The New Year's Eve party at City Centre to celebrate Batavia's centennial has given rise to a new point of contention between the city and the Mall Merchants Association.
While there is a long simmering dispute over who is responsible for a troubled roof and other repairs to the structure, and with a city-filed lawsuit pending over alleged unpaid rents, Mall Director Madeline Bialkwoski says you can now add "trespass" the the association's list of complaints.
Prior to Wednesday's event, Bialkowski sent a letter to City Manager Jason Molino that said as far as the association was concerned, using a portion of the mall concourse for a dance floor and photo studio was never authorized by the association.
"Therefore, we are once again letting you know that you do not have permission to use our insured and leased concoure space for your New Year's Eve Celebration and respectfully request that the City gate remains closed and locked," Bialkowski wrote to Molino.
Reached at his office this afternoon, Molino said, "We own the mall."
Asked if that isn't a bit like a landlord saying "I'm going to use your house for a party," Molino said there's a difference between a residential property and a commercial property. The city owns the space and therefore doesn't need the permission of the merchants to use it.
Bialkowkski said the association's big concern is over its insurance. She said the association's policy, like most mall policies the past few years, forbids the consumption of alcohol in the concourse.
"It voids our insurance," she said. She's concerned, she said, that now that the party has taken place, what the ramifications might be for the association's policy.
Molino said the city had insurance to cover the event.
"We had everything we needed in place," Molino said.
The event included a cash bar in the second floor community room and partygoers were free to carry drinks, if they wished, into the portion of the concourse being used for the party.
Bialkowski thinks the conflict could have been resolved if the organizers had been willing to put up signs and station one or two people in the stairway to ensure drinks were not carried down stairs.
"There justification is that they had insurance," Bialkowski said. "A million dollar policy with an additional insured is nothing in today's atmosphere."
Bialkowski said she first alerted Vibrant Batavia to the potential problem as far back as August and raised concerns then.
Leanna Di Risio, of Vibrant Batavia and a member of the Centennial Committee, wrote a letter to Bialkowski on Nov. 7 outlining celebration plans and requesting the mall association's support of the celebration.
The association's operating committee voted Dec. 4 to deny the committee permission for use of the space. (Dec. 4 is a late date for such a decision, Bialkowski admits, but said the committee couldn't meet in November because of travel and vacations of members).
The city has filed a suit against the merchants claiming the association owes more than $800,000 in back rent for the concourse.
As for the claim of trespass, Molino said, "The mall merchants are just being obstructionists."
Bialkowski said she realizes she could have called the police on the trespass complaint, but felt that would just be unfair to any officer who responded, putting the officer in awkward position.
"No one here wanted to ruin the event," Bialkowski said.
As far as I'm concerned,
As far as I'm concerned, the mall is in perpetual trespass against the city of Batavia.
They are just being stupid.
They are just being stupid. The event had all the necessary insurance. This is just like the issue this group had with Cookies and Cream when they used part of the concourse to put out tables. Sounds like sour grapes for them not being able to control the event.
Two things pop out of the
Two things pop out of the article: #1. While there is a long simmering dispute over who is responsible a troubled roof and other repairs to the structure, and #2. Reached at his office this afternoon, Molino said, "We own the mall."
It would seem that Mr. Molino just resolved the problem of who is responsible.
Good observation, Bea.
Good observation, Bea.
Not a problem that a few
Not a problem that a few bulldozers wouldn't solve.
"City council, tear down
"City council, tear down that mall!"
After all these years of
After all these years of litigation why isn't this all settled?All this back and forth is making a few lawyers rich....
Mark, you are right. But the
Mark, you are right. But the majority on Council refuses to ask the State Comptroller for an independent audit of the all the legal bills. They let Molino audit the legal bills, but he is also the one who hires the attorney.
Batavia's
Batavia's Anthem
http://youtu.be/ApjJK8gxn7o
If the city owns the Mall,
If the city owns the Mall, then they need to step up and honor their "landlord" responsibility. So much of that place has become a disgraceful slum... seemingly the city has become a slum lord.
well if you own the
well if you own the mall.....then fix the roof
"What difference at this
"What difference at this point does it make?"
Oops! Sorry. Probably not the right place for that quote.
Or...is it?
Is Groundhog's Day on
Is Groundhog's Day on Netflix?
The issues of the Mall itself
The issues of the Mall itself and the insurance for the New Year's event are separate. This is just sour grapes from the Mall Association and its manager. They played no part in the event or its planning. Sort of like being on the outside looking in and not liking it.
There was insurance. There is insurance whenever there is an event that uses City property. The parades have to have insurance, Summer in the City and the Picnic in the Park all have to have insurance. The question of insurance was brought up at Council before the event by Councilman Jankowski, and Council was satisfied insurance was in place. The event took place and there were no problems, except now by this group.
The Mall has problems and the City could use a new Manager. Maybe it is time the MOA got a new manager also?
Who obtained a NYS liquor
Who obtained a NYS liquor license to operate a cash bar out of a city office?
It may well be sour grapes
It may well be sour grapes John but it also shows the arrogance of Mr. Molino and the city when dealing with this issue. First of all its been a few years but with commercial leases thing are different as Jason pointed out. But if insurance is required and maintained by the Association, then they have the right to refuse as they are legal owners, any alcohol related incident the City's insurance would cover them as owners and sponsors of the party. However the Assc. could also be sued and their insurance NOT cover anything as their policy explicitly forbids this activity with alcohol consumption.
My question now though is brought up by Bea's observation of the final answer to who OWNS the Mall property. If the same obvious property violations that City Center Mall exhibits now were located in say, the Harvester Center Mall or East Plaza there where Aldis is.....would code enforcement be citing them and fining them or closing them down for not attending to them? It's a fair question and one that the citizens of this City deserve a straight answer to.
I hate walking into that Mall because of the damp musty smell. I also wonder how long before people realize that smell is from mildew and mold. Things get too moldy there could end up being very very expensive lawsuits and remediation as mold's toxicity is VERY well known and documented. We could see the whole building razed over that.
Just a few things to consider... People like Mr. Molino need to be careful about what they say to the press, They get to feeling untouchable and the arrogance sets in. That ends up being their downfall every time.
Just for education... Molds
Just for education...
Molds can be found almost anywhere; they can grow on virtually any
organic substance, as long as moisture and oxygen are present. There are
molds that can grow on wood, paper, carpet, foods, and insulation. When
excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials,
mold growth will often occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains
undiscovered or unaddressed. It is impossible to eliminate all mold and
mold spores in the indoor environment. However, mold growth can be
controlled indoors by controlling moisture indoors.
Molds reproduce by making spores that usually cannot be seen without
magnification. Mold spores waft through the indoor and outdoor air
continually. When mold spores land on a damp spot indoors, they may
begin growing and digesting whatever they are growing on in order to
survive. Molds gradually destroy the things they grow on.
Many types of molds exist. All molds have the potential to cause health
effects. Molds can produce allergens that can trigger allergic reactions or
even asthma attacks in people allergic to mold. Others are known to produce
potent toxins and/or irritants. Potential health concerns are an important
reason to prevent mold growth and to remediate/clean up any existing
indoor mold growth.
Read more at
http://www.epa.gov/mold/pdfs/moldremediation.pdf
Time for the city to spruce
Time for the city to spruce it up,,, lets get some designer buckets to catch the water!!
The mall has been a white
The mall has been a white elephant since it opened. It had structural issues from the get-go and was never fully developed to the extent of the original plan. The perennial squabble between municipal owner and management association is purely symptomatic of larger issues that are less easily remedied than fixing a leaky roof. The success of the mall was always predicated on establishing a customer base that would attract anchor stores- a paradox not dissimilar from the riddle: which came first? ...chicken or egg. Customers don't patronize a mall without attractive shops, and anchor stores don't set up shop in malls without customers. Granted the mall opened with near full occupancy, but the variety of merchandise was comparatively limited; many of the shops were specialty boutiques that didn't generate consistent traffic. Noteworthy are those shops that eventually closed or moved out: Sleght's, Roxie's, etc. Penney's was and remains an abbreviated version of its manifestation in other settings. Customers ask, "how do you get to the second floor?" At one time there were gift and card shops, a book and stationery store, a candy-soda fountain cafe, multiple shoe and jewelry stores, a music shop, clothing stores, a restaurant and an amusement arcade. In the late 70s Penney's threatened to pull out due to available parking spots not meeting minimum level spelled out in their contract. The city scrambled to paint parking stripes on every street within a block of the mall. The original mall plan called for a parking garage that never materialized. During my brief tenure at The Daily News I was assigned to photograph holiday shoppers in the mall (Winter 1976). Three days I went to the mall to no avail. There were people in the mall, but none of them were apparently buying anything. Most were teenagers hanging out in the arcade. The mall remains a "if you build it they will come" fantasy. ...Like locating a tech park in the middle of nowhere. Planners forgot to enlist Kevin Costner and Burt Lancaster. Costner being Wegman's; Lancaster, Macy's.
The city owns the concourse,
The city owns the concourse, the merchants own their individual properties; a model unique to Batavia for good reason. No were else in the entire United States was anybody else foolish enough to use this ridiculous model in commercial real estate development. This whole issue is just sour grapes by the Mall Merchants Association. Let them go into the corner and stomp their feet like the children they are. Just another reason why, with the exception of J.C. Penny's, I won't do business with any other business in the mall.
I was post # 21, and I was
I was post # 21, and I was censored .....
Wait.... There's a mall in
Wait.... There's a mall in Batavia????
You weren't censored. A post
You weren't censored.
A post that contained a personal attack was removed.
I asked someone a
I asked someone a question..... you can call it whatever you want, you can censor all you want, it's your internet newspaper.........
David, I don't post anymore
David, I don't post anymore ('cept this one time) for that very reason. Howard's and my definition of "personal attacks" differ greatly. Case in point: I was degraded and insulted by many regarding my stance on the the Deats story. When I pushed back, some of my posts were deleted and I received an email from Howard that unless I stopped posting what He determines are personal attacks, I would not be allowed to excercise my 1st amendment rights on his site - which will probably happen now anyhow.
And you're right, it's His site.
My guess is that Howard will
My guess is that Howard will consider something a "personal attack" even when asking a simple question, like "are you THAT freaking stupid?" or "were you dropped on your head as a baby, or last week?"
He can be picky that way.
;-)
Government entities may
Government entities may censor. Publications can only edit.
First, as Scott points out,
First, as Scott points out, censorship is an operation of government, not a private business.
Second, a more generous definition of censorship would involve removing comments because we disagreed with the opinion expressed or points raise or facts issued. We have never and never will do that.
David, you didn't merely ask a question. You did in fact phrase it as an insult. That's not allowed.
Bob, people disagreeing with your statement is not degrading you or insulting you. Nobody attacked you for what you posted. Some just found it distressful and said so.
For those who wish to wallow in a cesspool of bile, that's what Facebook is for. Our aim here is have on-point conversations about the issues of the day,
You and Scott are both wrong
You and Scott are both wrong then because the definition of censorship is this....
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.
Now I realize that personal attacks are part of your forum rules, but the these rules are still censorship. Personal attacks are very widely defined, and sometimes sarcasm is mistaken as personal attack here, as is some gallows humor.
A personal attack is defined as... personal attack (plural personal attacks)
Making of an abusive remark on or relating to one's person instead of providing evidence when examining another person's claims or comments
So offering to purchase bedsheets for a child abuser is NOT a personal attack just very bad humor or sarcasm. By your own words you removed Bob's postings about buying bedsheets for a person imprisoned on a charge of harming a child were distasteful to people, therefore removed. Thats censorship.
If you want an open forum go
If you want an open forum go to facebook page as he suggests. I don't know how the advertisers will feel about driving traffic to another site though.
Your point is correct. The
Your point is correct. The quote from Mr. Molino: Reached at his office this afternoon, Molino said, "We own the mall." says is all. Now that he has admitted to the city owning the mall, the city council has no choice but to FIX the mall problems.
If the council refuses to make the needed repairs, then they should do the right thing and buy out the mall merchants and tear the mall down. This eye sore has been giving everyone grief for much to long.
The only people that will benefit from the lawsuits brought by the mall merchants on the city and the counter suit by the city to the mall merchants are the attorneys involved. Take the money in legal fees and either repair the mall or make the final decision and tear it down so new development that is beneficial to Batavia can happen.
Alvin, you are aware that The
Alvin, you are aware that The Batavian has a page on Facebook? https://www.facebook.com/thebatavian
Less ads are seen if people
Less ads are seen if people click on articles through facebook, read them, then bounce back to facebook to comment. On this site you scroll past all the ads as you read each post.
You can't read the whole
You can't read the whole story on Facebook.
Facebook is a frienemy. It drives a lot of traffic to the site. It also detracts from traffic. It's probably a wash.
I stand by my original statement, Kyle.
Who obtained a NYS liquor
Who obtained a NYS liquor license to operate a cash bar out of a city office?
Who obtained a NYS liquor
Who obtained a NYS liquor license to operate a cash bar out of a city office? Why is it so hard to get an answer to this question. Everybody knows if you sell alcohol in New York, you need the blessing of the NYS Liquor Authority...So, who had it??
You can stand by your
You can stand by your statement all you want Howard. The fact is you censored Bob's post. As for what David posted I didn't see it so cant comment on that one.
But you and Scott are dead wrong in the statement that Gov't is the only entity that can censor things. Because it just isn't true.
Here are some examples...
the media censors ideas is by using certain words or phrases to form people's opinions FOR THEM, without having to provide any proof whatsoever. Examples could include:
"Obviously, anyone who doesn't believe what the media tells them is just one of those crazy conspiracy theory nuts."
or
"If you don't support Obama, it proves you are a racist."
or
"Any idiot knows that something like that could never happen."
How about other examples?
Media Censorship:
Ron Paul, during his campaign, took time out to go to Congress and put in legislation to counteract the NDAA that had just been passed allowing black-bagging of Americans. Media portrayed that he was too old and was taking a break, along with the false image presentation that Ron Paul has never put forth any worthwhile legislation to congress in 30 years. Yea right - he only put in the most important piece of all time - End the Fed, Audit the Fed legislation.
MIACs outline exactly who is considered a terrorist, right down to a family, blue jeans, sunglasses, map in a car along with a baby stroller and a ron paul bumper sticker. You'd think the media would go wild with that one.
Take any wholesome values like family, faithfulness, hard work, honesty, truth - they are demonized while satanist values of trash behavior and values are applauded in media. What is put forth as supposed humor is not funny, at all...
So it can come from other entities as well not just Govt sources.
Dennis some organizations can
Dennis some organizations can have Cash Bar companies that are licensed and trained to serve alcohol at functions just like caterers serve food. Thats the likely explanation to your question. Here is the details....
You can hire a licensed caterer to provide the food and alcohol at the event. You can not mix Caterers Liquor with your Own store bought or sponsored Liquor.
Events that are closed to the public (invitation only) and will not be selling or offering alcohol to its guest do not need to apply for a liquor permit. Please check with your Venue if this is permitted.
Liquor Liability Insurance will not be provided or valid should the Venue not have the correct permit.
Permit issued to Caterers: Requires the Caterer to already have a "On-Premise License" which is then extended "Off-premise" to your Event Location.
For Information Purposes only:
You = applicant
****Caterers Off Premise Permit**** (one time) $38 + $10 NY State filing fee = $48 (does not include cost of goods) per Bar setup.
($48 for each point of service for each date) Point of service is Each BAR setup.
This Permit Authorizes an active on-premises retail licensee to furnish alcoholic beverages for use at a specific event located off the licensed premises. Applicant must be hired to furnish provisions (food) and alcoholic beverages at the event. An applicant cannot cater for themselves. Such permit shall be valid for a period not to exceed 24 consecutive hours commencing 8:00 a.m and must stop serving alcohol by 4am of the effective date of such permit and shall authorize the permittee to furnish provisions and alcoholic beverages for use at an indoor event.
This permit shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. Application must be received by the Liquor Authority a minimum of 15 days prior to the event.
2. Food must be provided by applicant/licensee, meeting the minimum requirements under §64-a of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, for example: salads, soups, sandwiches, finger foods. Pretzels and potato chips do not meet the minimum requirements for food.
Additional Documentation for Caterer Permits:
Site Diagram:
A diagram of the area to be licensed or a Floor plan which marks all Entrances and Exits.
Menu:
A menu for the food and alcoholic beverages to be served.
Landlord Permission Form:
The landlord for the property where the event will take place must complete and submit the form.
Conviction Certificate:
If the applicant has been convicted of a felony or other crime, a Certificate of Disposition or a Certificate of Conviction by the Court Clerk must be sumbitted for any conviction that has not been previously reported to the State Liquor Authority.
"Media Censorship: "Obama
"Media Censorship:
"Obama impeachment began last Feb 2013. What has been heard on that?"
You need to take greater care with your sources of information. Bad sources of information are a leading cause of confusion, delusion, and vertigo, according to reports from leading scientists around the world.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/impeachment.asp
For the record: one can
For the record: one can purchase either a rider or short-term policy to insure an event. If the alcohol was served by a licensed business such as a caterer, the sponsors of the party do not need a separate license. Anyone who has ever hosted a one-day event would be familiar with the protocols- certainly the City falls in that category.
As for the edit/censorship debate, it's plain and clear that personal attacks will not be tolerated. Anyone who chooses to ignore that stipulation must be cognizant that they do so at the risk of having a post deleted. Anyone who cannot self-police the rhetorical tone of posts, should anticipate the outcome. I venture that the nastiness exhibited by some does more to censor this site than any deleted post.
Howard, I'm not sure how your
Howard, I'm not sure how your practice of censorship (yes, you do censor - see below) jives with your self proclaimed libertarian views.
http://media.okstate.edu/faculty/jsenat/censorship/defining.htm
Easy, it's my business.
Easy, it's my business. Either you can be civil and contribute to a meaningful conversation or you can not participate. Your choice.
I stand by my previous statements on this matter. You say more, I'll say the same. This is rather pointless.
So peoples opinions on the
So peoples opinions on the death penalty, assisted suicide, and sentencing in criminal cases are meaningless conversation?
“Once a government is
“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
[Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”
― Harry S. Truman
Alvin this is nonsense. We
Alvin this is nonsense. We don't allow personal attacks. Against anybody It has nothing to do with the opinion of the person. It has to do with civility.
"Fighting a losing battle is
"Fighting a losing battle is as good as tucking in stones in your pockets, jumping in a dam and hoping to float.” ― Nomthandazo Tsembeni
When you enter a store that
When you enter a store that posts "shoes and shirt required", you respect the shop owner's right to expect that people will enter dressed with shirt and shoes on.
When you post to Howard's site, you are expected to follow his terms of service. One of which is "no personal attacks".
Neither of these examples violates your right to free expression. Both the owner of a shop or this site have a reasonable expectation that their request for appropriate dress/behavior will be honored.
The problem isn't the policy
The problem isn't the policy of "shoes and shirt required". The problem is that the shopkeeper says my boots are not shoes and my shirt looks more like a sweater.
This is all rather stupid. If
This is all rather stupid. If you don't like the rules or how they are applied, then don't post. Simple really. Don't like it, leave. To use the example of shoes and shirt, if the owner said my shirt looks like a sweater so I can not come in, I'll leave and never come back. To whine about it is, again, stupid.
John please stop attacking me
John please stop attacking me personally. I don't like being called stupid, being told to leave, calling me a whiner, and claiming that I don't like rules and how they are applied.
Please. Can someone tell
Please. Can someone tell me if it's the Children's Hour, or just the Silly Season?
Alvin, I am not attacking you
Alvin, I am not attacking you as such. Just pointing out that complaining about how somebody else wants to run their own private site, over and over, is stupid. But I stand by what I said, if you don't like the rules, then too bad, it is not your site. Same applies to me. If I don't like it, then I have to decide live with it, or leave.
I know your not. I was just
I know your not. I was just taking a couple more swings at the dead horse.
Hey! Here's something to
Hey! Here's something to argue about... The newly re-aligned Congress has announced its priority for 2015. Despite health care, wage stagnation and immigration being the top priorities with the American people, the GOP has made Canadian tar its number one. Maybe Boehner misspelled "immigration" and spell check substituted "emulsifier"- you know: the stuff used to clean up toxic oil spills.
Getting the Canadian
Getting the Canadian sludge to our Gulf ports is job one for any entity in the thrall of the petro giants. Fossil fuel -- the grave of the future. But capital always makes hay while the sun shines.
It seems the Canadians
It seems the Canadians have sense enough to disallow the pipeline from crossing British Columbia to ports at Vancouver. I guess they know something we don't.
Yes Scott they do know
Yes Scott they do know something......They know how compromised a pipeline would be and how much more expensive and difficult it is to transverse the Canadian Rocky Mountains to get from Hardisty, Alberta to Vancouver shipping ports.
But did you know that it's goal is NOT to get it to shipping ports, but to get it to refineries down in Texas to be refined first before being shipped to wherever?
Educate yourself a little... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline
Make sense to you now?
"They know how compromised a
"They know how compromised a pipeline would be . . ."
Thanks, Kyle, for making my point.
"how much more expensive and difficult it is to transverse the Canadian Rocky Mountains . . ."
Hard cheese. Let them study how Alyeska got the Trans-Alaska over the Brooks Range in the seventies.
"Educate yourself a little..."
This from the guy who last night claimed we've been kept in the dark about a (nonexistent) Obama impeachment proceeding, because of 'media censorship'.
"Make sense to you now?"
More than you'll ever know.
FYI -- "For years the tar
FYI --
"For years the tar sands promoters have said: ‘if we don't build Keystone XL the tar sands will get out some other way.' British Columbians just slammed the door on the most obvious other way, so now it's up to President Obama. If he approves Keystone XL he bails out the Koch Brothers and other tar sands investors; if he rejects the pipeline, then an awful lot of that crude is going to stay in the ground where it belongs."
Why British Columbia rejected the pipeline:
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/05/british-columbia-kills-w…
If you had read the link I
If you had read the link I put up. you would see that there is already a pipeline taking this crude from the Tar sands across the US to Texas. The Keystone XL project (which is phase 4, by the way) Is what is being argued in Legislation this year. So The Keystone pipeline exsists already and is in operation. See notations below...
Three phases of the project are in operation, and the fourth is awaiting U.S. government approval. They are:
The Keystone Pipeline (Phase I), delivering oil from Hardisty, Alberta 3,456-kilometre (2,147 mi) to the junction at Steele City, Nebraska and on to Wood River Refinery in Roxana, Illinois and Patoka Oil Terminal Hub (tank farm) north of Patoka, Illinois, completed in June 2010.[2]
The Keystone-Cushing extension (Phase II), running 480-kilometre (300 mi) from Steele City to storage and distribution facilities (tank farm) at Cushing, Oklahoma,[8] completed in February 2011.[3]
The Gulf Coast Extension (Phase III), running 784-kilometre (487 mi) from Cushing to refineries at Port Arthur, Texas was completed in January 2014,[4][5] and a lateral pipeline to refineries at Houston, Texas and a terminal will be completed in mid-2015.[6]
So in fact only 110.000 of a possible 700,000 barrels per day will stay in the sands.
Nice try to spin the info to seem more dramatic than it is.
So Scott's FYI is just another biased and incorrect article that has NOTHING to do with facts...
Anyone that cares for the WHOLE picture and not just what the Conservative or Liberal Media want to feed you, here is the link again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline
"So Scott's FYI is just
"So Scott's FYI is just another biased and incorrect article that has NOTHING to do with facts..."
Sorry, Kyle. The *fact* that British Columbia has rejected the pipeline (as well, the reasons for it) is not in any way incorrect, or biased. Pray tell, how can a fact be biased?
Or, you just read the header and started to copy-paste from Wikipedia , forgetting to read the actual Mother Jones article. . .
Meh.
Scott the fact you emphasized
Scott the fact you emphasized was that if Obama allows the XL pipeline then he bails out tar sands investors (Which is NOT a fact as they already have most of Keystone pipeline in place and already working) If he does not allow the XL pipeline you said an awful lot of crude will remain in the ground. (Also not true as it can move 700,000 barrels a day as is without XL pipeline.
In your struggle to discredit me over an ancillary fact you steer people away from the main facts I was discussing. Again try to focus on the whole picture instead of looking for ways to discredit opposing views on facts that are ancillary.
"In your struggle to
"In your struggle to discredit me . . ."
You flatter me. But you do all the heavy lifting in that regard.
As I stated don't let facts
As I stated don't let facts get in the way of your opinions Scott.....