Texas Thoroughbred Forum

[Roger]

Rog, it has nothing to do with a lawsuit but everything to do with Key posting accusations he can't substantiate. You and the other 3 mushrooms who condone his behavior make you just as culpable. When Key is asked to elaborate on his accusations, he chooses to ignore the questions and changes the subject. He should have learned by now just because he chooses to ignore the questions, it doesn't make them go away.

Give us some examples of Key's unsubstantiated accusations, and unanswered questions. It seems to me that you are the one who fails to answer questions and you are the one calling people names. Key lets people know who he is and you hide be a nickname?Let's top this post off with the standard BS, this is just my political opinion.

[Bedouwia]

Once upon a time, a long, long, time ago .... the TTA had an online forum. I used to enjoy it. People talked about their horses, pedigrees, and made suggestions about how to improve horse racing in Texas. Then the forum was killed, because often there were critical comments and disagreements.

So, Roger moved the discussion to this little venue. If you go back to the beginnings, you would find a lot of posters who are long gone. I hardly bother to check in any more, because I am not really interested in reading about folks personal attacks upon one another. I don't have the time or the energy to spend being uncivil.

People, racing in Texas is dying. Many of the good people who built the sport are now in their final resting place, along with most of the good horses who arrived in Texas when the future looked bright. Slots are not, and will not be the answer to our problems. I hope that there are some people left with the assets and common sense to move us forward, but I am beginning to doubt that very much.

We need to find some exceptional people to move us forward. We need to work together. We need to remember that what happens to Texas racing impacts the real lives and circumstances of people and their families not just a few egotistical board members. Owners, trainers, jockeys, grooms, vets, etc. are the basis of our associations. The board members should serve the members, not the other way around.

Bedouwia

[Ajo]

Right on, Bedouwia! So are you running for TTA or TTHBPA? If not, why not?

[keyranch]

Ajo, you have been on this forum long enough to know our friend has had a few issues the last couple of years. She contributes with her participation in the forums and shows up when asked by the TTA staff to count votes. She has been involved in the industry for many, many years and your attempt to badger her is another lack of class on your part! As a member or former member of the associations, she should be treated with the respect and you owe her an apology!

[Gate2Wire]

Rog, I don't have the time or desire to search Key's accusatory posts especially since you won't acknowledge it anyway. You can read them for yourself. I do find it ironic that Key continues to post about the proverbial rabbit hole while he continues to dig his own grave. Key, your latest rant on FB, you accuse the TTA nominating comm of election fraud....how do your clients feel about that post since a couple of them are on that comm? This post is a political opinion.

[Roger]

Rog, I don't have the time or desire to search Key's accusatory posts especially since you won't acknowledge it anyway. You can read them for yourself. I do find it ironic that Key continues to post about the proverbial rabbit hole while he continues to dig his own grave. Key, your latest rant on FB, you accuse the TTA nominating comm of election fraud....how do your clients feel about that post since a couple of them are on that comm? This post is a political opinion.

Another cop-out. If you can't back up what you post behind your nick-name, then you should not post it at all. Even your generalizations lack credibility. In my opinion.

[Ajo]

I stand chastised, and I do sincerely apologize to Bedouwia. Ajo

[Roger]

[quote="Ajo"]I stand chastised, and I do sincerely apologize to Bedouwia. Ajo[/quote

You're not all bad, you have old gate using words like culpable and you have me proofing my post sometimes, but I've found that a waste of time since or is it sense, I still can't spell any way.

You never did tell me how the nice Special Rate baby on your FB page is doing.

[Bedouwia]

Ajo, apology accepted.

Yes, the last couple of years have not been the best that I have known.

However, I might have replied that in the past I have served on many boards and committees. That includes six years on a Texas school board, three as President. It taught me a lot of things, including that being a board member is a big responsibility. Too often those who serve do so for their own egos, and often just follow along with what the superintendent suggests. Sometimes that is the right thing and sometimes it is not. A good board member needs to know the difference by being well informed and connected to the district.

I am now too far removed from Texas horse racing to even consider being qualified to serve, even if asked, which I was not. I do sincerely hope however that the associations will find dedicated board members who will do their jobs and not just tag along.

Bedouwia

[Gate2Wire]

Rog, here's your example. Key has posted nothing that's true the last 2 days. There are NO violations of bylaws for the upcoming TTA elections. There is NO deadline for the election nominees. There was NO vote on a 60 day meet. Also, there are NO board members who own interest in KY stallions. John Adger manages Stonerside's interest in some stallions and Mr. Heiligbrodt has owned many stallions in many states. Both of these people have done more for TX racing and breeding than most folks on the board. Did you read Weilberg's post on FB? We are now further behind the 8 ball concerning ADWs and other revenue streams because all of these now have been made even more illegal. All this time we werevtold how the politicians thought this was already legal here and a bill was coming forward. The very opposite was true. They took us further from these things. NO ADW bill was ever in consideration from sunset or any other source. Global and LSP spent untold money and time to get these things and were sent packing.

[Roger]

[quote="Gate2Wire"]Rog, here's your example. Key has posted nothing that's true the last 2 days. There are NO violations of bylaws for the upcoming TTA elections. There is NO deadline for the election nominees.

Lets look at one of these at a time.

Dave went to great length trying explain the board's actions in replacing a nominee, but my question is, why was there a need to go looking. What is the magic number of NOMINEE'S needed to run. WHY IN THE WORLD IS'NT THIS PROCEEDURE IN THE BY-LAWS? It really looks suspicous when all of a sudden we have so many candidates (were they nominated) running in in the at-large. How many did we have last year for the vacant spots?

The rules are pretty clear in the by-laws. Just check out Article V. It really looks bad to see so many interpretations of what is simple. Its all on pages 11 and 12 of the by-laws. You really need to read the thing before making statements like you have in this post.

[Roger]

[quote="Gate2Wire"]Rog, here's your example. Key has posted nothing that's true the last 2 days. There are NO violations of bylaws for the upcoming TTA elections. There is NO deadline for the election nominees. There was NO vote on a 60 day meet.

Working from memory. Ms Sam Houston said that the directors and track representives meet every year over lunch to discuss dates. There might not have been a formal vote, but when I spoke to the Commission at LS it was very clear, that the tracks and the Associations were in favor of the 60 day meet. There are many was to reach consensus without a vote. I think that your comment is just a play on words to deceive and mislead.

[Ajo]

Quote Roger "I think that your comment is just a play on words to deceive and mislead."
My reply: Roger, I think that your comment is just a play on words to deceive and mislead.
There was never a vote by the THP affirming the need or desire for the 60 day meet. The 60 day meet didn't occur for the reason I outlned on Facebook Tb on Thursday on Bob Pickard's thread. There were no secret luncheons to determine race dates. But would you deny our negotiators the right to eat during a long meeting? Do you expect negotiations to take place out on the sidewalk in front of an assembled audience with pro and con cheering sections? Is it unreasonable to have a meeting with a board member or track executive that might resolve some dispute or misunderstanding? Do Jan and Marsha and Tom Hayes have to be recorded and notarized every time they have a conversation with somebody influential in the racing business? I didn't hear any complaints when Theo had lunch with Marsha. I didn't see any minutes of your private converstions with the TRC staff, either. My point is, people talk privately and get information or get things done. It is your right and it is mine. Transparency is a good thing, but it shouldn't be demanded ad absurdem. And disingenuous conclusions shouldn't be repeatedly alleged to emphasize political opnions that have no veracity. Credibility can be stretched just so far, and then it tends to fade to nil rapidly. Why emulate those who have stretched credibility beyond its tensile capacity?

[tinners way]

Terry Blanton must have been mistaken when he testified at the meeting in Dallas about the vote. And for that matter why did John Roark also apologize for the vote that wasn't a vote?

To be fair, Terry did say there were a lot of questions, but he did say there was a vote. And Doc, this is not one of your cut and paste maneuvers, but word for word.


MR. BLANTON: She'll turn that over to me
to give an update.
It's actually a copy of our race date
board meeting that we had about two weeks ago after our
general meeting that was held here at Lone Star Park.
There was about a three-hour discussion on race dates.
And some people think that we have approved race
dates. And that is not true.
We had a long discussion revolving around
24
1 the applications that Drew and both Sam Houston have
2 proposed to us. And we think that's a viable plan.
3 But we -- even though a vote was taken, there's a lot
4 of if's to that plan that we're continuing to discuss
5 because we have this meeting today and we have another
6 meeting obviously at Sam Houston and we have meetings
7 scheduled obviously with the Commission and listening
8 to the horsemen out there.
9 So there's still concerns with that
10 situation even though we think that is a very viable
11 situation because if you'll study and look at this
12 thing like I do each day, our purse structure is
13 continuing to decline and that's with the handle and
14 with the economy and that type of situation. We're all
15 concerned about it.
16 And certainly there's concern from the
17 standpoint of horsemen that there will be a loss of
18 dates in the industry and people going out of business
19 and that type of situation. It's a very dire
20 situation. And we don't take this as a cut-and-dried
21 situation.

[tinners way]

And, there is a big difference between having lunch with a friend or colleague and discussing a topic and your position on that, and a policy decision that requires a quorum and a vote. Even though you still insist one was never taken. I guess Terry is not aware of what constitutes taking a vote.