Arrogance.

Soon-to-be-but-not-soon-enough-so-don't-let-the-door-hit-you-on-the-way-out-former Mayor Randy Gray had a big write-up in the Tribune yesterday. Several parts caught my eye, most of which demonstrate the fact that this gentleman feels he is a little better and just plain smarter than the rest of us.

First, he struck me as a little Clinton-esque in suggesting that Mayor-elect Dona Stebbins should push forward on the coal-fired power plant. Newsflash, Former Mayor, she's a big girl. I don't think she needs you to tell her how to vote on the issues that will come before her.

Second, he "believes the key reason he lost was because he took on gambling interests." No, Former Mayor, the key reason you lost was because the voters voted you out. And, if your theory about losing due to your anti-gaming positions is true, what does that tell you about the general acceptance of your positions on this issue? It's pretty clear that the Former Mayor and his pals in CasiNo, don't really have the support of the community that they constantly tout. (In fact, a friend who recently wrote a pro-casino, pro-Great Falls letter to the editor found wide support for his expressed positions.)

He then discussed his efforts to double the gaming tax. He said that the "gaming industry strongly opposed an effort to cut into its profits." As I have pointed out before, I know operators who pay more in gaming taxes than they earn in profit. If you double the tax...no profit. Gee, Former Mayor, I wonder why that pissed them off. Maybe if you had climbed down from your high horse and talked to these people, you might have some idea of what they go through? (Yeah, right.)

Then, in discussing the industry, he said "It's a business of extreme greed." Actually, it isn't. The ROI is not out of whack with many other industries.

I would say that, if the Former Mayor wants to see "extreme greed," he need look no further than his own back yard. One might say that it is "extreme greed" to enter business transactions for a profit when those transactions require that you use your consituents' assets (for free, essentially) to structure the deal. Let's say I want to sell my boat for a tidy profit, but I don't have a trailer. My buyer wants a trailer. So I come over to your house and use my position as a public official to coerce you to let my buyer use your trailer. The deal? He'll paint it today, pay you a dollar a year, and give it back to you in 20 years. Meanwhile, I make a nice profit. Extreme Greed?

Finally, the Former Mayor said there were no scandals during his tenure. Really? How about the aforementioned land transaction?