View Full Version : Mick Cornett: Weak, weak, weak



xrayman
02-18-2005, 11:38 AM
There have been several things lately that have made me realize just how weak Mick Cornett is as mayor of Oklahoma City. And I don't mean "weak" as in our "weak mayor" system of municipal government. The man is simply not up to the caliber of what this city deserves. The "weak form" of government makes this even worse when you consider his only real responsibility is being a cheerleader for Oklahoma City. He has a bully pulpit with the title and office of the mayor and yet, how does he use it? Look at the latest and pay attention to the actual words of our mayor:
------
"Mayor expects end of Heartland Flyer"

By Hank Jenkins and Bryan Dean
The Oklahoman

Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett said Tuesday he expects train service in the state to end when federal funding for the Amtrak Heartland Flyer runs out in September.
Cornett's comments came as the city council voted to provide security as Amtrak passengers arrive and depart from the downtown Santa Fe Train Depot, which is the end of the line for the Heartland Flyer.

He said he does not believe the state will come forward with the $4 million needed to keep the train running between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth, Texas.

Cornett said with only a small portion of Oklahoma towns along the route of the Heartland Flyer, it would be hard to get legislation passed for it to continue.

"It is an issue where, if you are trying to get votes at the Legislature, how many communities benefit?" Cornett said. "Well, not half. How are you going to get half of the votes if fewer than half benefit?"
----

Weak, weak, weak, weak. A mayor who is willing to let passenger rail service leave our city without an ounce of fight. I was shocked to hear Mick Cornett's defeated, lazy, uninspiring words. Disgusting.

First of all, in general, a REAL leader would go down with a fight. He wouldn't "predict" a legislative defeat.

Secondly, His reasoning is horrible. It's basically, because only a few communities benefit, how could we get support from a majority of the state legislature for funding? What if we used that same principle on so many other things? As mayor, you get out there and fight! Explain why passenger rail is part of what makes Oklahoma City "big" and how that service is another major listing when promoting our city for economic development purposes. "Uh, no, we don't have Amtrak - they pulled out a while back," That will sound real good. As for how many communities will benefit, maybe some legislators remember that Oklahoma City is our state capitol. It's good - not only for our city - but for our state, Mr. Mayor. Our success as a great city has a lot to do with what we, as a STATE can do. The reasoning he used, and its amateur civics, was embarrassing.

There are just so many things where Cornett has shown himself to be an unacceptable lightweight. The true "jock" that loves sports more than life itself is coming out more and more. This guy lives and breathes sports. He was a sportscaster who was bumped and took a job reading news to keep a job. Today, because he had name recognition, he is mayor of Oklahoma City. A city that needs a mayor with fight, with gumption, with ideas that look to the future, with a respect for what makes great cities "great".....and yes.....passenger rail service is one of those things. But it's the attitude of defeatism and weak "leadership" that has convinced me that Mick Cornett's tenure as mayor of Oklahoma City should be a very short one.

mranderson
02-18-2005, 12:12 PM
Xrayman:

Our mayor (who, by the way is a member of this forum, and hopefully will address this with you) is a member of this group and will read your concern, I am sure.

I personally do not share your opinion of Mick Cornett. Although I have not met him personally, and would love the honor of doing so, I think he is doing a great job with what he has to work with.

There are major differences between Mayor Cornett and former Mayor Humprheys.

1. Mayor Cornett listens to people. Mayor Humphreys did not.

2. Mayor Cornett has a great presence. Humphreys, I found to be quite rude.

3. Mayor Cornett is pro major league sports. I do not feel Humphreys cared about it.

4. Mayor Cornett has a true, realistic vision for the growth of Oklahoma City. Humphreys just wanted to be Senator.

5. Mayor Cornett consistantly seeks ideas from citizens for improvement. Mayor Humphreys personally told me to mind my own business when giving an idea and implied I knew nothing about politics and city government.

Thank God and your lucky stars we have a Mayor that listens, cares, respects the citizens, and has the background to bring sports into the 21st century.

Personally, I aplaud our Mayor and the people who elected him!

:tiphat: :congrats:

xrayman
02-18-2005, 12:19 PM
And could you explain the complete and total lack of leadership exemplified by his defeatism on the passenger rail issue? His lack of understanding of the legislative process and how the capitol city relates to the rest of the state? The cheerleading for Cornett is one thing, answering questions is quite another. Cornett is a lightweight when it comes to politics - even municipal politics, not known as a bastion of towering political figures. By the way, I was not a fan of our last mayor either. There is a leadership vacuum in local government right now and Mick Cornett doesn't fill it.

mranderson
02-18-2005, 12:31 PM
And could you explain the complete and total lack of leadership exemplified by his defeatism on the passenger rail issue? His lack of understanding of the legislative process and how the capitol city relates to the rest of the state? The cheerleading for Cornett is one thing, answering questions is quite another. Cornett is a lightweight when it comes to politics - even municipal politics, not known as a bastion of towering political figures. By the way, I was not a fan of our last mayor either. There is a leadership vacuum in local government right now and Mick Cornett doesn't fill it.

It is not "cheerleading." The city of Oklahoma City has no authority on Amtrak. The state and federal levels do. Yes, Mayor Cornett can and probably has tried to lobby for funds to save it.

What do you expect? Do you want this city to go farther back in time? This is just one issue.

It may help to learn how government works. Just because a man can not move a trian does not make him a bad mayor (or other office holder).

I will let Patrick field this one as well.

xrayman
02-18-2005, 12:36 PM
You miss the point - completely.

It is the Mayor's DEFEATISM on the issue. The lack of leadership. The failure to fight for funding from the state. To the contrary, he has *** given up ***....That is not leadership.
Oh....I know how government works......all too well.

mranderson
02-18-2005, 12:48 PM
No. I did not miss the point. I will let Patrick explain what I am saying.

zuluwarrior0760
02-18-2005, 12:57 PM
Defeatism is a very valuable political tool.
People hear their leaders basically say......
"we're screwed, and that's that....."
and then people say "Oh my goodness, he's so HONEST!"

If the Mayor says Amtrak is in trouble, it's no news to anyone....
we've known this for years......all the fight in the world
isn't going to sway the legislature.....what might sway them
is hearing from someone besides the mayor, namely.....our
legislative leaders hearing for their constituents on the issues
that are important to them.......sadly, for most people not
within 10 miles of Bricktown, Amtrak is not high on their list
of critical priorities......

That is not Mick Cornett's fault.......

Floating_adrift
02-18-2005, 12:58 PM
Is this about Mick Cornett's leadership or losing the Rail? What benefit does the rail provide? I've never heard of it nor used it.

swake
02-18-2005, 01:13 PM
Politics is the art of the possible.

A bad politician is one that spends his “capital” on an issue that has no chance of passing.

You want to see why it will never pass, visit Tulsanow’s thread on this issue. Metro Tulsa politicians including the new speaker of the house would greatly anger their own constituents, and me, by funding this train. Tulsa, as part of backing train service and it’s subsidy to come to OKC, was promised that train service to Tulsa would be restored shortly after OKCs service was, it never happened. Another broken promise from the state to the Tulsa area. If Oklahoma City wants the train, then you are going to have to pay for it yourself, it’s $4 million a year.

zuluwarrior0760
02-18-2005, 01:17 PM
How many Southwest tickets to Dallas will 4 million buy?

xrayman
02-18-2005, 01:38 PM
I see the "old" Oklahoma City way of thinking at work here. Keep this in mind: Oklahoma City would be the largest city in America without rail passenger service. Sometimes, it's not the service or whether you use it, but whether it's available if you DO want to use it. It is this availability that helps "sell" a city. I am reading a lot of short-sighted thinking in this thread, a lot of Cornet cheerleading which destroys credibility. No matter how much you like the Mayor, some of you should admit that his lack of leadership on this issue has been pathetic. In fact, his pessimistic, lack-of-fight defeatism is deplorable. He could at least keep quiet and not embarrass the city by showing all what little civic minds are at work at City Hall. But look! America West will be flying tiny 50-seat regional jets to Vegas and Phoenix and everybody is excited. Wow! How impressive.

mranderson
02-18-2005, 01:58 PM
I see the "old" Oklahoma City way of thinking at work here. Keep this in mind: Oklahoma City would be the largest city in America without rail passenger service. Sometimes, it's not the service or whether you use it, but whether it's available if you DO want to use it. It is this availability that helps "sell" a city. I am reading a lot of short-sighted thinking in this thread, a lot of Cornet cheerleading which destroys credibility. No matter how much you like the Mayor, some of you should admit that his lack of leadership on this issue has been pathetic. In fact, his pessimistic, lack-of-fight defeatism is deplorable. He could at least keep quiet and not embarrass the city by showing all what little civic minds are at work at City Hall. But look! America West will be flying tiny 50-seat regional jets to Vegas and Phoenix and everybody is excited. Wow! How impressive.

Did you know Mick Cornett was elected by one of the largest margins in Oklahoma City history? That speaks volumes.

Plus. Maybe America West is using puddle jumper jets, however, that could be an asset. Here is why (off topic, but the door was opened). An official with America West corp headquarters has told me the airline intends to apply for hub status if the profit margins are high enough in a year to 18 months. With three flights a day in and out bound, that means the most they would require is 300 passengers a day. If they used 737's or A330's that number would be at least three times that number. Not much to ask to earn 300 flights a day.

One reason this is happening is... Mick Cornett.

xrayman
02-18-2005, 02:07 PM
Yep.....all 35 people showed up to elect Mick Cornett. That's not the issue. What this tells me is that some people are more interested in currying favor with the mayor, than with discussing the issues. Where does the electoral margin of Mick Cornett come into play here? Do you REALLY think people voted for Cornett because of his agenda for Oklahoma City? Do you not realize the obvious - and that's that people knew him (and voted for him) from being a sportscaster on television? At any rate, as I noted, margins don't mean much when a group smaller than could fit into a corner booth at IHOP showed up to vote. Totally off topic: Are you the M. Anderson that used to preach at the Presbyterian church?

Midtowner
02-18-2005, 02:33 PM
xrayman, let's narrow the scope of your arguement. It seems that you are holding up this rail issue as your major issue with Cornett's leadership. I personally have not held any civic elected positions, but I have served on numerous leadership boards, committees, etc. of various organizations. One type of person that proved to be a constant thorn in my side was the kind of person that would wait until you stated a problem or a vision, then try to pick it apart, finding everything possible wrong with it without suggesting an alternative, or even favoring another route.

So, please allow me to turn this around on you. How would you propose that the mayor "show leadership" and get this Amtrak proposal hammered out?

xrayman
02-18-2005, 02:50 PM
1. Call together the state legislators in the OKC area. Maybe include legislators from other communities.
2. Ask to address the House and Senate on the importance of passenger rail to Oklahoma City - and hence - Oklahoma.
3. Call a press conference with legislators and announce a commitment to do everything possible to keep rail in OKC.
4. Appear on TV and radio and work for involvement from the citizens.
5. Decline to say things like, "Amtrak is probably gone," and go on to describe why it just can't happen.
6. Show leadership about something more than that which profits private business. This city has subsidized enough businesses to our community. A city gets a reputation that it's "for sale." A business may become - but they were bought and paid to come with taxpayer dollars. Funny how this kind of neo-socialism is supported by self-described "conservatives."

I could go on and on. Cornett, to use a sports metaphor just for the mayor, is out of his league. He seems incapable - on a number of issues - to offer leadership. To "listen" and appear open is great, but it's not leadership. His standing down on passenger rail, not willing as mayor to fight for our city, is unacceptable for a city of this size. In time, this will be clear for all to see. I'm sorry so many seem to disagree and think leaving Oklahoma City as the largest city in America without passenger rail is acceptable - and the issue of a mayor not willing to fight for it is as well.

One thing that would make a difference in the long run on a number of issues: Scrap the largely ceremonial post of mayor all together and organize a new "strong mayor" style of municipal government.

Midtowner
02-18-2005, 03:08 PM
1. Call together the state legislators in the OKC area. Maybe include legislators from other communities.
2. Ask to address the House and Senate on the importance of passenger rail to Oklahoma City - and hence - Oklahoma.
3. Call a press conference with legislators and announce a commitment to do everything possible to keep rail in OKC.
4. Appear on TV and radio and work for involvement from the citizens.
5. Decline to say things like, "Amtrak is probably gone," and go on to describe why it just can't happen.
6. Show leadership about something more than that which profits private business. This city has subsidized enough businesses to our community. A city gets a reputation that it's "for sale." A business may become - but they were bought and paid to come with taxpayer dollars. Funny how this kind of neo-socialism is supported by self-described "conservatives."

I could go on and on. Cornett, to use a sports metaphor just for the mayor, is out of his league. He seems incapable - on a number of issues - to offer leadership. To "listen" and appear open is great, but it's not leadership. His standing down on passenger rail, not willing as mayor to fight for our city, is unacceptable for a city of this size. In time, this will be clear for all to see. I'm sorry so many seem to disagree and think leaving Oklahoma City as the largest city in America without passenger rail is acceptable - and the issue of a mayor not willing to fight for it is as well.

One thing that would make a difference in the long run on a number of issues: Scrap the largely ceremonial post of mayor all together and organize a new "strong mayor" style of municipal government.

Interesting approach. Have you ever worked in the political arena? If so, you should probably know that expending a great deal of political capital on an unwinnable fight is probably not a good idea.

It's difficult to know what his motivation was there. As far as Amtrak and passenger rail service go, frankly, it's not that big a deal unless you're a city on the Eastern seaboard. Amtrak is a company that is hemmoraging money. As a "self-described Conservative", my thought is that they've sucked up enough taxpayer money. They should be thrown out into the water, whether they sink or swim will be up to them.

It seems that your major beef with the administration is this rail issue. So, I'll pose a few questions to you:

1. If light rail were to leave the city, do you not think that if the free market presented the right opportunities for a busines to run a profitable enterprise, that it might come back?

2. Do you think that right now, rail service is somehow "key" to our city's success in terms of landing more and better jobs? Do you think that they even care about passenger rail service?

3. Since we've had passenger rail service in Oklahoma City, please name for me one thing that it has changed or helped the city to accomplish (besides the rennovation of the train system which really only helped the city to accomplish wasting money).

To my knowledge, under Cornett's regime, we have not yet "bought" a business. Dell, for example it appears at this point came on its own free will (the state computer contract might just be an amazing coincidence.. who knows?). Certainly, we're better off in that respect than we were under the previous administration. As far as showing interests in that which profits business, currenly, we operate under a capitalist economic model. That means that whatever benefits business will eventually profit those that are employed by the business, and finally those that consume what the business produces.

If a city has a bad business environment, the city will not be a good place to live. If the city has a good business environment, it will obviously be a much better place to live. It's very obvious what this city needs to take the next step: more money and more jobs. How, other than by providing a fertile ground for businesses to develop would you propose helping this along?

It does appear that you are nitpicking one issue here. You've taken one stance that the mayor has taken, which I and other have pointed out is a very realistic, honest approach. From that, and really based on nothing else, you have developed a theory that he is somehow "small-time" or "lacking in leadership".

Having lived in the OKC metro for my entire life, I have seen many mayors come and go. I have seen the "old money" families of Oklahoma City benefit constantly from taxpayer contributions and "public" works programs. Cornett has in my eyes (history may prove otherwise) kind of bucked the trend of the mayor who always seemed to come up with a way to line his friends pockets.

I disagree with you. At this point in our city's history, he is exactly what we need.

mranderson
02-18-2005, 03:22 PM
"Are you the M. Anderson that used to preach at the Presbyterian church?"

No. The "m" stands for mister.

xrayman
02-18-2005, 03:23 PM
And with that, we'll agree to disagree.
Have a good evening!

Midtowner
02-18-2005, 03:30 PM
And with that, we'll agree to disagree.
Have a good evening!

Awww.. didn't answer my questions..:(

floater
02-18-2005, 05:04 PM
This kind of single-issue politics makes me sick.

Floating_adrift
02-18-2005, 05:57 PM
I see the "old" Oklahoma City way of thinking at work here. Keep this in mind: Oklahoma City would be the largest city in America without rail passenger service. Sometimes, it's not the service or whether you use it, but whether it's available if you DO want to use it. It is this availability that helps "sell" a city. I am reading a lot of short-sighted thinking in this thread, a lot of Cornet cheerleading which destroys credibility. No matter how much you like the Mayor, some of you should admit that his lack of leadership on this issue has been pathetic. In fact, his pessimistic, lack-of-fight defeatism is deplorable. He could at least keep quiet and not embarrass the city by showing all what little civic minds are at work at City Hall. But look! America West will be flying tiny 50-seat regional jets to Vegas and Phoenix and everybody is excited. Wow! How impressive.

Actually, your not reading anything. You've come in here with a closed mind and blinders on in a very defensive frame of mind. I don't know Mick Cornett, have no clue as to what he has or hasn't done and your single example to begin the thread is weak, weak, weak if your trying to impress anyone with your view of the situation.

If you want people to give your opinion any thought, you should really consider a different approach - maybe one that would inform, rather than attack. Like I mentioned above, I have no idea what the rail is that your talking about. So if you want to gain support for it, you should do it by informing people about it - tell them what they could benefit from by supporting it, or using it.

Why do I want the state to spend $4,000,000 on the rail?

El Gato Pollo Loco!!!
02-18-2005, 06:58 PM
You know, maybe this all came about (the tread that is) because Mr. Cornett doesn't seem like a politician.

To be perfectly honest as a non-political person whatsoever, I find that trait to be very refreshing. I am glad that he is mayor of OKC, because he does have very good ideas and plans for the city. As far as this railroad Amtrack thing, I thought that it was a higher authority that had say in that. I just don't get why anyone would want to drag him down, without any real evidence or otherwise.

Mr. Cornett, if you read this, please keep up the good work!

Keith
02-18-2005, 07:07 PM
You know, maybe this all came about (the tread that is) because Mr. Cornett doesn't seem like a politician.

To be perfectly honest as a non-political person whatsoever, I find that trait to be very refreshing. I am glad that he is mayor of OKC, because he does have very good ideas and plans for the city. As far as this railroad Amtrack thing, I thought that it was a higher authority that had say in that. I just don't get why anyone would want to drag him down, without any real evidence or otherwise.

Mr. Cornett, if you read this, please keep up the good work!

I agree. He is the best mayor that I think OKC has ever had.....because he isn't a politician. He is doing an excellent job!! You have our support, Mayor Cornett:yourock: .

HOT ROD
02-18-2005, 08:33 PM
I think you all are missing the point.

So, you think AMTRAK has not had an impact on OKC tourism? Huh?

Well, go to bricktown.com or any website or magazine which prominently talks about Oklahoma City. AMTRAK's return and regular service is listed as one of the ATTRACTIONS of Oklahoma City as a Big City!

And for SWAKE and other Tulsans, we dont need to go to TulsaNow, we already know what anti-OKC-semitic remarks reside there. You guys always complain about not realizing your taxation but OKC is the largest city in the state. Im not buying that bs you guys always pull with your inflated population numbers for Tulsa Metro (I saw figures as high as 950k on TulsaNow), the census has you at 820k and thats it. OKC METRO is 1.25m (not 1.1m or 1m as I have seen on TulsaNow). You guys up there want to be a big city so bad, that you honestly would never support anything for the state that does not go through Tulsa.

Well, if you had the tracks and voted to fix the problem with the ones you do have, then Tulsa surely would have rail. Remember the vote you guys turned down that would have realigned the tracks going NE of OKC to Tulsey Town? I dont even live in OK but I remember. That is why I always said, give Tulsa Motorcoach service until we work out the track issue. See, I root for you! But the first chance you guys get to slam something bad on OKC, you take it.

Cornet is a joke. I dont care how honest he is, his JOB is to fight for OKlahoma City; its quality of life (like he talked about in those newspaper articles), its services, its big city qualities, and its citizens! He is doing a very big disservice to the citizens of this state (yes, the mayor of OKC should have influence on the state - just like mayors of the largest city of every other state) by throwing his hands up (in typical OKC defeatism fashion) on the issue of AMTRAK funding.

Honestly, I bet you Tulsa guys are laughing your *ss off because for a while OKC was untouchable with its Renaissance. Now you have our mayor as a conservative, unprogressive ally - so once again you can stomp on OKC and the state.

What happened to working together, the state's two largest cities - to make the STATE progressive? You guys voted no for the alignment of your tracks, not OKC.

So now, you want to come along here and say our mayor is good because you dont have service, nor should OKC. Well, OKC pays more tax revenue than Tulsa! In fact, OKC pays more than everyone else combined. And Im sure if you look at GDP, OKC's Metro area beats the whole rest of the state combined.

A city with this much economic influence, not to mention political, centrally located, in the middle of a booming renaissance, and so on - does not deserve AMTRAK?

For those of you OKC citizens (yes, M Anderson, Midtowner, et al), you may never use AMTRAK. But you WILL suffer if AMTRAK goes away! Having AMTRAK is just another big city attraction and we are not the only city with a spur. But having it gives us a seat in the club! Besides that, it gives an option for those who want to travel, but dont want to drive, are afraid for your lives (like all of you who commented negatively about Greyhound) to take the bus, and too cheap to fly - it gives you all an OPTION for travel. That is what big cities have, OPTIONS!

That is why you and the rest of the nation think Kansas City (smaller than OKC in acutallity) is a big city. It has flights (tho not many), freeways, bus service hub, AND AMTRAK! Right now, so does OKC! And you may have noticed that OKC is being mentioned as a member of the club also!

Just like Xrayman said, you would be the largest city (probably in the world) without PAX rail service!

Now why dont you put that on your tourist sloguns!!! Im sure Tulsa wants you to.


PLEASE CONTINUE THE RENAISSANCE!!! Mr. Mayor, think of your city - its image, what we all have fought for, and fight for our OPTIONS!

HOT ROD
02-18-2005, 08:38 PM
My final point, but I wanted to separate it out, is that just because we fight for rail service, does not mean we endorse AMTRAK to run it.

We could get someone else to run our line. for a guaranteed $4m contract with pax fares more or less as pure profit, Im sure someone would come forward to run the service.

Think of it, (especially Tulsans), $4m dollars of transportation dollars but then the rest of the state could advocate their share in their transportation infrustructure. Heck, Tulsa you could use your allocation to straighten your tracks - then maybe you would get service.

Quit complaining, stop looking for an avenue to continue the past. That has gotten this state nowhere past the Grapes of Wrath, which we all know all toooo well and have been successful at shaking as of late. Drop PAX rail, and people will forget about OKC again!

Im sure you dont want that!

Midtowner
02-18-2005, 10:23 PM
Rod, I've advocated dropping AMTRAK for a long time. Not necessarily the rail system. It's just that AMTRAK is really the only game in town when it comes to passenger rail service.

AMTRAK had a massive restructuring about 5 years back. For that, they got a HUGE subsidy from the federal government. Now, they are about to ask for a larger subsidy still. The former subsidy was supposed to have allowed them the flexibility to restructure their operations to become more self sufficient. Now, they are threatening to shut down their entire network -- even profitable lines if the federal government doesn't pony up with yet another multi-billion dollar subsidy.

Rod... do we really want a company like that doing business in our state?

In 5 years, the Heartland Flyer only had 300,000 tickets bought.

That averages out to 6000 passengers per month. At that rate, I'm really not convinced that it's worth 4 million dollars to keep it going. I'd like to have a rail line, but it's apparent that at least right now, there is no competent service available.

Patrick
02-18-2005, 10:36 PM
I have read the posts on this thread and have left with mixed emotions.....obviously I know what my opinion on the topic is, but that isn't my concern here. My concern involves the negative comments directed at another member of this forum. As a moderator there are times I have to make difficult decisions, sometimes ones that I have to spend a lot of time thinking on. It can often be a balancing act.

In this certain situation, I'm facing two sides: on one hand, I see that a member (xrayman) is simply stating his opinions about our city government, and our mayor specifically. Under the 1st Amendment of the constitution, he's entitled to speak his mind on certain issues, even if the majority of us here don't agree with his views. But, at the same time, we're walking a fine line here, because the person who's being attacked is a registered participating member of this forum. Attacking another member of this forum is a violation of our TOS.

So, I came up with a compromise. I've allowed everyone 10+ hours to express their opinions on this topic, enough time for everyone's voices to be heard. I will not delete the thread. But, I will now close the thread and allow it to flow down to the bottom of the page. I think this is only fair.

At the same time, we've heard xrayman's side, but haven't really gotten to hear the side from city hall. To make this completely fair, I recieved the opinion from city hall. No complaining now, because you all have had you chance to express your opinions.

The news from inside the chambers is that the mayor is fighting for the Heartland Flyer, every chance he gets, and for commuter rail in general. He's accomplished almost every goal on xrayman's list. Problem is, the media doesn't like to focus on "behind the scene's work".....it just doesn't make news! One thing different about Mick, is that he makes a lot of his moves behind the scenes, out of the eye of the camera. Much of this work, the general public will never see.

xrayman, I see you haven't been around Mick Cornett much. If you knew him well, you'd know just how hard he really fights for issues, including Amtrak.

Let me explain The Oklahoma article. First off, the article itself was negative. I've never seen Mick speak in a negative manner, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was more the wording of the article, and not the mayor's overall view on the topic.

In a sense though, I think Mick was being realistic. The city can help out some, but without extra state funding, this just isn't going to happen. And, unfortunately, no matter how hard Mick fights, and no matter how many task forces he puts together, he can't change a final decision that's made at the state level, once it's made. I do want you to know that he's giving it all he has to try to save passenger rail in our state. He's actually the strong-willed man here. It's our state legislature who isn't willing to step up to the plate. Trust me...through OCART, we tried to sell the idea of commuter rail to our state legislators, and to then mayor Humphrey's. No dice......many weren't even willing to listen, including our former mayor. Mick Cornett has actually been one of the first people to actually listen to our views on rail and commuter rail transit. Does he favor Amtrak? You bet he does! Is he trying to save it? You bet he is!

I just hope that sets the record straight.

Our mayor is very innovative, and always looking for new ideas. If you have a problem with his policies, by all means, write him a letter, or call his office. One thing to also remember...he hasn't been in office that long. Give the guy a chance!

Anyways, I guess that gives both my opinion, and presents the truth from city hall at the same time.

If anyone else would like to comment on the Heartland Flyer in general, outside of this attack on the Mayor, I encourage you to check out the Heartland Flyer thread.

http://www.okctalk.com/t2085-santa-fe-stationheartland-flyer.html

If you are unhappy in any way with a decision our mayor has made, please call his office or write to him.

Todd
02-19-2005, 05:58 PM
I've had several PM's and numerous phone calls in regards to this thread both pro and con in regards to the views held by xrayman. After reviewing all the posts I am re-opening this thread. There are many things on this board that I disagree with including the views of xrayman. However, imposing my views or preventing others from voicing theirs only serves to undermine the creativity of our members.

I appreciate Patrick closing the thread to give me a chance to review the posts. If any of you have any thoughts you would rather share privately as always you can email todd@okctalk.com.

Sooner&RiceGrad
02-21-2005, 12:05 AM
Even though I was pro Humphreys, I think Cornett is a fantastic mayor that I have become gradually more, and more enthusiastic about. And, I didn't even get a chance to see his affilaition (D or R) because HE JUST ISN'T A POLITICIAN, something that frightened me at first, but impressed me later, and is now exciting me.