Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Still thinking Boger gets the gig...

Update:  I seem to recall that Tony Golik hammered Brent Boger when they ran against each other for prosecutor over his complete lack of criminal experience in court... and that lack of experience hasn't changed..

But this isn't about who the best lawyer is for the job.  This is about politics... and Boger was Boldt's slave during Boldt's run for county chair.  Of course, the county has suffered terribly as a rtesult, with more suffering yet to come, but the question is this: will Boldt and his winged monkeys ignore the issue of experience and qualifications and just get Boger the gig fr being Boldt's sock puppet?

Boger has no qualifications for this job when compared to the others.  None.  So if Boldt engages in pay back for political support, it's not going to be for the best reasons... instead, it will be for the worst


The 4 Stooges on the county council, BEING the 4 Stooges, will say or do anything to get what they want... regardless of what those poor schlubs they govern want.

Leave it to my idiot brother-in-law to babble something like:
he was a “little disappointed” by the poll’s lack of information — primarily, how it was conducted. He would have liked some context, he said, on how the bar vets the candidates.
I guess, failing to have mastered the mysteries of how to operate either email or a telephone, the idea of simply contacting the Bar to ASK them was beyond his abilities.
Councilor Julie Olson added that the poll seems to indicate which candidates local lawyers are most familiar with.
Like that's relevant?

Chances are that the members are, in fact, "familiar" with ALL of these people if they've been practicing law around here for more than 20 minutes.

That said, Boldt shows his ability to self-delude: the council put Boger on the list, in part, because "of the ...bipartisan support he's received?"

Talk about "stranger danger."

To claim that Boger received anything but leftist and RINO support is to announce the world is flat.

It's like the facetious claim that Boldt is a Republican... you know, having received the Young Democrat endorsement?

There is no justification for keeping that lackey around.  Boger, of course, has no relevant legal experience that even remotely compares to the others.  His "bipartisan support" consists of carrying Boldt's water like Gunga Din as he did all he could to trash every conservative within shouting distance.

I hope I'm wrong.  But I wouldn't be surprised if Boldt continues to trash the people in favor of his "Stuartesque" governance philosophy that what the people want... and what's best for us... doesn't matter if it conflicts with Boldt's agenda.

Don't be surprised if it's Boger.

No comments: