The Register    OPINION    EDITORIAL
* * * * * *

Updates with Doris Moore Bailey: a program worth saving
A look at another local news program that has been serving Polk County and Lakeland, Florida for quite some time; highlights diverse history, accolades, kudos, and accomplishments, as well as recent, new challenges

By Gordon Wayne Watts | Thursday, 03 November 2016 (LAKELAND, Fla.) ; Updated: Sunday, 12 March 2017, at 09:56am (EST) to fix minor typos & add Editor's Note @ bottom

Lakeland, Florida, situated almost mid-way between Tampa and Orlando, has several local news medić, including various newspapers, web blogs, and radio programs, one of which is WLKF, 'Talk-1430', broadcasting on 1430-AM and 96.7 FM-stereo. Its programing schedule, which does not feature music, includes both nationally-syndicated as well as local talk programs, hence the name, "Talk-1430." One of the better call-in programs is Update with Doris Moore-Bailey hosted by Doris Moore-Bailey, the CEO of the eponymous Nonprofit Organization, The Bailey Group.

Doris Moore Bailey - FairUse thumbnaail I have known Doris for years, and not only been a semi-regular caller to the show, but also worked with her on other things off-air as well, and, for many years, she has made efforts to make all-comers to her program feel welcome, whether or not their political views were in the majority (which, in some cases, was the case for myself). She is a middle-aged professing Christian whose favourite books include The Holy Bible. Before going into more detail about Ms. Bailey, however, let me give you an overview of her program and a small selection of recent guests. Alzo Reddeck from the Florida Memory Project used by permission Alzo Reddeck from via FairUse One of my favourite recurring guests is Dr. Alzo J. Reddeck, who is a legendary Florida State Lawmaker. [The photo so denoted is from the Florida Memory Project, hosted at the State Archive of Florida, and is released into the public domain in the United States, under the terms of Section 257.35(6), Florida Statutes. Note: In accordance with the provisions of Section 257.35(6), Florida Statutes, "Any use or reproduction of material deposited with the Florida Photographic Collection shall be allowed pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1)(b) and subsection (4), provided that appropriate credit for its use is given."]

Ronn Easton FairUse via Facebook One of the more interesting guests was Military Veteran, Ronn Easton, whose recent Facebook video just went viral, with 1.4 Million views, 5.6K comments, 11K 'Likes,' and 14K shares, in which Easton claimed that Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, said that: “Only weak veterans get PTSD.” Easton seemed sincere in his claims, but his claims about the Trump speech were false, and eventually debunked as 'mostly false' by SNOPES. Mr. Trump indeed complimented "folks in this room" for being "strong," but he also went to lengths to express empathy for those military personnel who had experienced "horror stories." Mr. Easton caught a lot of flack from Facebook users, including this writer, whose original posts seem to have been deleted. But Mr. Easton appears to have let me post two comments in a more recent thread, one short thank you note and then a longer clarification of the good and bad points of his wall posts. For reasons that were not clear, Mr. Easton blocked me after I posted my respectful comments: (short thank you note and longer clarification: _p.1_ - _p.2_ - _p.3_ - _p.4_) after deleting two of my comments, but he was kind enough to let the other two remain. (Perhaps he thought that were duplicative, but it seemed petty to block me when I had not done anything more than respectfully, politely disagree with part of his post, while agreeing with other points he made.) D.C. Atty., Barbara Arnwine, Esq. Attorney Barbara Arnwine is another frequent guest, whose specialty includes voter rights issues. She is strongly against excessive Identification standards (which, many think, single out minorities and the poor). Since Ms. Bailey's programs focuses greatly (although not exclusively) on African-American and minority issues, this is a very important issue for all of the panel and callers. In fact, while I might disagree a little bit (in my view that at least some form of photo-ID should be required), by-and-large, I am mostly in agreement with Ms. Bailey, Atty. Arnwine, and most (if not all) of the other panel members and callers. In fact, I have gone to lengths to highlight (and speak out against) voter suppression against Blacks & other minorities. (perma-link - Facebook note: weigh in)

Leo Alexander FairUse via Facebook Leo Alexander is another of my favourite panel members and recurring guests. Although I read his personality as being noticeably 'Liberal' in his political views (just my guess- no offense intended), I am greatly thankful for his enthusiasm in agreeing with me that the College Debt Bubble is quite oppressive. (In fact, you can listen to him here {{Comment on Facebook * YouTube * WMV format * MP4 download}} between about 3:16 and 5:50 and even follow along in the video notes for the "OlderCall" video, of the 3 videos listed). [Note: I'm not sure if this is his correct Facebook photo, but I did the best I could. Incidentally, I found this July 30, 2010 article by Alan Suderman, in the Washington (DC) City Paper, titled: "Why is Leo Alexander Running for D.C. Mayor? [line-break] The long-shot candidate opposes gay marriage and illegal immigration, and he's not going to win.," which would suggest that he is quite conservative, and maybe not the same 'Leo Alexander from Washington' that I've heard on Ms. Bailey's program. If I've gotten several people mixed up, my apologies: I don't mean any offense, affront, or insult by it. However, I think this seems correct, because the Wikipedia article for Mr. Alexander mentions Alabama, as does the Facebook profile. On today's program, I hear Leo asking Congressional Candidates, Jim Lange of Lakeland about whether he supports having not just Native Americans, but also African Americans, on a Federally-Protected job list, as a protected class. Oddly-enough, Jim is relating how he is a light-skinned Native American, but still someone who has experienced racial prejudice - just like I, too, experienced when I was a student up at FSU, and kicked out of a business, solely (according to the police report) because I was Native American, and was wearing a feather! For the record, I know both incumbant Congressman, Dennis Ross, and Jim Lange, his Democratic challenger, quite well, and while they differ somewhat politically, both of them are men of honour, respect, & integrity, and take pains to show respect by excellent listening skills, and being quite responsive. I wrote about both of them in my recent Elections Editorial. Jim, especially, has made Herculean efforts to make himself available to voters, which I attest, speaking only for myself. Mr. Lange, who used to be a 'Reagan Republican,' before he switched parties, is "pro-choice," but absolutely hates partial birth abortion, and would not support taxpayer dollars for abortions, as best I recall him telling me. But, regardless his political views, he would be a good public servant, should he get in.]

Leo Alexander FairUse via Facebook Updates with Doris Moore Bailey: a program worth saving --
A closer look at another local news program that has been serving Polk County and Lakeland, Florida for quite some time; highlights diverse history, accolades, kudos, and accomplishments, as well as recent, new challenges

Leo Alexander FairUse via Facebook OK, that is the 'backdrop' of the program, to set the mood, but a closer look is warranted. Besides her personal web page, which advertises her radio program, Ms. Bailey also has personal Fecebook page, which is on my Facebook friend's list, as well as a professional Fecebook page and a Facebook fan page, to boot.

I wouldn't quite say that Doris is one of my best friends, but we've known each other, quite well, for ages, and, while human, I'd say that she is one of the hardest-working and most professional community organisers or talk-show hosts (not sure the exact terminology). I know that I've been listening (and calling-in) to her radio program, since at least late 2012 or maybe January 2013, maybe longer than that. And, this is an excerpt of one of those call-ins, probably that 2012-2013 one, mentioned in my Jan. 2013 email, but I'm guessing it took me a few months to upload it (note: it was Published on June 22, 2013, on YouTube) {{Comment on Facebook * YouTube * WMV format * MP4 download * Video Notes}}

I can't emphasise this enough: Doris (and all of her panel members and recurring guests) have always made me feel quite welcome, and willing to hear my views, even when they, on occasion, were at variance with the rest of the show guests; and, as an example, Doris reminds me of many of my great college professors, pastors, or some of my better Sunday School teachers, in how she made sure that "everyone got their turn," and kept the program 'on-track,' in the face of a tight schedule, long guest list/schedule, and short-on-time. She (and her numerous guests) seemed to demonstrate honour & integrity, by-and-large. (And, I add, while I really enjoy my "morning friends" on Mayhem in the AM (a rival talk program on WLKF), I usually don't get near as much share of the conversation (since Mayhem is much more diverse, and much less political in nature, and they insist on callers staying "on topic" LOL).

I know this is getting a bit lengthy, but this is an important foundation which, shortly, will be apparent in its relevance & importance, so bear with me.

Back in a Feb. 18, 2014 Facebook message, Doris asked me to call her. (I rightly forget the details, but it seems like she wanted some advice on how I set up my website, registered my domain name, and/or edited my webpages; I know she also wanted some help with her computer, which, she said, is an old Windows XP, like my old computer. I told her that I was not an expert on computers, but I recommended that she take basic steps to computer security, such as making sure she has installed & up-to-date anti-virus software, especially from reputable places like Microsoft.) The next day, 02-19-2014, I responded by 'regular' email.

More recently, this past August (2016), I emailed her about an "update" (no pun intended) regarding my Aug. 04, 2016 column in The Ledger (local cached copy), which had just published, and where I hold my congressman accountable about the massive college debt burden (one of the areas where Doris and I are in strong agreement). Since I knew she was having computer troubles, I also sent her a short "Facebook email" follow-up, to make sure she had a 'head's up' that my guest column had published: "A Polk Perspective: Fix our bankrupt policy on student debt," By Gordon Wayne Watts, Guest columnist, The Ledger, August 04, 2016 (newspaper cut-out pic)

Although Doris is clearly not a "Donald Trump" fan, when she heard that there was a rally scheduled for Lakeland Linder Airport, she asked me for time/date information and how to get a ticket. This was a little work for me to look up & find out, but she was one of my better friends, so I busted a move, and, on Oct. 07, 2017, I replied fast enough to give her several days' notice for the October 12 rally, 5 days later. In that Oct. 07 email, I gave her another copy of the web-page editing instructions about which she had been asking, when I responded in my Aug. 10 email -just to make sure she got the step-by-step instructions I had written up about making your web-page & uploading files, etc. - We were talking on the phone, when Doris got a call (call-waiting), and had to take it, but I was able to email her after that, to finish explaining what she was asking about "how to" edit a web-page & then upload it to your webspace. In my October email, with ticket information about the Trump rally in Lakeland, I reminded Doris to "use a computer at the local library," if she was afraid of getting a computer virus from opening a PDF file (since she had said that she thought she may have gotten a computer virus in the past). And, just to make fully-certain that she was being "safe" in her computer use, I reminded her to "then right-click & scan for viruses," before opening *any* file, even a PDF file (which is relatively safe, but, I hear, can still have computer viruses). I don't think anything I sent her was 'infected,' or else it would have probably infected my own computer. (Moreover, even if I were some dishonest creep, I would have no motive to do anything to Doris, since she has been one of my better friends; this is a slightly-odd-sounding comment, but it will become relevant, shortly.)

Updates with Doris Moore Bailey - a program worth saving: New Challenges

OK, this was a bit 'lengthy,' but it shall become apparent as to the meaning, soon. On Oct. 16, earlier this year, you can see that Doris had sent me a private 'Facebook' message (email) to turn my Boom-Box radio off, while I was on the phone as a call-in caller to the Sunday 5-6pm 'UPDATE' radio program she hosts. And, in all fairness to her, she had made that complaint before, both on-air, as well as in private conversations. Some of the times, she didn't name anyone, but she often insisted that she thought whomever was doing this (background noise) was doing it maliciously & intentionally. However, things took a down-turn: more-recently, she began accusing me of making noise to somehow "cause trouble" (paraphrasing from memory), and, as exemplified in this email, right here. I had made two videos with my CamCorder, of when I was calling-in to the program, and, in particular, I took special pains to show that I had turned my radio off, muted my phone (my cordless phone), as well as muted 'the line' (by the star-6 command, which is a common function in many call-in teleconferencing phone systems, such as Doris' program uses). It doesn't take a "rocket scientist" to look at the YouTube videos of my recent call-ins to the program to figure out that, whatever was going on, it wasn't me who was doing it: my radio was off, my phone was muted, and I even muted the call-in line, just to make sure that no "background noise" got in. (And, I add, it was no small-easy task to make, annotate, and then upload all these videos! But my good friend, Doris Bailey, was certain that I was not only causing disturbances, but - get this - doing this intentionally. She has said, in the past, that she can listen in on individual calls, and see who is making noise by some caller-id method, but if this is true, why doesn't she tell us who it is, and offer "video" proof, like me? --instead of making baseless & false accusations?)

This new development presented a 'new challenge' to me. To be sure, I enjoyed calling-in when I was available, but, first, I often over-slept, because of staying up late the night before (doing whatever), and, secondly (more-importantly), Doris (and, for that matter, all her friends on the program) had always treated me with the utmost respect (and even given me a 'fair share' of time to weigh in with my news & views). So, only an insane person could ever conceive or imagine that I might have any motives to "mess with" my friends. (In fact, I don't even think it's right to "mess with" your enemies, and would prefer to avoid "messing with" anyone except in last-resort self-defense - and even then only enough to defend myself, and not go overboard.)

So, as you might expect, I reassured Ms. Bailey that it wasn't me doing this. (Who knows? It might be a problem with the phone system; I don't know.)

More-importantly, I personally see Doris, her many guests, and her program, as valuable - worth saving - from what is sure devolution & descent into madness. (Anymore, it seems that every-single program, Doris is complaining about "noise on the line," and, here lately, it seems that every-other time, she drops my name as the culprit. I think this needs to be addressed.) So, as you might expect, I contacted her again, including by Facebook email, and I tried phoning her several times, as well, since it was plainly obvious (for two reasons, at least) that I wasn't creating any disturbance: First, of course, the damning forensic evidence: the videos of my call-ins where she was accusing me, when it was plainly-clear that I was innocent; and more-importantly, why would I have a motive to mistreat my friends? (And, yes, we all have enemies, but I disdain arguments even with them.)

Stepping back a moment...

I think it would be best to 'step back' and take a breath, for a moment... And learn from the past: Doris, in one recent program, told one guest (an African American gentlemen whose name I forget) to stop calling the president merely "Obama," but rather to call him "President Obama," out of respect. This other guest was a Republican and a Conservative (like me), and, while he probably didn't mean anything disrespectful, I was impressed by Doris' attention to detail, and very glad that she was trying to avoid disrespect by raising the tone. This was one of the most powerful object-lessons that I can recall in recent history, and I appreciated her efforts to keep things 'positive.'

And, while I'm not given to bragging, I will tell of one example on my side to make a point about pulling my own weight: I'm friends with many of my neighbors, and occasionally give them food/drink goods (which is a 'good' thing), but since some people are a little 'funny' about food-stuffs, I practically always make sure that it is "brand new" and unopened in its packaging. (And, besides occasionally helping those less fortunate who need food/drink/clothing, etc., I occasionally donate to my church or to other groups where I am a "taker," so I can "give back," and not just be a "taker.")

So, my point here is that there is mutual good will on both (or all) sides (with me doing my part - or trying to).

Doris also offered me support in a recent program, when I was trying to explain to Dr. Shandale Terrell (another call-in guest, candidate for Lakeland's Dist. 40 State House, and a new friend of mine) regarding Florida's controversial "Amendment 1," the Solar-Amendment-scam. So, Ms. Bailey is in agreement with many, even if not all, of my political views. (This is not, or at least, should not, be important, as I have many friends who are far more 'Liberal' than her, but I'm building to a point.) OK, my point? I'm unsure of just how to handle this... any suggestions? My progress, so far... Back on 10/16/2016, Doris asked me to turn off my radio - she repeatedly asked me. As you can see, I assured her that my radio was off, and even showed her an older video where the same thing was happening - and proof that my phone was muted, etc., back then (to effectively show her proof of my innocence). That was on 10-19-2016. Since I wanted to move past this nonsense, I also showed her a TIME article that showed Black Americans have twice as much College Debt burden, useful for her program, since she focuses on minority issues. After my 10-19 emails, above, I hadn't gotten a response, so I emailed her again on 10/21/2016 @ 6:44pm, to ask her about this "background noise" complaint that she continually made against me, and also to try and see if I could help 2 guests (Leo and Dr. Reddeck) work out a misunderstanding that they'd had during one program I had partially-recorded. (One would think that both of these would be good things, not argumentative or negative in any way - since I was trying to get resolution/reconciliation to 2 misunderstandings, one with Doris, and a 2nd one, an argument between 2 other guests.) As you can see, Doris got my email: It was marked, by Facebook, as: Seen Oct 21, later that day.

I am at my wits' end: While her accusation is not exactly criminal in nature (she's been repeatedly accusing me of interfering with her radio program, each time I've called in), I'm at my wits' end - for 2 reasons: Firstly, this is a false accusation, and offends me (as described by Jesus in Matthew 18:15 of the Holy Bible). However (and more-importantly), not only does this nonsense harm myself, it even more-so harms Doris (and those around her) by the very poison of hate & discontent that she spreads (whether intentional or unintentional - or careless, or reckless - I do not know). But one thing I know: She seems to have something against me, as Jesus discusses in Matthew 5:23-24, and this is (I am quite sure) harming my prayer life and my Spiritual well-being. I think that I will consult with friends & family - and my church - on how to handle a situation like this. Any advice, assistance, or prayers & well-wishes are welcome. I'm documenting these things because this seems to be getting out of control, and I'd appreciate any help, here. But, the conclusion of the whole matter is this: Doris and her program are valuable - and worth saving. Any help would be appreciated (for her sake, the sake of her guests, and my peace of mind). Thank you for your time, and may God bless you.

Editor-in-Chief, The Register, Gordon Wayne Watts


Updated: Monday, 07 November 2016, at 09:00am (EST)

I've gotten phone calls, messages, and have learned some disturbing things that can not be ignored, so I will get right to it.

First off, thank you, everyone, for your prayers and well-wishes. I was able to speak with a number of family, friends, and church leaders to get wise counsel on how to handle situations like this. My initial guesses were both right: whether I'm somehow offended, or whether someone has something against me (whether justified or not), I can not ignore it, and I must obey Jesus, and attempt to follow the Conflict Resolution methods He outlines in Scripture: It has worked for 2,000 years, and comes straight from Jesus, Himself -- God, The Son -- and my highest authority. Several of those from whom I sought counsel said or implied that the problem would not go away on its own, and explicitly said that I had to try and go through the steps to try and afford Ms. Bailey an audience to make her complaint - and try to resolve it, to the best of my ability. The Scriptures are unambiguous on that.

While I am not required to phone or email, also, this is not prohibited, and given the fact that trying to hunt down a needle in a haystack, perhaps a phone call or email would be most convenient (and, in some cases, the only possibility, given distance or other constraints). However, I phoned her and emailed her several times, and got no response. While I was tempted to keep ringing her off the hook, I feel that this would possibly be harassing, and not supported by The Bible (or common sense), so I waited... Still no response from my email of Friday, Oct. 21st, and 2 whole weeks elapsed as of Friday, Nov. the 4th. Ideally, it would be good to "set an appointment" to talk with her (either on the phone or in person), but she didn't return my messages. Since she still has an open complaint against me, then I asked myself: Does this Scripture apply? While these passages are a good guideline for any Tom, Dick, or Harriet, strictly-speaking, they only apply to fellow-Christians (if my brother or sister... is offended, or offends me - not just anybody). However, a quick look reveals that Doris' own words imply or clearly claim that she is a professing Christian. (Also, her actions seem to bear this out: She seems to truly act like a Christian, and sometimes wishes people blessings, so, I infer that these Scriptures apply to her, and that we, as followers of The Christ, are bound by these standards - and must not fail to have faith that Jesus knew what He was talking about: This would be insulting to no small amount, to our Sovereign King, Jesus.

Some of my friends insist on always having some "appointment" before going to see someone (and, ideally, that would be great), but I've made good-faith efforts to set an appointment, and come up short; nonetheless, 2 wrongs make not a right, and whether (or not) the other party acts in good faith, nonetheless, I am bound by Jesus clear commands. Period.

Next, I considered how to "go and be reconciled to them," as Jesus requires in Matt. 5:24; since Jesus is asking me this, I should not think it to be impossible, since Jesus would not ask me to do the impossible. I, myself, get quite a few visitors, whether at home, work, or about town, and so I must next make sure that I don't run afoul any other Biblical standards, such as the requirement in Romans chapter 13, of Scripture, to obey the law. Last time I checked, it wasn't against the law to go visit someone (it is done all the time: I get visitors all the time, friends, strangers, neighbours, etc.), so, moving on. I should not only obey the "letter" of the law (above), but also the "spirit" of the law, namely, I should not even give the appearance of evil, as another passage requires - i.e., an even higher standard than the mere letter of the law. I decided to see if I could visit Doris, if it were possible. She was listed in the public phone book, and when I got there (slightly before 6pm Friday the 4th of November, right before the "Ask the Preacher" radio program ended), there was not any 'No Trespassing' signs. However, I did something else: Besides making plans to inquire about Doris' complaints against me (which Jesus requires in Mt.5:23-24), I also brought along a print-out of the College Debt column that I had written, because I recall Doris saying she wanted a copy (she and most or all of her guests agree with me that college loan bankruptcy would be a good idea), and I figured that I would knock 2 birds with 1 stone (instead of sending it by postal mail, which I was going to do, since Doris said she had not been able to find it on The Ledger's website, but why send it by mail if you have to come by anyhow? Needless postage costs).

But I did not more thing that I felt led to do (my conscience convicting me to do). 99 times out of 100, when I offer someone a free gift, they're happy (if they're normal, that is), and, remember where I said that I wasn't bragging, but that I occasionally give food/drinks to some of my less-fortunate friends or neighbours (or church)? Well, I had planned to go up town to give a donation of some food/drink stuff -- brand new and unopened (some people can be real 'funny' about eating something from a stranger or even a friend, if it's not brand-new and still in the wrapper).

So, anyhow, a friend from the Men's Group at my church (I'm not going to name him) was going through a rough time, and while I was "up town" dropping off some food-type donations for him, I included Doris Bailey in my "to do" list of donation recipients. The motive, here (of course) was to consider that she was mad at me (even though it was unfounded, Doris was nonetheless red-hot mad at me without a cause), and, indeed, The Scripture says:

Proverbs 21:14-15 (KJV) Holy Bible
14 A gift in secret pacifieth anger: and a reward in the bosom strong wrath.
15 It is joy to the just to do judgment: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity.
Based on that Scripture (and plain common sense, and years of life-experience), I figured that a gift would be the appropriate way to go, and, even in the event that Ms. Bailey wasn't home, I could drop off a copy of my editorial, a polite apology note, and, of course, a small gift (so long as it was brand new & unopened, something useful - even if small - to show intent). I knocked on her door, and, seeing so answer, I tried her on the phone, one last time, and then gave up: I just left the column printout & the brand-new food-stuffs (not sure why I didn't leave a short note: maybe I forgot), but I dropped the stuff off, and was leaving & almost hop in my car & leave, when someone pulled up in the driveway. So, I did the logical thing: I asked if I had found the right house, and the young man identified himself & said that he was Doris' son. So, I asked if she were available. (I figured they would either be home & available or not.) At this point, the young man started acting real crazy and asking if I had "an appointment" or something, and while I agree it would've been ideal, I explained that I'd tried to "call first," and gave up, but I told him that I had dropped off a copy of the column that his mother had wanted to see, and, to assure him that I wasn't some sort of 'weirdo,' I showed him my Driver's License, and told him he could check it out, if he wanted to know who I was, or ask his mother if I was telling the truth.

The young man snatched my license and started screaming & jumping around like a madman, whipping a knife around, and yelling that I had to leave. I figured that this guy was nutty, and that it would be good to leave, so I told him that, when he was finished looking at my driver's license and making any notes that he felt like he needed, that when he gave my licenses back, I'd be glad to leave; but he kept yelling & told me to 'back off' or something.

I calmly repeated my statement: I told him that if he wanted me to leave (I was guessing that he really did live there), I'd be glad to leave, but I wanted my driver's license back. (I had told him he could look at it, not snatch it and keep it, remember.) He kept jumping around like a madman, yelling, and, so, I finally gave up, and I called 911, at 6:06pm, according to my call phone detail.

While I waited for the deputies to arrive, I tried "one last time" to see I could reach Ms. Bailey by phone, and this time, I got lucky. She knew that she was on speaker phone, and I could overhear her yelling: "Milton, give him back his driver's license." And, I repeated what his mother said to him and said: "Milton, your mother says to give me back my river's license, so I can leave," but he kept jumping around and acting nutty.

Shortly, 3 POLK County Deputies arrived. (I'm not sure, but I think he may have called the police too.) This was last Friday, the 4th of November 2016.

All 3 deputies questioned us, and they all assured me that which I already knew, namely that I had not broken any law. (But one of them suggested that I should have "set an appointment" or something -- something I hear every so often. I told him that I'd tried to, but that, giving up, I fell back on my religious beliefs, and remembering we still have the 1st Amendment rights of peaceable assembly that let even nutty door-to-door salesmen roam unattended, and this was 'OK,' how much better would it be to do something 'good' - like try to seek peace, reconciliation, and resolution, while giving a free gift to a friend of mine - who was bent out of shape for reasons unknown.)

Deputy Smith (badge #:7562) arrived, spoke to me, and then went up and spoke to Ms. Bailey (who had apparently been home but did not answer the door), and in the mean time, Deputies Coburn (8139) and DisNovis (8152) spoke with me some more. I'm not sure, but I think that they came back and said that Bailey claimed that she didn't know me, but, in any event, they said I had to leave. I told them that I had neither caused any harm, nor had I even threatened anyone, and that this was a royal waste of their time (because *real* crimes might be committed elsewhere while they chase after fantasy crimes), but no matter how innocent I might be, if the homeowner wanted me to leave, I would. Then, at some point, Milton, Doris' son, went and got the box (with the food/drink, and the copy of my guest column, that Doris had wanted to see) and dropped them off in the middle of their lawn (as if he thought I had given them a box with a snake, bomb, or alligator in it - acting like it was 'bad' or somehow 'dangerous'). I pointed out that what I was giving them was (#1) meant to show my intentions/motives; and (#2) brand new (and clearly not dangerous, like I could somehow make unopened soft-drinks dangerous), but also, (#3) other than this one misunderstanding (about the radio background noise), I had been treated very well by Bailey, and thus had no motive to cause anyone any trouble. Deputy Smith told Milton that it was very unwise for him to grab the belongings out of a stranger's hand and then act in a threatening manner (I'm not sure of the deputy's exact words, but you get the picture). I agree with the deputy, and feel bad that they had to waste their time over useless nonsense.)

To repeat: I rarely knew anyone to get stomping-hot angry over fantasy nonsense. (But, if there is any doubt, please notice that even after I had left, nothing was stolen, damaged, or injured, and if I were up to "no good," it would have already happened.) So, the deputies told me that I had to leave, and I told them that I would be glad to leave, especially given how nutty my friend had acted: I thought that Ms. Bailey was my friend, but I guess I was wrong. However, when I tried to leave, Dep. Smith said I had to take the box I had dropped off, with the food-stuffs & printout of the column Bailey had said she wanted. When I asked him what would happen if I said that I wanted to go ahead and give them the free gifts, he said that he would throw in in the garbage. Later, he told me that he believed that Bailey & her son would throw it out, into the garbage, and that it would be better for me to "bless someone else" with it. I eventually relented & took my box back & left. (And, I'm guessing, based on his words & actions, this deputy is probably a 'real' Christian, but I'm not so sure about Bailey & her family. I don't want to sit in judgment, but most people don't act nutty when someone knows on their door and/or offers them a free gift.)

After that, I went straight over to my friend's house, whom I know from my church's Men's Group; he was not home, but when I knocked on the door, and his elderly grandmother answered the door, I dropped of the food that I was going to leave for him - but also the stuff that Doris M. Bailey & her son rejected, so my friend's family got a 'double' blessing. By the way, this lady didn't call the police on me, even though I was a total stranger, lending credence to my assertion that I was not in the wrong in obeying Jesus and going in person to visit someone: if even a total stranger does not act nutty when someone visits them, how much less should a friend, who knows you? Arsenio Hall: - As ARSENIO HALL might say: "Things that make you go: 'hmm...'."

Not letting it go...

I just now got several disturbing phone calls and messages about this. (I suspected that Ms. Bailey wouldn't "let it go," since whatever caused her to go off the deep end probably is still afflicting her.) First off, I noticed that Ms. Bailey is telling the world a "whole world" of lies about me on one of her public Facebook pages. (No, I'm not stalking her: I'm looking at the public news feed, which is a protected 1st Amendment Right, and she, conversely, is slandering, libeling, and committing defamation of character, against me, here, which is not only illegal, but also morally wrong -and very damaging to her reputation.) My own friends have said: "Gordon, let it go," and while I might have been able to "let it go," had Ms. Bailey not kept pushing lies, it is now clear that this is not going to "go away," unless I take a proactive step to address her complaints. In the Matt. 18:15 passage, I was required to go to her privately & discreetly, so as to not embarrass her; if that doesn't work, I'm supposed to compel 1-2 others, so that in the mouth of 2-3 witnesses (me and the 1-2 others), Matthew 18:16 is fulfilled. Maybe "peer pressure" of 2 or 3 others can convince a person to chill out. Since there were no less than seven (7) witnesses, at the height of the crisis (1.Myself; 2.Milton; 3.GOD is my witness, keep count; 4.Dep. Coburn; 5.Dep. DisNovis; 6.Dep.Smith; and 7.Doris Bailey, herself), I satisfied that prong of Jesus' "conflict resolution" method in Matthew 18:15-17 and Matthew 5:23-24. The 3rd step is to bring it before the entire church for review; while I don't know what 'church' Bailey attends (if any), I will trust God to 'sanctify' the believers, here, online (and elsewhere) - obviously, as I can't resolve this in person (I was asked to leave her property, and am unwelcomed & trespassed, so I must see another method, such as online or via news medić, etc.)

My reply

If Doris deletes or hides her public comments, that's OK: I have made screen captures to archive & document her complaints and claims, assertions, & allegations (some true, some false). OK, I shall reply to each of her complaints. Here goes...

To begin with, I notice that she simply says that this is "My current situation," and does not identify me by name (supposing, I guess, that it makes lying about someone 'OK' so long as you don't attach their name). - However, Doris identifies me in several methods:

  • First, she told someone, and I have it directly from several people that she named me by name. (They didn't tell me who told them in one case, but Doris spread slander, whether directly to my friend who called me, or to someone else; besides, you know that everything eventually comes out in the wash, so it is no surprise that she lied about me behind my back; she had lied to my face regarding the "background noise" matter, and that was proven false, above, by both motive and by forensic video evidence.)
  • Secondly, while her 2 photos are real grainy (and, in all honesty/fairness, don't identify me), in her description, she tells one friend that: "A radio listener came to my house re an on air political discussion re Trump.," in one comment, and, if that wasn't clear enough, she told another person that: "A radio conservative listener and frequent caller into my live broadcast whom I have had political dispute re Trump verses Clinton, looked up my [publicly-published] address and came to my home yesterday evening." She has many (anonymous) listeners, but very few callers, and there are **very** few people who are a "radio conservative listener and frequent caller." She has almost no conservative callers, so anyone with even half-a-brain would know that she is talking about me. Bailey identifies me unambiguously, and this is slander (or libel), if she says anything demonstrably false.
  • Since I have been slandered, by clear identification, I have no choice to remain silent, and I must answer every one of these charges, both true and false. Bailey must know that half of what she says is false: What was she thinking?

    Next, she claims that the deputy told her something about a concealed weapon's permit. However, I could not comment on this, even if I wanted to, because, according to chapter 790.0601, of Florida State Law, there is a "Public records exemption for concealed weapons," and nothing of this nature is legally permitted to be disclosed publicly, regardless of the manner or method. Period. Besides that, whether I'm a concealed weapon's permit holder, or merely a strong admirer & advocate of the 2nd Amendment who is afraid of guns, it would not just be illegal to wade in here, but it would also be quite stupid: If I were packing heat, I sure wouldn't want other to know: That would be like 'ratting out' an undercover cop, and, for me, if I were in a bank, and some robber wanted to do a 'hold up,' he might say: "Hey, let's knock off the 'guy with a gun' first, so we can rob the bank!" -- If, on the other hand, I were afraid of guns, or otherwise defenseless, I sure wouldn't want anyone to know about it, because some young thugs may see me out, by myself, late at night, and say: "Hey, this guy is an easy mark & defenseless; let's go hit'em up for some CA$H MONEY." *** HOWEVER, whether the cop told her this, or rather said something like "he might have had a gun on him," I know why the Deputy said this: The Deputy had told the young man, Milton, Doris' son, to the effect: "You'd better think twice before you go snatching some total stranger's driver's license and whipping out a knife on him; if this guy had been anyone else, he might have pulled a gun out and shot you." -- So, the 'bigger point' is not focused on me, but rather, on Bailey's son, Milton, to be careful: He has no way of knowing who's going to pull out a gun and shot him dead if he starts jumping around, yelling, & and acting nutty. I think the deputy told Milton something, in order to 'chill him out' & give him a longer life span, and whatever was said was overheard by his mother. Moving on...

    Then she says that: "This had been an on going situation as I have received emails him and others." That is partly-true: I have sent her emails, but they were all about things where we agreed with one another (except her "background noise" complaints she had, and, of course, if she emailed me, falsely accusing me, I was going to reply, telling her I was not the one doing this nonsense, and as you recall, I posted videos proving that my radio was off, my phone muted, etc.). *** But, she's been getting emails from "him and others? So, she's getting into arguments with others, too? Maybe I'm not the troublemaker; maybe Doris is the one with issues.

    On the 3rd screenshot, here, she says: "Thanks everyone. It has been an ongoing experience with lengthy emails, email virus, created technical problems for my broadcast; however, today was a reality call." Alright, let's look at that: Yes, a few of my emails were a bit lengthy, but then she accuses me of giving her an email virus: I can't "prove a negative," but, as before, up to this point, Ms. Bailey had treated me quite well, and even if I were "evil" (I am not), I would still have no motive to harass her. But, she repeats her claims that I "created technical problems for my broadcast." Even though this is a clearly false accusation (you did look at my YouTube videos, right?), I credit her for being consistent, and telling the world the same thing she told me privately. (This leads me to believe that, perhaps, she may believe this false accusation, but she needs to listen to her common sense and watch my videos. MOREOVER, she needs to LEARN HOW TO USE her phone system, and keep careful watch over all the incoming callers via whatever "Caller-ID" system is provided for her; I'm not an expert on conference calling, but she is, and I am very disappointed in her inability to listen in on each caller and make an accurate identification of who has called in to cause trouble! YES, I WAS YELLING because she is not only incompetent - we all make mistakes, so I'm not going to make fun of her - but she is too lazy (or proud?) to scrutinize the YouTube videos that I took pains to make and upload (with my old, cheap CamCorder, on its last leg, and my computer is not far behind, and I'm too poor to get anything better -- so her stubborn laziness and obstinate refusal to do her homework frustrates me to no end; Argh!.. she seems better than this, and I hope she can either get some help with her phone system or snap out of it).

    Next she says that this was a "reality [wakeup] call." Well, most people I call or visit act normal; not her. I thought that she was my friend, but it was a "wakeup call" for me for a person to be so nutty that both she and her son get mad and are deathly afraid of brand-new unopened foodstuffs! Get a grip!.. (She also expresses a desire to get a gun permit; since I'm a right-winger, I think this is a good idea for her, but only if she calms down and get proper training: Not all guns are alike; get training so that you don't kill yourself, k?..)

    One of her friends, an "Eddie Brandt," rhetorically asks: "Cant we all live in [peace in] 2016? Shameful" -- I agree: Why can't we all just get along? That's not just a 'cliche.'

    My reply, continued: Very Disturbing...

    Take a close look at Doris' comment, at the very bottom: "Thank you sis. Glad Milton came. He called law enforcement. Shall necessary steps. This is scary season. Have received lengthy emails to cease talking politics." Did you see that? She accused me of sending her "lengthy" emails with threats or intimidation to "cease talking politics." The 'lengthy' part may be correct (depending on your definition of 'lengthy'), but Doris Moore Bailey is a baldface liar, and I'm calling her on this statement: If I have sent ANYONE a 'threatening' email to coerce or intimidate a person to 'cease' advocacy of their politics, I challenge Ms. Bailey, here and now, to produce such email (or photograph, or screen capture, or even a copy and paste, with a proper time-stamp and email header reference)!!

    While we're waiting for Doris to produce an email (or Facebook 'message') that does not exist, you may peruse my entire archive of the emails I could find between me and Bailey.

    Let me say that I'm very human, and make many mistakes (both mistakes of commission, and of mistakes of omission), but I most certainly did not threaten or intimidate Ms. Bailey to 'cease' speaking her mind on her political or religious views!! - Produce an email or message as proof of your claim, or else retract your false accusation!! - I do not like the concept of bullying or squelching one's voice, and, as having been accused of this false allegation, I am not a small amount angry as hell. As should you be, were it you being falsely accused. I was willing to let this drop, but now I must see this through to the end, and I will not stop asking for either proof of her claim, here, or an explanation for this false allegation. (I'm not vindictive, and don't hate Doris, but make no mistake: I am as mad as hell, assure yourself.) Yes, I used boldfaced-red colour to YELL.

    A "Jacquelyn Johnson," one of Doris' friends or relatives, says that: "you will not walk with the spirit of fear," and that: "Drumpf followers are NOT honest and upstanding citizens." Jacqueline's 1st claim is, basically, true, if you're a Christian: 2 Timothy 1:7, of the N.T. Bible, says that: "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." However, her insult about 'Drumpf' followers, while partly true (you've got bad apples in all barrels) is also partly false, and an insult to humanity and God. Jacquelyn, Mr. Donald 'Drumpf' is not perfect, and neither are his followers, but there are many good people on both (all) sides of the political isle, and I think you are smarter than that. Arguments are not won on insults, but on blood, sweat, tears, and hard facts, and good intentions don't hurt either. I can't see how anyone with sense would support abortion for anything other than self-defense (and, in fact, abortion kills many more minorities & poor, per capita, than so-called 'rich' or 'Whites,' which makes it even worse); however, many so-called 'abortion' supporters are fine people who respect others; you are smarter than this.

    Charlene Hypes, whom I personally know to be very intelligent, and a good person, who cares for other people, said: "This is just crazy....did they arrest him?" I am surprised; Charlene should know better:

  • First, one single visit doesn't constitute stalking or any other crime worthy of arrest; you, of all people in this thread, ought know that;
  • Secondly, there is the issue of motive: I don't think even a jury from Hades Hell could rightly conclude I had any ill motive or Mens Rea, e.g., criminal intent. Maybe poor judgment (not sensing instability in Doris) was about the worse (lack of common sense) crime I committed;
  • Third and last, no harm was done, and so "no harm, no foul," is a legal standard: I'm sure if something was vandalised or someone harmed (or even threatened, as Bailey falsely claims above), this would "come out in the wash." That it did not. Charlene, you are smarter than that..
  • A "Linda Diltz Beckman" says that: "Telling you he had a GM [GUN] sounds like a veiled threat to me. I would press that issue." -- Just so you know, I neither told Ms. Bailey one way or the other then, nor will I do so now. (See my above-comments, if you don't understand my point, where I address Doris' similar comments on this head.) Also, Bailey's comments that I threatened her in some 'lengthy' emails is also false: You may ask her to show you said emails that she said (above) she got from me, and I bet she can't find them; no such emails exist. Here, again is the 'live' link to Ms. Bailey's comments (assuming she doesn't delete or 'block' her Facebook wall post).

    Off-topic, but interesting...

    My focus on Bailey's program wasn't meant to be a political argument, because addressing false accusations (against me) and anger (by Doris) were more important than "proving" one argument or the other was true regarding Mr. Trump, Ms. Clinton, or other player; however, these political issues are still important, so I'll take just a moment to briefly address a few of the more-important issues, hence the sub-title "Off-topic":

    First, I recall Doris saying that only one woman (Juanita Broaddrick) had accused Hillary Clinton of trying to silence or witness-tampering with victims of Bill Clinton sexual harassment, but in this informal survey, I find about 5 or 6 (depending on how you read the articles) women claiming this. While I agree we can not blame Hillary for Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct, we can (and should) blame Hillary for her own harassment of Bill's victims, and rightly call her out for NOT being an advocate of 'Women.'

    Secondly, Doris said something about me being wrong about Hillary Clinton's alleged views on the 2nd Amendment. While I admit that I don't exactly remember what Doris said I believed that was wrong, here, I looked up the famous DC v. Heller, 478 F. 3d 370 affirming personal gun rights, and contrasted that with Hillary's own views on the Heller decision. Since she disagreed with this decision, which affirmed a personal right to keep & bear arms, it seems safe to infer that she would be OK with gun laws like some of this other countries, where ordinary Joe's can't own a gun unless their a cop (and maybe not even then: Think British Bobbie, hello?).

    On a non-political subject, here is some of my anti-cancer health research.


    We need to talk - On a personal note, I feel bad about the fact that Doris, and her son, were somehow inconvenienced; however, if she had simply COME TO ME about her grievances (instead of simmering & talking behind my back things that are demonstrably FALSE), if she had taken just a moment to speak with me by phone (and/or email and/or Facebook messages) to address my concerns that she was making false accusations about the alleged background noise matter, then maybe I would not have finally gotten frustrated, and make a long trip waaay out to north Lakeland, where she lives (inconveniencing MYSELF, due to the distance traveled, and inconveniencing her because she's afraid of things that are not a threat)... How many other people will she annoy or falsely accuse? I think this needs to stop.

    Doris Bailey, who has not removed me from her friend's list or blocked me is fully-capable of emailing me, should she have had any other complaints (that she made above). I am in no small part very hot-angry, but I remember the initial purpose of my Editorial, here, and that was this: Not only to provide interesting news & opinion, but more-importantly, to make the case that both the "Updates with Doris Moore Bailey" program, and the various panelists (Doris Bailey, included) are all valuable people -and a program worth saving. Just remember this: While we were on the radio arguing with each other about how oppressive various things were (be they college debt or unduly restrictive voter-ID laws), our foes were winning, and they were proceeding unchecked, unopposed. Maybe if we all started arguing LESS, then we could have time to WRITE OP-ED's MORE -- such as here: "A Polk Perspective: Fix our bankrupt policy on student debt," By Gordon Wayne Watts, Guest columnist, The Ledger, August 04, 2016: WATTS-GuestColumn (web-page text) ** WATTS-GuestColumn (scanned newspaper image)

    Will we keep arguing, or will we get to work? It's your move, Doris (and dear reader, whomever you may be).

    Gordon Wayne Watts, LAKELAND, Florida, U.S.A.

    EDITOR'S NOTE: Ms. Bailey was notified of this when I tagged her (and numerous other mutual friends) in a Facebook post on Mon. 07 Nov. 2016, just days after the Fri. 04 Nov. 2016 incident, directly linking this article, on 2 different mirrors, so she can not claim ignorance of my complaints that she lied about me in such a way that might make innocent strangers hate my guts without cause. (Links: Facebook post ** Cached screenshot)

    Please notice here: I didn't talk behind her back, but - instead - I did notify her of my grievance by tagging her. ** HOWEVER, in all fairness, the 1st half of my lengthy article (above) on her was very "positive," in order to be fair & balance & Christian, so it's possible she didn't read down that far. But, I did notify her - and the world. (Plus, my positive news coverage of her - in spite of her hatred & irrational prejudice - showed my intentions/motives.) ~~Gordon W. Watts, Editor-in-chief, The Register

    *** Click here to jump back to the top of the page. ***

    * * * * * *