Will The [Macon] Telegraph take note, or as they have recently, just ignore it?

Let us be clear, there is nothing personal in this letter. What Burgamy and Richardson choose to do in their private life is their business. However anytime it crosses the line and becomes deceit where the public is concerned that is where the problem begins.  The thing here The Telegraph is more than willing to jump on people giving no one any quarter. Therefore the people we talk to, reasonable people feel they should be held to the same standard.


What a Veterans Day! We watched The Telegraph represented by Burgamy and Richardson use the day for what in our opinion is their self-enhancement. We recognize that both along with The Telegraph need it badly. 


Where we disagree about their Veterans Day episode is when they mixed a little deceit into the program. 


We would think a little history is in order. Back years ago during the “Blue Dress Era” when both were on mornings at 940 AM Radio with a program known as the Kenny B. and Charles E. show we heard the “no military service” for the first time. 


This is the time frame when we first heard Kenny B’s version of why he had no military service. It was straight forward, to the point and he made clear the fact that he did not serve and if he had it to do over with again he would serve. He did not say why he felt that way.


This is also the first time we heard why Charles Richardson had no military service and it is quite different from what he is telling now. Back then it was he “was not going.” He says, “I watched my lottery number like a hawk.” And “I was not going.” This was back when Bill Clinton did for the draft what he would later do for oral sex.  


We should point out there is no known case in the history of the world where a man forgot why he did or did not have military service. There is nothing wrong with either until an individual begins to misrepresent it. Or as The Telegraph would say lie about it. 


Now Richardson’s story is quite different at the age of 17 he “went down to sign up” but “his mother would not sign for him.” 


It should be pointed out that both Burgamy and Richardson was on the air together in what we will call the first and third instance. 
We remember the first incident well. Since that day, in this circle, we have referred to Richardson as a “potential draft dodger.” Burgamy was a “do over.” We were also taping the program in those days as Richardson kept on giving with his remarks, such as the “blue dress” and the "Secret Service takes an oath to Clinton”, etc.


As for the “mother would not sign” concept the first time we heard that was during the Christmas holidays of 2010 when Burgamy took the week off.


Harold Goodridge was on the air with Richardson that day and got a first hand account of this version. 


At that time we wondered if Richardson would have told the story if Burgamy had been there. Today (Nov. 11, 2011) we got the answer! With out hesitation “the mother would not sign” story followed the “if I had it to do over” story, right on cue. Burgamy’s response was, “oh, really”!


Now we have a quagmire. Was Burgamy willing to over look obvious deceit? Especially after his previous ranting and raving about Epps. Does his religion, which he often talks about permit deceit by omission. After all he heard the first story, the “I was not going” story during the “Blue Dress” era. Is he using selective memory as people of The Telegraph often do?  


For instance, during this time frame, when the news broke about the “blue dress”, Richardson while on the air with Burgamy declared to everyone listening that there was “not one iota - not one centilla of truth” to the “blue dress” story. Some years later in a phone conversation, when asked about this, Richardson pulls a Clinton with his “I do not recall”. That is on tape also.  


Perhaps someone could straighten this out. After all it leaves the impression that The Telegraph think they are above the honesty and integrity which they seem to demand of others. Is it hypocritical and dishonest?


If this is the policy of The Telegraph should not they extend the same courtesies to others? The Telegraph has a record of labeling other people as liars. Two examples are Condoleezza Rice and Epps among others. After the midterm elections of 2010 both Bergamy and Richardson sat there on the set and ranted about Epps. One of their favorite rants was he sat “right here on this set and lied.” Now we have indisputable proof that one of The Telegraph’s very own sat right there on the “set and lied”.


Surly this should be cleared up so there will be no misunderstanding about the honesty and integrity of these individuals.


As we have said deceit by omission indicates a lack of integrity and shows dishonesty. It also shows a willingness to deceive, especially by a paper that uses the phrase “middle Georgia’s newspaper” for their promotion. 


The omission of important events is contrary to any claim to be a ”newspaper” and that is obvious to everyone. 


Have a nice day.