The Columbian launches their "Save Tim 'The Liar' Leavitt from himself" campaign.

As I mentioned below, I went to that bizarro world or Tim "The Liar" leavitt last night to watch him try and squirm out of his lies and deceit.

It didn't work.

Predictably, much of the response to his cowardice didn't make the cut in our local cancer of a paper.

Following along in their efforts to rehab "Cowardman" Brian Baird and Jim "Candy Man" Moeller, the rag deliberately left out telling and ardent specific responses to The Liar's incompetence.

No mention in he article of the articulate and well supported plea for an advisory vote... a vote that The Liar said "wouldn't serve any purpose."

Leavitt town hall turns rambunctious on tolling protests

Attendees vent anger on many issues; some say it crossed
the line

By Andrea Damewood
Columbian staff writer

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Anger, worry and concern were the common threads during the third town hall meeting with Mayor Tim Leavitt and the Vancouver City Council and constituents
Tuesday evening.

The quarterly town halls, instituted by Leavitt when he took office, have changed since the first one in January. That one was a well-attended exchange of ideas. The next had a sparse crowd. The third, held at Fort Vancouver High School, had about 60 people with a litany of concerns.

Anti-tolling and anti-light-rail contingencies continued their active protest of Leavitt’s announcement that he had changed his position on tolling on any new Interstate 5 bridge.

Members of the crowd — many of whom attended Monday night’s city council meeting — booed, applauded and shouted questions over the speakers or politicians trying to answer questions.

Anti-tolling advocates tried to boo Councilor Jeanne Harris away from the podium as she outlined different tolling options bridge stakeholders have researched. They called for her to sit down, and that they had enough of her.

“People needed to be civil, that’s all I ask for,” Harris said after the two-hour session. “I’m used to it, but it does scare other people who are here to speak.”

Janet Postma, 32, and Stacie Walczyk, 35, both of Vancouver, showed up out of curiosity and concern after reading about the city’s budget woes. They were taken aback by the crowd.

They described what they saw as “emotionally overheated” and “disrespectful,” although they also recognized how passionate some protesters are.

“I had a ton of questions, but I’d rather do it in a smaller setting,” said Postma, as Walczyk continued, “You even said, ‘Why would you wanna say something and have people jump down your throat?’”

Sharon Thompson of Camas, however, came to protest bridge tolling, and said the meetings are a good opportunity for people to speak out.

“I would describe it as adamant, even angry, that this project is being forced down our throats,” she said. “It’s a sign of frustration at more than just the city’s mayor. It’s frustration at what happening to citizens of this country, a feeling of helplessness.”

Others issues that came up were the city budget and the potential cuts to public safety. The east Vancouver train horn quiet zone was another hot topic.

People also spoke out against the lack of police response to burglaries and about road issues and layoffs of other city employees.

Though the tone was ardent, most of those left in the audience at the end of the town hall raised their hands to say they thought it had been a productive session.

“I think that it’s important for these types of communication to be open,” Thompson said.

Andrea Damewood: 360-735-4542 or andrea.damewood@columbian.com.

This worthless article focused on the heat aimed at The Liar, but not the light.

Nothing about the specific concerns. Just a focus on the anger without using the word "betrayed."

The whining about civility. How civil was The Liar's betrayal of those who believed in him?

Of COURSE the crowd was angry. They just discovered what I knew all along: that The Liar had swindeled many of them out of their vote.

But the fact is that, for one example, the concern and suggestions about an advisory vote so we could all have a voice?

This article didn't even write a syllable about that. Why, other than being angry, this waste of ink would lead someone who hadn't been there to believe that no one even asked. And, in keeping with their "Save Leavitt" campaign, there wasn't a scintilla of The Liar's response: that such a vote "wouldn't make any difference."

That, of course, was an inadvertant oversight on the part of this cancer on our local society.... wasn't it? It couldn't have had anything to do with the rag failing to talk to opposition to this massive waste, or not wanting anything like the "Will of the people" to get in the way of their agenda.... would it?

Cross posted at Tim Leavitt Watch.