’t have access to any of the Mayor’s files. As I told Merritt, I knew about the fax, have a copy of it, and thought it did a good job of explaining why Dick Davis didn’t know the pictures were not of Lubbock. After all, PCP made him look pretty foolish, and for no good reason that I can determine.

    If Merritt never saw the fax or email, and knew nothing about them, then I take her at her word, and it could have been nothing more than a communication misfire.

    Actually, believe it or not, I’m glad that possibly is the case in this particular instance.

    I still can’t figure out why you told Dick Davis the pictures were not of Lubbock, and he continued to think they were. But, since he was originally told by the campaign they would be of Lubbock, I can understand his believing that.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 1:52 pm
    Permalink

    @N.F. —

    These photos that you posted are don’t reveal much other than to confirm that the Memphis photo from Dick’s mailer looks nothing like Lubbock and absolutely nothing like University Park could ever look. I do note that one of the “dives” that the photos suggest have infiltrated Lubbock is a joint called Bar PM. A quick check of public TABC records notes that Bar PM has had its TABC license since March 2006. The Lubbock Wet-Dry election was in 2009. So I ask again, why does the Wet-Dry election in University Park have anything to do with a bar that existed in Lubbock before it went wet?

    Also, you’re so scared of neon. I’m not a lawyer, but aren’t neon signs something that has and will be fully subject to city zoning laws?

    http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/PublicInquiry/Status.aspx
    License #: MB623138
    Trade Name: SPORTS GRILL AND BAR PM
    Owner: J.PAT’S IRISH PUB & GRILL INC.
    Location Address: 1211 UNIVERSITY, LUBBOCK , TX 794012991
    Mailing Address: 1211 UNIVERSITY LUBBOCK , TX 794012991
    County: LUBBOCK
    Orig. Issue Date: 3/24/2006
    Status: Current
    Exp. Date: 3/23/2011
    Wine Percent:
    Location Phone No.: 8067472720
    Subordinates: LB
    Related To:

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 2:13 pm
    Permalink

    Buddy, If you took the Lubbock pictures I posted, and some others I didn’t bother to post, blow them up (zoom in) to clearly see the neon signs and the words “bar”, “club”, or whatever, and put them together in a montage, the resulting picture would look very much like the one used in the brochure (of course, without the girl standing on a bar). Obviously, even to me, the problem was that the pictures were not good resolution, not enough pixels, not shot close-up enough to stand much zooming, and I’m told by one of my children that they needed a lot of color correction.

    Soooooooo, with a good artist at work, they would look very similar. The problem was that the campaign changed it mind about using Tech and Lubbock to make the point, and the artist didn’t like the resolution on the pictures.

    I am without explanation about your phone call to the Mayor. I don’t believe it’s entirely reasonable to expect him to know the difference between Memphis bar signs and Lubbock bar signs, and I don’t think he would intentionally lie. I also don’t believe for a minute that you’d intentionally lie. So, I guess this one remains a mystery.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 8:53 pm
    Permalink

    P.R., The Lubbock story is one that apparently has mixed results and reactions, depending on who you talk to. I’ve gone to Lubbock for meetings at CapRock, and to the Tech Texas Wine Marketing (Research) Institute, and some people have more visceral reactions to places serving alcohol than others. Apparently, when the city went wet, a lot of the sleaze places just out of town (where it was already wet) went out of business because new sleaze places decided to sell alcohol in town. Texas Tech, says privately, that they’d ban everything but wine and beer if they could. (I can’t explain it; just heard it.)

    But, you can talk to almost any Texas university, and they’ll tell you substance abuse is one of their biggest problems. We just can’t pretend it’s no big deal.

    On the topic of neon; don’t get me started!!! I have friends who believe neon signs are of the Devil, and others who don’t mind them as far as they are “tasteful” – whatever that is.

    I don’t so much mind the signs as what goes on inside. But, you bring up an extremely good point. While I’m not afraid of neon signs, I don’t want them lighting Hillcrest or Snider Plaza or Lovers Lane at night. But, when you’re from out of town and don’t already know what buildings house which places to eat and drink, neon signs can certainly be your friend.

    Drive through New England some time, and go through the towns with the sign ordinances that say no neon, nothing but white lights, no logos (only letters), and nothing over 30″ tall at the eve of the roof line. You can’t find a thing from the highway unless you’ve lived there since 1776!

    When it comes to signage, I probably lean too much toward the merchants and restaurants. If you think getting rid of private clubs in restaurants was a little challenging, you should suggest chains be allowed to put their logos in their trademark colors on tastefully-sized signs in some cities.

    That said, you can find a lot of city planners who will swear that commercial areas of a town can either support or detract from the overall ambiance of neighborhoods they serve – ala Highland Park Shopping Village.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 10:57 pm
    Permalink

    P.R., On the issue of the bar you cited, thank you for making one of my points for me. It turns out that 1211 UNIVERSITY LUBBOCK , TX 794012991 is immediately across the street from Texas Tech, and just one of many on “strips” that are growing in that area.

    This is the very concern that SMU and many in University Park share. So, while I certainly wasn’t involved in looking at Lubbock as an example, it does make the point – which remains the only reason the pictures I posted are important.

    Don’t get off in the tall weeds comparing the composite picture in the brochure with what was shot by an amateur photographer. I expect the final product would have been not too dissimilar in tone.

    I’m not your best witness on this, but I’d say the neon signs in the pictures are more symbolic than statements of the evils of neon signs.

    Reply
  • November 7, 2010 at 11:02 pm
    Permalink

    Seriously, why do you people continue to debate him on this? Or anything, for that matter. Are you masochists? Do you like banging your head against walls? I’m starting to get more worried about you than him.

    Reply
  • November 8, 2010 at 12:04 am
    Permalink

    Fair enough N.F. or T. I’m dropping the whole business and moving forward. Come have a marg with me. I’m buying!

    Reply
  • November 8, 2010 at 11:11 am
    Permalink

    D you have shamed me and I’m quitting. NF (aka T), take me up on the marg–I think I’ll know you by site!

    Reply
  • November 8, 2010 at 11:52 am
    Permalink

    Also fair enough! I turn the page with this thought on the debate as inspired by William F. Buckley: “I am satisfied to sit back and contemplate my own former eloquence!”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.