Conservative Commentary/Opinion on Local, State & National issues. Hours 6am to 7pm to respond to comments
Monday, June 25, 2012
Tag Line for Respectful Planning Pac
Comment Up
Voters Rights on
Building Heights
Not this
14 comments:
Anonymous
said...
We need balance, a little is fine, but some, not all the city. I can see though that your other big blogger friend is bashing the other comm. about wanting the petition and bashing her every which way on his blog, I am so tired of all this divisiveness, we all need to unite and work together, we need unity, but $ talks, there is so much greed and corruption, all of them in cahoots to develop all thinking this will eliminate blight, letting their slum owner friends do what they want until they can sell their properties for millions. Your blogger friend never wants to hear the truth so doesn't publish truth, it is all his side, wonder if being on the P&Z has any influence on all of this, we all have a voice and have a right to share it, some use their blogs for both personal and other reasons, who knows, $ talks. Keep up your great work on this blog, you care about all as a whole, that is the difference.
I sent this message to Wes today, I am sure he won't post it, but I think he is going overboard:
"Wes, sounds like you are in cahoots with William Waters too, sending him emails for reactions like this? It seems pretty unethical of him to even respond to your hearsay and probing. Try to unite, stop the divisiveness amigo."
I think Wes was perfectly correct in sending this to Mr. Waters, as a citizen he wanted an opinion form the head of code if this bullsh*t that Mulvehil is spreading was a correct representation of what could, and could not be done in the city.
Go see, Anon@6:37. Unlike this blog, Wes posts all reader comments, even those critical of his position. You may not agree with the facts, but they're still the facts.
If you read the comment policy (AND SOME OF YOU COMPLAINERS DO NOT), this is NOT fair or balanced.
I will NOT post lies or political smears against my position on certain subjects that I feel strongly about. This is an advocacy site. Now and then I will let some bull shit pass through like yours' above. I have told you to take that stuff somewhere else and you have--to the other blog. I appreciate that you at least can understand that you need to go where you are appreciated by political negativism.
And WES does not post all comments either, so stop the crap.
Lynn, bravo, you are right, he doesn't post all comments, he is one sided and does not allow the truth to come out, he covers for his buds a lot. I have concluded that your blog is much more fair and honest than his. Look at his attack on Suzanne now, that is not nice.
It is gossipy and hearsay and does not look good for Mr. Waters or Blackman, very unprofessional and unethical to do what Wes did and then for Mr. Waters, a city employee, to then react to, most businesses have policy on interacting with media this way, bottomline, it looks bad for both of them, I wouldn't be surprised if Waters loses his job over something like this now or in the future. Wes doesn't have a chance to be elected in this city, he is way too negative, attacking (just see his blog), and hateful, people do not want a person like this in office.
"Waters is a staff member hanging on to his job by a bunch of gestapos. I don't care that Wes published his comment. It just shows you what type he is."
Good points to the above post, it didn't work for Wes nor Mary Lindsey, you need to be positive and not attacking, Triolo ran a good campaign in that respect. Unfortunately, she is s sweet talker with a lot of lip service who is not doing what she ran her campaign on. We need all of them to listen better to citizens and show they care, they need to get this city cleaned up, bottomline.
Yes, it is true--she was against assessments. However, what I felt about them was of no consequence. She never asked me. It was politically SMART of her to vote NO on a special assessment for fire pensions. She had the support of the people on this one, not just me. Those I supported on the dais were FOR the assessment. Waterman was FOR it before she voted against it--politics.
Let's see what happens this year. The special assessment may have only been delayed by one year due to politics.
14 comments:
We need balance, a little is fine, but some, not all the city. I can see though that your other big blogger friend is bashing the other comm. about wanting the petition and bashing her every which way on his blog, I am so tired of all this divisiveness, we all need to unite and work together, we need unity, but $ talks, there is so much greed and corruption, all of them in cahoots to develop all thinking this will eliminate blight, letting their slum owner friends do what they want until they can sell their properties for millions. Your blogger friend never wants to hear the truth so doesn't publish truth, it is all his side, wonder if being on the P&Z has any influence on all of this, we all have a voice and have a right to share it, some use their blogs for both personal and other reasons, who knows, $ talks. Keep up your great work on this blog, you care about all as a whole, that is the difference.
why wouldn't we want Historical quality buildings in our down town core?
Does that picture represent an opposition to the Gulfstream Hotel?
It's pretty hard to respond to the above jokes.
I sent this message to Wes today, I am sure he won't post it, but I think he is going overboard:
"Wes, sounds like you are in cahoots with William Waters too, sending him emails for reactions like this? It seems pretty unethical of him to even respond to your hearsay and probing. Try to unite, stop the divisiveness amigo."
I think Wes was perfectly correct in sending this to Mr. Waters, as a citizen he wanted an opinion form the head of code if this bullsh*t that Mulvehil is spreading was a correct representation of what could, and could not be done in the city.
Go see, Anon@6:37. Unlike this blog, Wes posts all reader comments, even those critical of his position. You may not agree with the facts, but they're still the facts.
So who's really being "fair & balanced"?
If you read the comment policy (AND SOME OF YOU COMPLAINERS DO NOT), this is NOT fair or balanced.
I will NOT post lies or political smears against my position on certain subjects that I feel strongly about. This is an advocacy site. Now and then I will let some bull shit pass through like yours' above. I have told you to take that stuff somewhere else and you have--to the other blog. I appreciate that you at least can understand that you need to go where you are appreciated by political negativism.
And WES does not post all comments either, so stop the crap.
Lynn, bravo, you are right, he doesn't post all comments, he is one sided and does not allow the truth to come out, he covers for his buds a lot. I have concluded that your blog is much more fair and honest than his. Look at his attack on Suzanne now, that is not nice.
Waters is a staff member hanging on to his job by a bunch of gestapos. I don't care that Wes published his comment. It just shows you what type he is.
It is gossipy and hearsay and does not look good for Mr. Waters or Blackman, very unprofessional and unethical to do what Wes did and then for Mr. Waters, a city employee, to then react to, most businesses have policy on interacting with media this way, bottomline, it looks bad for both of them, I wouldn't be surprised if Waters loses his job over something like this now or in the future. Wes doesn't have a chance to be elected in this city, he is way too negative, attacking (just see his blog), and hateful, people do not want a person like this in office.
"Waters is a staff member hanging on to his job by a bunch of gestapos. I don't care that Wes published his comment. It just shows you what type he is."
Good points to the above post, it didn't work for Wes nor Mary Lindsey, you need to be positive and not attacking, Triolo ran a good campaign in that respect. Unfortunately, she is s sweet talker with a lot of lip service who is not doing what she ran her campaign on. We need all of them to listen better to citizens and show they care, they need to get this city cleaned up, bottomline.
actually I belive her campaign was run on no assessments, because Lynn, and her croonies would not stop bitching about them.
Yes, it is true--she was against assessments. However, what I felt about them was of no consequence. She never asked me. It was politically SMART of her to vote NO on a special assessment for fire pensions. She had the support of the people on this one, not just me. Those I supported on the dais were FOR the assessment. Waterman was FOR it before she voted against it--politics.
Let's see what happens this year. The special assessment may have only been delayed by one year due to politics.
Post a Comment