Saturday, December 21, 2013

Richard?

http://hcda2014.wordpress.com/

22 comments:

  1. so this odd blog you linked to is just going to repost other's work? I'm not following? Richard who? Inquiring minds want to know - fill us in Rose.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jon, so you know NOTHING about the history here?

    ReplyDelete
  3. it's ok to be on a learning curve Rose we all are on this or that. Learn something new everyday is my motto. So what's up?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jon, you do an awful lot of pontificating for someone who doesn't know anything about what has gone on or is going on.

    That's putting it bluntly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a sad old crow you are Rose

      Delete
  5. Pontificatin' Jon12/22/2013 2:24 PM

    When people say they like sarah plain, like the tea party, like conservatives , just moved to the fifth ward and just became a democrat in 2012, it's pretty easy to figure out what's going on. It's not rocket science. But still no closer to understanding what this is about.

    One of the little nuggets I've discovered in my travels through life is it's not necessarily what you know that's as important as if you learn how to learn. Especially in the age of the internet. It's complicated.

    Merry Christmas btw Rose!

    ReplyDelete
  6. And what a troll you are, Anon 3:20 again stalking Rose, for shame! Rose tells it like it is re motormouth blogster Jon. You, sad s.o.s. anonymous, are out of touch with Humboldt blog scene reality. You seem to crawl out from under Rose's bridge quite frequently, coming up to crap on Rose and then slithering back under. She should call animal control only they'll ask for identification tags and all Rose can say to that is, the mutt's counterfeits his own and barks and bites anonymously..

    ReplyDelete
  7. Merry Christmas, Stephen! And yes, Merry Christmas, Jon.

    And as for this upcoming race, Richard Salzman should stay out of it. As should I. Let these good people run a good race, on their own, and without his bought and paid for taint. Without his threats, without his browbeating reporters. Without his slimy brand of politics.

    He's calling around on behalf of one of them. And it's looking like he has plans of some kind to get involved. Let it go, Richard.

    ReplyDelete
  8. motormouth blogster jon12/23/2013 6:06 AM

    Salzman ! duh! of course I should have know that. Sorry. I actually had lunch with Richard and like him a bunch as you might imagine. I do know most of the outline of that history now that you mention it.

    btw - you should be involved, as should Richard. We are all part of the ugly process of democracy. We should all be playing by the rules and I think transparently to insure we do - but other than that the dialog should be long and often and many, many, many more people should be interested and involved.

    Merry Christmas Rose and Stephen and anon - (anon - you should be polite though or else you are only helping Rose's cause which I'm guessing both of us are often against) The Golden Rule! Huzzah!

    Thank you stephen for that christmas present of a label - it's one of my favorite so far!

    ReplyDelete
  9. so, I'm still confused. Do you think Richard started that blog? It's pretty nothing - just word for word content of other's right?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Motormouth Jon, you're actually getting to be a kind of mascot for Progressive silliness and that's a good thing. I try to add a dash or two of it myself to keep these people from trying to reach through the wires and ethersphere to grab each others necks and choke the living crap out of one another. Keep it up, Jon, it's Saul Gould, and Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too. I'm sending out Catholic Church membership sign up forms instead of Christmas cards this year and I'll be sure to include you on my Santa' list.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Merry Christmas to you too, Rose. We should have lunch sometime soon. Got lot's of good news to share.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh, is he a GOOD Democrat, Jon? I asked you before, do you vote just based on the 'D' after the candidate's name?

    See, I don't vote for any candidate based on the 'R' or the 'D' or the 'L' or any other designation (including incumbent), and I don't understand people like you who do. And if all you do is vote 'D' - and once your candidate gets seated in, say, the senate, and all they do is vote party line, why do we need them at all? If we vote for a 'D' we can just fill in their votes for their entire term, and send them on a nice vacation, and avoid all the expense of a DC (or Sacramento) office, and all the travel to and fro. Right? It's just a scoreboard, right?

    Think. Different. Jon.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I don't think he even is a Democrat Rose, but he is right on policy - most of the time.

    Remember, Supervisor Bass and Supervisor Fennel are D's too and I will vote against them - no matter what - even if it's the most conservative of R's.

    Why? Because they are ultra-conservative on land use and they (especially VB, not so much EF) are doing a great job of brandishing their D come election time but voting like an R.

    It's not as simple as that - I'm making the complex simplistic because of space and time constraints, but we may agree more than you think on the relative importance of partisanship/policy Rose. I just am making the point that the "D" or "R" is relavent information to elections. It does tell you stuff. It's up to the candidate, the media, you, me, Richard and as many others out there who care to to help define what, if anything the D and R mean.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks S. I'll look for it in the mail. With Pope Francis - My agnostisism is leaning heavily Catholic these days.

    For the record, this "these people from trying to reach through the wires and ethersphere to grab each others necks and choke the living crap out of one another." is never, ever, ever, ever,ever,ever, ever, ever me.

    ReplyDelete
  15. There are things we agree on, Jon.

    And I am curious, since you keep mentioning land issues - how much property do you own?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Me, none. Family some, nothing fancy all in town.

    ReplyDelete
  17. And yet you presume to tell people who DO own property what they should do with it. Based on your ideas about what it might be like and how you think it should be restricted.

    See, Jon, that's where we part company.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Yes Rose that is where we part company but that shouldn't surprise you. BTW, what gives us the right not to allow someone to build a helicopter pad in their house in Myrtletown? Or telling people they shouldn't build a 3 mansions on their TPZ property in the hills? We are going to have to do this some day, the sooner we do, the more problems we can solve, the more profitable everyone will be and we will all have a higher standard of living. Where it's done, infill is highly successful - especially with the kids. Sometimes the free market needs to be protected from itself.

    Again, we will part company there and the R behind your name already told me we would. It's one of the reasons I question Supervisor Bass's "D" too. She should be thinking about this issue instead of doing everything she can to be on board with the mortgage and real estate brokers.

    Also, remember, this isn't 1776. You don't need to have property to vote or have an opinion.

    http://www.elocallawyers.com/infographics/democracy-distilled.html

    ReplyDelete
  19. "You don't need to have property to vote or have an opinion"

    You DO need property to be of some value - Opinions are just as worthless as the person making them.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jon. I have no respect for your position, denigrating the people who are vested in the community, who are the bedrock foundation of society. You're a fool.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Rose, don't you know that people who own things are inherently evil? They had to take whatever they have from someone, didn't they?

    I think the biggest mistake this country ever made was giving a vote to the losers and parasites among us who don't have any skin in the game. It just doesn't make any sense to let people vote for the politician who promises to do the most stealing and redistribution.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.