Sunday, October 13, 2013

The solution for the democratian anti-advisory vote fetish

Of course by now, every sentient being in Clark County is aware of the democratian's terror of the upcoming advisory vote on loot rail.

They've effectively launched a campaign worthy of an in-kind campaign contribution to the "yes for loot rail forces" infesting the County.

Today we see the second in the series of articles that will no doubt question the wisdom and the reasoning for even bothering to have an advisory vote. Democrats generally and fringe leftist nutters like Molehill Moeller are certainly opposed to giving the people any voice on this issue; and the despicable excuse of a daily newspaper serving Clark County has made their position clear: we should just sit down and shut up and allow this massive waste of billions to be rammed down our collective throat.

Well, I have come up with the simplest solution to this problem: if you don't like an advisory vote on this or any other issue… Then don't vote.

That's right ladies and gentlemen, just don't vote. It takes a genuinely special kind of stupid to be opposed to giving people a voice in the affairs of their government locally. Our local disgrace to journalism illustrated quite brilliantly that stupidity with its anti-advisory vote editorial October 9.

It's unfortunate that the democratian lives in terror of the will of the people locally, and the likelihood of losing the loot rail advisory vote. For their purposes, then, it's far better to hold no vote at all than it is to risk losing one. For the rag, that's the best way that you can express your disgust about remotely allowing the people of this County to have a say on a project that has wasted tens of millions, would waste billions more, and in-debt the people of this County for the next four decades plus with ever increasing tolls... tolls that would decimate local small business that depends on discretionary income in Clark County and that otherwise would make our lives miserable as opposed to doing something to make our lives better.

My faith is in the will of the people. We do not always agree; that is, I don't always agree with the outcomes of the votes the people are finally and actually allowed to take, but there is absolutely no harm to the people in allowing advisory or binding votes on any issue confronting us.

The harm is, of course, to the entities in Clark County and Portland who stand to make major money off this scam. The harm is, of course, to those who have been touting an agenda while ignoring the people by published policy, belittling the people and criticizing the people, because we had the temerity to dare to stand up to their worldview.

Frankly, I just don't give a damn that the newspaper and the special interests of the Downtown Mafia don't happen to like allowing us to have a voice. Recognize that this series of articles that they have done and will do on the issue of advisory votes is being done entirely to impact the vote on light rail.… As well as the vote on the I-5 bridge, it's not difficult to arrive at this conclusion.

Because I have got to ask you, what will the newspaper do when their two issues go down to a crashing defeat? What is going to happen when they finally and irrevocably get the will of the people expressed by the only poll that matters and that will is not to build these projects?

How many years have we been been hearing it from the fringe left nutters and union scum that support this rip off? How many years and we been hearing it from the special interests that own downtown Vancouver such as the Chamber of Horrors, Identity Vancouver, CRUDEC, and the other special interests with an agenda who actually believe their judgment is so far superior to that of the people?

How many years have we been hearing it from that disgrace to journalism; reduced to name-calling and labeling those of us wise enough to oppose their scam.... "cockroaches?"

Between now and the end of the election in November, we can expect many more biased, exaggerated, twisted, and downright dishonest attempts by the newspaper to impact the outcome of the election that so scares them.

Fortunately, with each expression of bias and support for the fringe-left, the ability for the newspaper to actually impact the outcomes of these elections becomes increasingly limited.

If the newspaper would actually have made an impact in the last election, then we would, for example, have a Commissioner Boldt and a Commissioner Tanner. That we don't have either one continues to be a testimony to the limited impact this left wing publication of hate speech has on the outcomes of our local elections.

No comments: