Ah, dear dear Jonetta. It’s always good to hear from such a voice of reason.
Can you please explain the phrase “between a tree and a confirmation vote”?
Idioms aside, I didn’t think you hated dogs until you brought it up. You’ve been in politics for a long time, so I’m sure you are aware that when someone says, “For the record: I don’t hate…” they doth protest too much.
Could you please provide some support for your contention that dog owners who want dog parks are lazy? My wife and I walk our dog 1.6 miles twice a day. (I checked the numbers on Google Maps. I like to get my facts straight when I’m arguing with reasonable people.) When we take him to the dog park, it’s halfway through his walk. It’s not a substitute for his walk.
The move to establish dog parks is a responsible move by DPR. It’s the law, for one thing. In your article, you say “Acting DPR Director Clark Ray says he’s trying to implement a 2005 law passed by the D.C. Council. But…”
With your long experience in the political world, you know that “He says” is snotty political language for “and he’s a liar.” Well, the law’s on the books, Jonetta. There are no buts about Director Ray’s actions. You have a beef with the law, so argue about the law.
In fact, I’m impressed with the number of political judo chops you’ve put into such a short article. You even go so far as to cite unnamed “dog walking companies” as if big corporate bad men were behind this law.
Do you think the first round of dog park laws was reasonable? Or are you, like the fellow mentioned in the previous post, just against the idea in any form? If you think they were reasonable, tell me this: are there any rats within five blocks of your house? Is there a single spot in this city where you can stand balanced on one big toe and reasonably ask for a Health Department certification that there are no rats within five blocks of where your toe hits the ground?
The original draft of the laws was designed to prevent dog parks while appearing to comply with the law establishing them. You know this. Any reasonable person can see it.
The current guidelines are parallel to dog park guidelines in other major metropolitan areas. They establish reasonable ground rules yet allow enough flexibility for reasonable neighbors to work out want they want in their neighborhood. You know, using reasonable and civil discussion. So the answer to your question about the triangle parks is this: both. We’re urban dwellers. We’re able to live together because we’re smart, flexible and reasonable.
I agree with you on at least one point: the issue is contentious. We have unreasonable people claiming that dog shit is behind DC’s rat problem and we have unreasonable people claiming Kathy Silva’s sister Madeline Albright is the reason we have a dog park law. So much unreason. So much anger. Wouldn’t it be easier if we complied with the law and established legal places for neighbors to meet and play with their dogs?
It’s hard to pick a favorite political ploy from your article. There are so many old chestnuts of the vicious innuendo school of political writing. Is it a scandal that the chair of the committee is a dog owner? My goodness. Until you told me that, I thought this whole thing was on the up and up, but now I see it’s all a conspiracy.
By the way… are you, as vocal opponent of dog parks, a non-dog owner? Not that there’s anything wrong with that. There is, however, something wrong with having a total lack of empathy for those who are different from you. It’s easy to tell when you’ve lost all empathy. When you start making generalizations about people like saying they’re “too lazy” you should sit down with a priest, a counselor or a therapist and work on your empathy.
Or perhaps you could just come hang out in the dog park for awhile. I’ve made many friends there. Since my dog park isn’t legal, I feel like we’re some sort of cool gang of criminal pals. We don’t have a secret handshake, but you can recognize us by the little poop bags we carry in our pockets.
On second thought, it’s not so hard to choose a favorite from your nasty, cynical little article. It’s the moment in the article when your total lack of self-awareness shines brightest. Standing alone, as one weighty little paragraph, is your assertion that, “It’s all politics.”
You should know, Jonetta, professional political analyst. You’ve been in the game a long time. You’ve picked up the moves and you’re not afraid to show them off.
