Here's a clue to both the moron who wrote this bizarre idiocy of an editorial and the slime balls soooooo upset that commented on it.
You lost.
Get over it.
Every single name attached to every single whine and snivel underneath this self-flagellating effort by the democratian endorsed and/or worked to get Marc Boldt re-elected.
Commissioner Madore (Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? Almost as good as Congressman Madore) ran on a campaign of eliminating these fees. He's done that.
While the scum beating him senseless will remain silent in the face of that slimebag mayor's lies on HIS campaign, when Madore told the truth, what do they do?
They call him names. They act SOOOOO superior.
Betty Sue Morris, who would not have been out of place in the Central Committee of the Supreme Soviet blatheredf thus:
Betty Sue Morris · Top Commenter · Vancouver, Washington
Good editorial. The action Madore and Mielke took would have been much more considered had they waited until the budget cycle. Mr. Madore seems to have no understanding of the pressures on the General Fund to keep government services like law enforcement well staffed.
Well, Marc Boldt "understood." That's why they append the word "former" to his title. What HE understood and what YOU understand was destroyed at the polls. See, we did not elect YOU. We ELECTED David Madore, and he is doing PRECISELY what he was elected to do, your faux crocodile tears notwithstanding.
Your guy lost. Get over it. And if any one of you think you can take Madore out, then feel free to try.
That you're "disappointed," believe his successful effort to keep his promise is "disingenuous," or that Madore "doesn't know" all the wonderful things you clowns believe YOU know or that somehow the AUDITOR should have ANY say over ANY of this is really too... damned... bad.
Your fellow leftist lost. There's going to be a great many things that you clowns are going to be "disappointed" about in the years to come. But for the rest of us to the right of Mao, we'll likely be thrilled.
1 comment:
I compared the Democration's article endorsing Marc Boldt and Jamie Herrera. They brought up Marc Boldt being sanctioned by the party in their endorsement but left out Jim Moeller denying the nomination of Jon Haugen even though they mentioned he lost by 17 points in the primary. They also endorsed Stonier because she came ahead in the primary leaving out Madore winning by 700 votes and Mielke's 4000. In fact, Bill Phillips is not mentioned at all in the Columbian article regarding Jamie Herrera. "What we have in Jon Haugen is someone who has only proven himself not a worthy opponent but also a real democrat" (If I remember correctly,that's how it went)
Post a Comment