Dubya, The big article is in the ok gazette.

FWIW, without any consideration to the current OKC mayor race, it would not bother me if those running for elected office, any elected office, muni, county, state or federal had to submit to drug testing within 24 hours of filing, 24 hours of taking office, and one or two random tests each year in office.

After all, we now test a passle of poor folk sans any suspicion.

It's been talked about before. The city has an employee drug testing program AFAIK. Why do the employees at the top get a pass?


John Parker • Modified: January 20, 1993 at 12:00 am • Published: January 20, 1993

Proponents of drug testing for Oklahoma City Council members are donning a holier-than-thou attitude over what is basically a "few cc's of pee pee," Ward 7 Councilman Goree James said Tuesday.

The council deferred a drug-testing proposal one week after members wrangled over whether they should voluntarily submit to drug screening. Ward 3 Councilman Jack Cornett posed the idea in a resolution.

City Council Delays Drug-Testing Proposal | News OK (http://newsok.com/city-council-delays-drug-testing-proposal/article/2418952)

That was voluntary. Should be mandatory. If it's not needed because people won't take the job, maybe we need to consider the same about the rest of the city workers.

Swarthy??? Let's not imply that he's somehow a minority in a city where "poor Lebanese" is an oxymoron. Flaws?? You've ignored the fact that he lies, ignored the fact that he doesn't play fair with his peers, ignored the fact that he has no plans to support his agenda. Those are excellent reasons why he shouldn't be mayor from a political standpoint so I guess it's no surprise that you see this extremely unbecoming (and illegal) behavior in a physician and human being as "flaws".

And again, I'm a fairly liberal democrat who is very happy voting for Mayor Cornett. There are some things I'm going to ask him to promote during his next term, particularly an improved transit system. But when the progressives are supporting Cornett over Shadid, you'd better take a hard look at why, if you consider yourself progressive.

Edgar can't even vote in this election as he's not an OKC resident. His role is "astroturfing" for Shadid on here by trying to change the conversation from things that make Ed Shadid look bad, like the huge Gazette article that broke last night. He's possibly getting paid for his efforts or is a campaign volunteer.

It does look like we got a few words from our "worldwide ambassador" for Oklahoma City as Mick called him.*

Added to the gazette story apparently sometime after the original post...


In a text to Oklahoma Gazette late Sunday night, Coyne clarified what he said: “It was just a silly remark. No I've never smoked pot with Mayor Cornett and I don't think he smokes pot. But, I think he is open minded and has progressive solutions for lower income families in OKC and perhaps he will consider the outdated marihuana laws, and their impact on our families and community in his next term.”

Doesn't change my position on a testing program for the mayor, the council and anyone else working for the city.

*What does that say about Mick's judgement?

Kevin, I don't know, but I'd wager you've had a few of your clients report to ICS for a UA (you're in Cleveland County, IIRC). It is a grossly humiliating experience, although necessary to prevent devices such as the Wizzinator The Whizzinator Touch - The Most Realistic Synthetic Urine System Device by Alternative Lifestyle Systems (http://www.thewhizzinator.com/) from being used. The male or female test subject gets to drop trou, hold their shirt up so their stomach is exposed and then get the urine flowing while being observed by an observer of the appropriate gender. I for one probably wouldn't want to run because I wouldn't want to subject myself to that.

Yes, it is Mid. And yes, it is even worse if someone is physically infirm in some manner and/or also relies on a device in their body due to a medical condition.

But then again, it is the same form of testing for someone who seeks public assistance, and for many in the public sector and in the private sector who endure pre-employment testing and subsequent random testing as a condition of continued employment. Perhaps if more politicos had a truly working up close and personal knowledge of the process so easily pressed onto a large part of the populace, a better process, or a more limited process might come into existence.

Yes, it is Mid. And yes, it is even worse if someone is physically infirm in some manner and/or also relies on a device in their body due to a medical condition.

But then again, it is the same form of testing for someone who seeks public assistance, and for many in the public sector and in the private sector who endure pre-employment testing and subsequent random testing as a condition of continued employment. Perhaps if more politicos had a truly working up close and personal knowledge of the process so easily pressed onto a large part of the populace, a better process, or a more limited process might come into existence.

Thing is, ICS and SOS (and the Courthouse lab) are pretty solid collection centers. Others? Not so much. I did take a UA one time around 15 years ago for a retail job. I took my cup into the bathroom and that was that. No trouble at all. Some of these more criminal justice inclined sites though...well, your mileage may vary. We'll just leave it at that.

Drug testing for any reason other than child custody or as part of a rehab program or criminal case type reasons is just unnecessary.

Drug testing for any reason other than child custody or as part of a rehab program or criminal case type reasons is just unnecessary.

Pilot? (My apologies if I took your remark out of context.)

Pilot? (My apologies if I took your remark out of context.)

Amended:

Ok. Drug testing for any reason other than child custody or as part of a rehab program or criminal case or public safety type reasons is just unnecessary.

I know I'm veering off topic, but I'd like to see drug testing for politicians (and almost anybody who draws a check from the government on any level) for an ulterior motive. I don't think that marijuana (pot, weed, herb -- choose how you wish to sound cool about the substance) is anything worse than alcohol and should be legalized. Maybe if there were the threat of more detection it would come closer to legalization. Also, maybe if it was more expensive to test for marijuana in addition to drugs that we can agree are more dangerous, it would be in the public interest to legalize marijuana.

It does look like we got a few words from our "worldwide ambassador" for Oklahoma City as Mick called him.*

Added to the gazette story apparently sometime after the original post...


In a text to Oklahoma Gazette late Sunday night, Coyne clarified what he said: “It was just a silly remark. No I've never smoked pot with Mayor Cornett and I don't think he smokes pot. But, I think he is open minded and has progressive solutions for lower income families in OKC and perhaps he will consider the outdated marihuana laws, and their impact on our families and community in his next term.”

Doesn't change my position on a testing program for the mayor, the council and anyone else working for the city.

*What does that say about Mick's judgement?

And to think you were taking Coyne's word as a blood oath on this ? LOL

Midtowner, question for you (being an attorney and definitely not a shrill for The Oklahoman): Would the sealing of testimony concerning a doctor's use of narcotics while in practice prevent those suing him for malpractice from discovering this information as part of their lawsuits?

And to think you were taking Coyne's word as a blood oath on this ? LOL

Cite? I never said it was correct or that I believed it. In fact at one point I said the opposite, he was too nerdy to be a pot smoker.

I always said it should have been followed up on, particularly by some of the press who still haven't mentioned it, The Daily Oklahoman, who makes a point of targeting who they are politically against, and at the same time have a hand off approach to Mick in particular and their other buddies.

Seems like you rarely care for the topic or facts and more about the people who post. At least that's the way you direct your comments. Got anything to say on the topic?

More to the point, do you think this Ed hunt and kill was all done from a place of 100% pure journalistic integrity?

FWIW, without any consideration to the current OKC mayor race, it would not bother me if those running for elected office, any elected office, muni, county, state or federal had to submit to drug testing within 24 hours of filing, 24 hours of taking office, and one or two random tests each year in office.

After all, we now test a passle of poor folk sans any suspicion.

During the drug test welfare recipients debate at the capitol one Dem proposed the idea that if you test welfare recipients then it only makes sense to test lawmakers as well and maybe they suggested testing anyone who receives any government assistance or even a tax credit. I thought it was a good idea, not sure why we ask more from the poor than other people who benefit off of govt.

It is funny that Shadid himself brought up Coyne's comments as if they were credible. Hilarious, actually.

Cite? I never said it was correct or that I believed it. In fact at one point I said the opposite, he was too nerdy to be a pot smoker.

I always said it should have been followed up on, particularly by some of the press who still haven't mentioned it, The Daily Oklahoman, who makes a point of targeting who they are politically against, and at the same time have a hand off approach to Mick in particular and their other buddies.

Seems like you rarely care for the topic or facts and more about the people who post. At least that's the way you direct your comments. Got anything to say on the topic?


I've posted plenty on the topic, but when people like you that have a vendatta against the DOK, keep your own attacks up then it gets out of hand. I post about a lot of the idiotic comments coming from the Ed campaign....

Go re-read your post about your insinuation of Mayor Mick smoking pot.....? It's out there in the previous 10 pages or so.
Your evidence was something WC said at a news years eve party...

I've posted plenty on the topic, but when people like you that have a vendatta against the DOK, keep your own attacks up then it gets out of hand. I post about a lot of the idiotic comments coming from the Ed campaign....

Go re-read your post about your insinuation of Mayor Mick smoking pot.....? It's out there in the previous 10 pages or so.
Your evidence was something WC said at a news years eve party...

No, it's your claim about what I said. Back it up. Second. I'm still not the topic of this thread.

No, it's your claim about what I said. Back it up. Second. I'm still not the topic of this thread.

Poster David was quoted by mkjeeves as saying this:


Originally Posted by David
If it really is scandalous, I just want it out now. It's far better for OKC for a mayoral candidate to have his campaign ruined than for it to come out after he manages to get elected.

Here was mkjeeves reply. I will leave it up to readers to determine if he was insinuating Mayor Cornett smoked pot.


I agree. And the pot smoking allegations about the current mayor we are about to re-elect?

Poster David was quoted by mkjeeves as saying this:


Originally Posted by David
If it really is scandalous, I just want it out now. It's far better for OKC for a mayoral candidate to have his campaign ruined than for it to come out after he manages to get elected.

Here was mkjeeves reply. I will leave it up to readers to determine if he was insinuating Mayor Cornett smoked pot.

Exactly correct. David wanted all possible scandals settled now. I agreed we needed that. My question was did he want Wayne's allegations settled now about Mick too or just the ones about Ed?

It's also funny that no one believed Wayne until Wayne told them what they wanted to hear, he doesn't know and doesn't think mick smokes pot. Then it was gospel.

Exactly correct. David wanted all possible scandals settled now. My question was did he want Wayne's allegations settled now about Mick too or just the ones about Ed?

It's also funny that no one believed Wayne until Wayne told them what they wanted to hear, he doesn't know and doesn't think mick smokes pot. Then it was gospel.

There were several others beside yourself, including Ed Shadid himself, who acted as if those Wayne Coyne comments were credible. What a joke. Perhaps you were just trying to needle the Oklahoman a bit, but it seems kuku to compare admissions in open court and on public television with silly things a rocker said from a stage. Equating the two, which I guess you were not, is silly.

Like I said:

1. His words are 100% credible on the part where he says he was just kidding then. Why is that?

2. We named a street after their band. Mick elevated his status in an interview. There's a state song or something? and some other official recognition I'm too lazy to look up. Nope, you say, the people, the government, and Mick in particular, think they are all a bunch of dishonest folk right? Couldn't possibly have any need to follow up on a public claim of illegal activity against the mayor. Unfathomable. When he's your guy.

I left out the part about his wife being appointed to a city post.

Oy vey. So do think this is a scandal or not? I'm confused. I honestly don't know your opinion.

mkjeeves is simply a bomb thrower. He makes inferences and inuendoes, and when challenged to back them up (by Bellaboo) he back pedals, and then makes makes someone else (soonerguru) root through the thread and find them, followed by a change of subject.

Can't you simply set the hyperbole aside for a minute and enumerate Ed's accomplishments that clearly demonstrate why he's the best mayoral candidate?

Here's your governor with the guy who can't be trusted or believed unless he said what you wanted him to say:

http://oklahomarock.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/fallincoyne.jpg

Like I said:

1. His words are 100% credible on the part where he says he was just kidding then. Why is that?

2. We named a street after their band. Mick elevated his status in an interview. There's a state song or something? and some other official recognition I'm too lazy to look up. Nope, you say, the people, the government, and Mick in particular, think they are all a bunch of dishonest folk right? Couldn't possibly have any need to follow up on a public claim of illegal activity against the mayor. Unfathomable. When he's your guy.

I left out the part about his wife being appointed to a city post.

1) Because he said it at a concert and was probably high at the time of the concert. Honestly, even if Wayne Coyne said "You have a Ward 2 city councilman who smokes pot in his house!" I wouldn't believe it because it's from Wayne Coyne and if you have seen his live show, been to the Womb gallery and follow him on twitter, you know he is all about the shock value.

2) You can give someone recognition and not agree with their beliefs. At the time of the alley dedication, Wayne Coyne was globally one of the most popular people in the world (I don't think we recognize this as much as people from out of the state of Oklahoma) and was someone who was an ambassador for OKC since he grew up here and had roots here. Now, of course, KD and Russell Westbrook are more of the ambassadors of OKC than WC, which is a great thing.

Obviously no one can prove which of Wayne Coyne's two statements are true. One of them is. Either he has seen Mick Cornett smoke marijuana or he hasn't. One of them seems more logical. The way I see it, we can either vote for a mayor who has given OKC exemplary service, who has continued the legacy of his mayor forebears, who worked tirelessly to bring the Thunder here and continue the MAPS legacy and who might or might not (might not seems a bit more likely) have smoked marijuana with Wayne Coyne or we can vote for someone who promised to support MAPS 3 and then broke his word, who never participated in government politics until the election in which he ran, who has tried to manipulate his peers to achieve his ends (not those of his constituents) and who has smoked marijuana and used cocaine, etc, etc.

I see the facts outlined in the divorce brouhaha as supportive of my earlier impression of Ed Shadid - he's not a person to trust in any position of authority. They don't make my decision, they just make my decision look even better.

I don't care what Wayne Coyne says about either candidate and its not worth any media member's time to dig into that subject.

Obviously no one can prove which of Wayne Coyne's two statements are true. One of them is. Either he has seen Mick Cornett smoke marijuana or he hasn't. One of them seems more logical. The way I see it, we can either vote for a mayor who has given OKC exemplary service, who has continued the legacy of his mayor forebears, who worked tirelessly to bring the Thunder here and continue the MAPS legacy and who might or might not (might not seems a bit more likely) have smoked marijuana with Wayne Coyne or we can vote for someone who promised to support MAPS 3 and then broke his word, who never participated in government politics until the election in which he ran, who has tried to manipulate his peers to achieve his ends (not those of his constituents) and who has smoked marijuana and used cocaine, etc, etc.

I see the facts outlined in the divorce brouhaha as supportive of my earlier impression of Ed Shadid - he's not a person to trust in any position of authority. They don't make my decision, they just make my decision look even better.

^^^ this.

1) Because he said it at a concert and was probably high at the time of the concert. Honestly, even if Wayne Coyne said "You have a Ward 2 city councilman who smokes pot in his house!" I wouldn't believe it because it's from Wayne Coyne and if you have seen his live show, been to the Womb gallery and follow him on twitter, you know he is all about the shock value.

I think that goes both ways and doesn't settle anything. Any of this could be a possibility:
He said something he should have kept in confidence but he was high.
He said something he made up because he was high.
He said something because he wasn't high and rationally likes to self promote through controversy.
He wasn't high and said something he thought was true because he's stupid and didn't realize the possible ramifications, or just didn't care at the time.

Or we could look up what he just said about it and believe that.
Or we could doubt THAT's completely true but he said it from political pressure. Or maybe he was high the second time. I mean come on. The guy made a statement about criminal activity and the mayor. It should have been addressed a long time before now. Still amazed at how little it took for some people to say, oh, now we know the truth.



2) You can give someone recognition and not agree with their beliefs. At the time of the alley dedication, Wayne Coyne was globally one of the most popular people in the world (I don't think we recognize this as much as people from out of the state of Oklahoma) and was someone who was an ambassador for OKC since he grew up here and had roots here. Now, of course, KD and Russell Westbrook are more of the ambassadors of OKC than WC, which is a great thing.

Sure you can. However, credible governments don't typically recognize and associate themselves with people whom they think are the out of control, drug dazed and dishonest types some claim is widely known and accepted. Fleas, dogs, sleeping and all that.

Right, wrong, good, bad or indifferent, I wouldn't put much credence into anything that WC has to say...especially in a crowd at a concert....I don't have a problem with him, just wouldn't trust his hyperbole at a concert.

His comments about the Mayor were never addressed because people knew where it came from, WC.....

Right, wrong, good, bad or indifferent, I wouldn't put much credence into anything that WC has to say.....I don't have a problem with him, just wouldn't trust his hyperbole at a concert.

His comments about the Mayor were never addressed because people knew where it came from, WC.....

Should have just said that. It made more sense than my ranting.

I think that goes both ways and doesn't settle anything. Any of this could be a possibility:
He said something he should have kept in confidence but he was high.
He said something he made up because he was high.
He said something because he wasn't high and rationally likes to self promote through controversy.
He wasn't high and said something he thought was true because he's stupid and didn't realize the possible ramifications, or just didn't care at the time.

Or we could look up what he just said about it and believe that.
Or we could doubt THAT's completely true but he said it from political pressure. Or maybe he was high the second time. I mean come on. The guy made a statement about criminal activity and the mayor. It should have been addressed a long time before now. Still amazed at how little it took for some people to say, oh, now we know the truth.

Sure you can. However, credible governments don't typically recognize and associate themselves with people whom they think are the out of control, drug dazed and dishonest types some claim is widely known and accepted. Fleas, dogs, sleeping and all that.

What are you trying to accomplish? You are asking all of these questions, what do you think the answers are?

What are you trying to accomplish? You are asking all of these questions, what do you think the answers are?

I'm pretty sure I've said something like this about 50 times and again in the post you quoted.


It should have been addressed a long time before now.

What are you trying to accomplish? You are asking all of these questions, what do you think the answers are?

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

What are you trying to accomplish? You are asking all of these questions, what do you think the answers are?

He'd have to be able to answer a question before he could answer that... I think he's pre-programmed to just ask questions and change the subject of those questions to avoid anything of substance.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track,

You might go back to this last exchange and see it was your friend and fellow personal attacker Bellaboo who started this last conversation. Talk to him. In big letters.

mkjeeves, are you going to discuss Ed's accomplishments or keep beating the "Wayne Coyne says Mick smokes pot" drum?

Same response as the one above yours. Talk to Bellaboo about beating it...

Prior to Bellaboo's BS whipping the horse, this was my last post on the Wayne subject:

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/34251-okc-mayor-race-2014-a-90.html#post719441

We're getting trolled. Stop feeding into it.

Batter up. It's their turn. I wonder who Mick's barber is and where they put the clippings? I still think we need to drug test the mayor and everyone on the council.

Another example of you blaming Mick for smoking dope......... Oh crap, you really didn't say this did you...?

LOL. Jaysus. It isn't that hard. If you don't want to talk about it quit bringing it up.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

Wow. This is amazing stuff. Let's keep quoting this post and keeping this information in the forefront.

Which candidate are you referring to?

Another insinuation........ You couldn't have said this, Because you said you didn't.

You keep telling yourself you didn't say things and you'll start believing it.

And yes, it was about drugs.

So you do want to talk about Mick and Wayne or no? Make up your mind.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

I want to talk about this.

...
Drug testing for any reason other than child custody or as part of a rehab program or criminal case type reasons is just unnecessary.

And if that is where we stopped, we'd be belly'd up to the same bar. But as you know, that isn't where we limit the testing. I figure it is at least as costly to society for a politico being impaired than a chap in a warehouse or a noskills parent relying on public assistance.

But as we don't limit it to custody determinations and the criminal case realm, it's not hard to say those who make policy ought to live with some of the policy that gets created.

Clearly we need Wayne's post about getting drunk with the Governor investigated, since apparently every single comment of his is worth taking seriously.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

So... about all this? Anything of substance from Edgar and the gang or just the continuing harmony and rhythm of the crickets chirping?

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

We're all reposting this, right?

We're all reposting this, right?

Yes. This is how you combat trolls who are trying to filibuster and change the conversation.

I think that goes both ways and doesn't settle anything. Any of this could be a possibility:
He said something he should have kept in confidence but he was high.
He said something he made up because he was high.
He said something because he wasn't high and rationally likes to self promote through controversy.
He wasn't high and said something he thought was true because he's stupid and didn't realize the possible ramifications, or just didn't care at the time.

Or we could look up what he just said about it and believe that.
Or we could doubt THAT's completely true but he said it from political pressure. Or maybe he was high the second time. I mean come on. The guy made a statement about criminal activity and the mayor. It should have been addressed a long time before now. Still amazed at how little it took for some people to say, oh, now we know the truth.




Sure you can. However, credible governments don't typically recognize and associate themselves with people whom they think are the out of control, drug dazed and dishonest types some claim is widely known and accepted. Fleas, dogs, sleeping and all that.

Wayne Coyne does not have any credibility. That's the reason. He doesn't have credibility when he says Mayor Mick smokes pot, and he doesn't have credibility when he says Mayor Mick doesn't smoke pot. In the end we are left with our own knowledge and perceptions of the mayor. I mean, I like Mick, but he's a huge dork.

If the Lost Ogle posted an article that said "Ed Shadid Killed 5 Hookers", would you demand an investigation? Because that's what you have here. You have an entertainer making a wild claim that people immediately discount.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

I wonder what is still under seal?

Midtowner, question for you (being an attorney and definitely not a shrill for The Oklahoman): Would the sealing of testimony concerning a doctor's use of narcotics while in practice prevent those suing him for malpractice from discovering this information as part of their lawsuits?

Not Midtowner, but I am a lawyer, used to do divorce, just criminal now...but to answer your question...of course. If it is sealed...no one will know its there, or what is in there. From my practice, it has usually been the case that to get a sealed record unsealed, you have to show there is information there necessary for your case. But you cannot just say..."we want to see if something is there," you have to have a reasonable basis for it. So, sealing it would protect him somewhat. And it would protect him from the medical licensure board from using it against him for practicing while high. They usually frown on practicing while high.

And to echo what Midtowner said...in 30 years of practicing law, I cannot think of a single divorce client ever pleading the 5th. And I have had tons with drug problems. And they all admit the problem.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

Is there any question who is the best choice for office?

Hmm... Mick Cornett, proven and trusted.

Ed Shadid...doing coke, and admitting to being violent.

Is this even a question anymore? It's obvious who is the better candidate

Okay, so why don't you show up at the next council meeting with a "collection" professional and make an offer? Or stfu about it!


Ha ha. LOL. Lets drug test them all anyway. What are you afraid of?

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

Then count me in.

He's astroturfing. It's like filibustering. This is a tactic to deflect the conversation away from Ed Shadid's imbroglio in the Gazette. He starts conversations about having politicians drug tested, etc. to keep the discussion off of Shadid. We are all falling for this by arguing with him. Just to keep the conversation on track, I'll repost the Gazette article here for discussion.

Mayoral candidate Ed Shadid confirms cocaine use, violence when asked about his sealed divorce file, which The Daily Oklahoman is fighting to open

Oklahoma Gazette News: Ed Shadid's divorce records (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-19981-ed-shadids-divorce-records.html)

stupED

bustED

disgustED

Is anyone else agnostic about the race? I've been following closely because well who doesn't love a good fight, but neither candidate is ideal.

National press is lauding OKC for low unemployment, the downtown focus is spilling over in 'hoods like Midtown, Uptown, JFK, and OKC is on TV sets across the country countless times a year (Thunder Up). Mick has done great things for the city, but hasn't laid out a plan for the next 4 years. Despite the good news we still have expensive sprawl issues (bad air, bad water infrastructure), a truly awful school district, and OKC's income is still below the national average (say nothing of the poverty rate). He also has a less than stellar record on some urban issues: streetcar route is too sort, we're rebuilding a freeway downtown with its replacement blocks away, the NE and inner SW sides of town are still very ghetto, and Ed's right, our bus service sucks.

Some on here have brushed it off, but I admired Ed's fight on the convention center; I still think that was a poor use of MAPS 3 dollars (many agree, see Mick's last results, and the rocky passage of MAPS 3). Even though Ed seems to have a platform built on transit access and funds for inner city neighborhoods, he lacks the knowledge and political skills to get any of that done. I don't disagree with Mick enough to jump on board the Ed train. He's flipped flopped on the streetcar, which while not perfect is a start to a 30 year dream of rail in OKC. I'm not going to rehash the deeply embarrassing divorce proceedings here, but even the bleeding heart liberal in me thinks that's just not the standard public office holders should set. So adding all of these up Ed's clearly not up to snuff.

Neither of these guys excite me. Maybe I'm just asking for too much in an urban-minded mayor that doesn't have a coke-filled background and knows how to listen to the urbanism consultants the city hires.

Is anyone else agnostic about the race? I've been following closely because well who doesn't love a good fight, but neither candidate is ideal.

National press is lauding OKC for low unemployment, the downtown focus is spilling over in 'hoods like Midtown, Uptown, JFK, and OKC is on TV sets across the country countless times a year (Thunder Up). Mick has done great things for the city, but hasn't laid out a plan for the next 4 years. Despite the good news we still have expensive sprawl issues (bad air, bad water infrastructure), a truly awful school district, and OKC's income is still below the national average (say nothing of the poverty rate). He also has a less than stellar record on some urban issues: streetcar route is too sort, we're rebuilding a freeway downtown with its replacement blocks away, the NE and inner SW sides of town are still very ghetto, and Ed's right, our bus service sucks.

Some on here have brushed it off, but I admired Ed's fight on the convention center; I still think that was a poor use of MAPS 3 dollars (many agree, see Mick's last results, and the rocky passage of MAPS 3). Even though Ed seems to have a platform built on transit access and funds for inner city neighborhoods, he lacks the knowledge and political skills to get any of that done. I don't disagree with Mick enough to jump on board the Ed train. He's flipped flopped on the streetcar, which while not perfect is a start to a 30 year dream of rail in OKC. I'm not going to rehash the deeply embarrassing divorce proceedings here, but even the bleeding heart liberal in me thinks that's just not the standard public office holders should set. So adding all of these up Ed's clearly not up to snuff.

Neither of these guys excite me. Maybe I'm just asking for too much in an urban-minded mayor that doesn't have a coke-filled background and knows how to listen to the urbanism consultants the city hires.

Great post. I agree that Mayor Cornett is not "exciting," and he is not perfect, but I've gotten the chance to meet him and he is a very cerebral guy who has OKC's best interests in mind. He's also highly competent. He's a bit shy and comes across as less than warm (until you meet him), but he's also a very good guy. He is also a remarkable public spokesman for OKC.

There are so many differences between the two that it's hard to know where to start. But I'll leave you with this: Cornett has actually advanced more progressive, urbanist ideals than any mayor in my lifetime. He's had to do it within the frame that is set for him by the OKC ruling elites. This is a compliment, not a critique. He understands the level of pragmatism that is required to advance this city forward while dealing with powerful, colossal egos. He also is the rare politico who has kept his word.

As a fellow liberal, I am excited to vote for Mayor Cornett. He has represented our city with dignity and class -- and he has advanced many ideas I never thought an OKC mayor would. One more term!

Clearly we need Wayne's post about getting drunk with the Governor investigated, since apparently every single comment of his is worth taking seriously.

Getting drunk with the governor...not a crime.

Being the governor and posing in selfies with someone your base thinks is a despicable dopehead...probably not the best judgement.