Get to know D.C. with our daily newsletter
We dive deep on the day’s biggest story and share links to everything you need to know.
Don’t let them fool you.
In response to Loose Lips’ comments about washed-up politicians and the petition-signature effort (7/30), I say this: To be critical of men earning an honest wage for honest work in a city that has become a swamp of corruption and kickbacks is both cynical and counterproductive to the goal of more responsible citizenry and governance.
No one questions the ethics or legality of Eugene Kinlow’s actions, yet he was picked apart for working on behalf of an issue. I should be relieved that the smoking ban hasn’t been as inflammatory an issue, or we’d probably be reading Kinlow’s grocery receipts.
From the sharp, digging investigative commentary I’ve become accustomed to receiving from Loose Lips, I expected to read a timely and necessary criticism of the Washington Post for a sustained campaign of limiting the public’s right to balanced news reporting and blurring the issue by sensationalizing every hint of foul play by proponents. How could she in all good conscience take such cheap shots at a man who believes in something enough to get out in the streets and act?
To be compensated for giving people a choice sounds like a dream job. I’ve watched Eugene Kinlow for the past two years, and I will be the first to say that he is a man who stands behind his principles and acts. I’ve watched him stand against popular views because of principles, and for that I am obligated to defend a man who believes and acts.
The public should really be asking what Atlantic City has to say about D.C.’s possibly taking some of its action. Where is the anti-slots campaign getting its funding? There are very powerful players in the background on both sides of this issue, and unfortunately for us, the spotlight is only being aimed at one side.
My convictions stand firmly with the people’s right to decide what they want where they live. Having the issue of video lottery terminals on the ballot would put the choice in the people’s hands. Keeping the issue off the ballot makes this a battle of special interests and undermines the democracy we all believe we should have.