Monday, April 14, 2014

THE TRUTH IS...It was EXCRUCIATING.
Embarrassing and Excruciating.

UPDATE: Video embed added:



Humboldt Access - video

The first report on the Fifth District Candidate's Forum at Azalea Hall in McKinleyville.

Nice, and Nicer - The Journal
__________________

It wasn't just the lack of knowledge and preparation. The inability to answer questions except for two areas. Woefully unprepared. I almost want to just wince and turn away, this was so sad, and so painful. But it's serious, because of why she's running. So here's what I saw...

A one-issue candidate pushed by people who are pissed off about the general-plan delays. Well, ok, one-and-a-half, because she was well-versed in Ken-Millerisms about Richardson's Grove (Are the tanks rolling up the interstate yet?)

Ordinarily, a candidate this clueless would have been eviscerated in the media.

When asked about county funding, her parry was "The only person who cares about that is the person who wrote that question." Really? Ryan proceeded to answer it. As he answered every question.

Some things are understandable. She can be forgiven for not knowing anything about the 50,000 acre feet, it's not likely any first-time candidate would understand it.

But, as excruciating as it was to see her unable to answer question after question, or responding with platitudes, it got worse.

I don't remember what the question was, there were several that pertained to tribal relationships - to hear her start a mini-dissertation on 'indigenous people' was beyond imagination. You wanted to scream, OMG! STOP! Don't you realize you're sitting next to a tribal member! Talking about 'them' in the abstract, it took on a surreal quality, as Ryan stoically endured it. (comes in about 53:35 on the video, added, above)

I left before it was over. But I hear she had a great pre-written piece at the end, all about the General Plan.

I felt somewhat sorry for this woman.
__________________

From the article: The debate was recorded by Access Humboldt and will be available online soon at www.accesshumboldt.net. For a rundown of other scheduled debates in local races, check ◼ here.
__________________

◼ Her My Word: Meet your 5th District candidates: Sharon M. Latour - Times-Standard
◼ Ryan Sundberg's My Word: Meet your 5th District candidates: Ryan Sundberg - Times-Standard
Who? - WP 3/20
Sharon Latour Launches Campaign to Unseat Sundberg - Ryan Burns/Lost Coast Outpost 3/20
...Following the speech, Latour took questions from the crowd for more than half an hour, and in the process she seemed to have trouble addressing policy specifics....

42 comments:

  1. I heard Sharon at last month's HCDCC. Since she had just announced, I cut her some slack when she couldn't answer even the easiest of questions, figuring she'd do her homework. Sounds like she hasn't. It must have been really painful to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  2. She was ignorant, unprepared and arrogant. This is our progressive BS at it's very best. Ryan was a true gentleman. Understands our community and responds to everyone. Went to an old friends funeral today, Lot's of indigenous people there in need of her "conversation". NOT! This woman is a fool and Mrs Hodgson is starting to run her a close econd

    ReplyDelete
  3. Judy Hodgson takes first place. Sharon is a nice person hoodwinked into running.

    Her handlers could at least provide a script.

    ReplyDelete
  4. THE TRUTH is an interesting thing. I find it often escapes local conservatives and Republicans.

    a) Rose will you admit to being Conservative Rose? I don't know if you truly believe you are being objective, you don't see your bias, or you are being insincere. I'm going to go with the former.

    b) So let me explain, because you are biased and this is left vs right, not right vs wrong, you can't or won't see the whole picture. Here is some of it for you.

    c) Both events were held at the Chamber of Commerce. There is not a more powerful and consistently conservative player nation wide.

    Here is your conservo word watch...

    ...lack of knowledge...inability to answer...woefully unprepared...clueless...(he answered every question)...forgiven for not knowing...first time candidate...unable to answer...platitudes

    now lets go back and just focus on your stated emotions or emotions that the scene evoke for you... want to wince and turn away...so sad...so painful...(serious!)...pissed off (btw totally wrong reason, that was your candidate's reason last election and they did nothing to fix this)...(should be)eviscerated...she can be forgiven...excruciating...beyond imagination...(Ryan as stoic)...feel sorry.

    d) Imagine this Rose, imagine, for a moment that you too have rose colored glasses, you too are partisan. I think that is what is happening here. This in no way reflects what happened up there. I see what you are saying and I can imagine how you saw it that way, but that isn't what happened. It isn't the TRUTH, it isn't even the truth. It's your perspective, and imho, it's 180 degrees wrong.

    f) I don't have time to give you my perspective - you can find my thoughts you know where but here are a couple of points for you to consider...

    i) You are very importantly wrong about why the left is upset about the GPU, are you intentionally mistating the reasons or do you not know.

    ii) Ryan isn't answering the questions, he is playing a role of answering the questions. I think that is a huge difference. In fact, it is THE (since we are using CAPS LOCK) DIFFERENCE. Sharon contemplated questions, Ryan gave his well developed stock answers. I heard Cleary ran circles around Sundberg 4 years ago on technical aspects of the GPU, etc. Were you hard on him then.

    Here's an example of what I mean. I asked the question about the GPU going back to the PC, my question was WHY? I had a phrase of my question removed by the young folks handling them. It spoke to the odd reaction Ryan specifically had to the Mercer Fraser letter as Chairman, in session. It seemed that there was a cause and effect. Because of that letter (the second basically threatening the BOS to send the GPU back to the PC in order to fix internal inconsistancies based on the now developer friendly Guiding Principles) the entire, scheduled GPU process was taken off the tracks. I asked why and it couldn't be answered.

    Those silences you heard that made you and so many others uncomfortable did not represent ignorance, it represented thought. Sharon is a human being, (like Ryan btw) But unlike Ryan, she will bring thought and real answers to the Board, not preconceived answers by ... wait for it....the Chamber of Commerce.

    We do need an adversarial system. We are doomed if we allow the Chamber of Commerce to run our public sector as well.

    Good Morning Rose. Did you see the eclipse last night? Have a great day and I'll catch you later.

    (And just so the reader is not confused. I do think I'm right, Rose is wrong, but on top of that I also realize this is due to a different world view, there is a right and wrong from the left, and a right and wrong from the right. This is what these debates and elections are about, chosing our governing philosophies and directions. Rose in your inability to speak of partisanship, I don't think you are allowing for the left to be right.) :) (because, btw, we are) :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. JON! LOL. YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Libjon. WTF? Sharon seems nice enough but clueless. Totally clueless. I don't give a shit about what party someone is registered with but I do care if they wear foil on their head. If you support Sharon please take the aluminum foil off of her head before you take her to another event

    ReplyDelete
  7. CAPS LOCK! IF YOU TYPE LOUD ENOUGH THE WORDS DON't have to be internally consistent. Hey - just like the GPU after the GP rewrite. That's fun.

    BTW, for the record Rose, what non-vested interested people (like yourself - I note you don't often mention the property rights argument you have brought up before) is largely the copting of both the plan and public participation by changing the Guiding Principles behind closed doors and then refusing to actually listen to the public particiaption. The one time they did, Principle #4, they abrublty changed it back once their friends and contributors told them what a bad idea it was to "discourage resource conversion".

    Finally they justified this sham with the red herring of the City of Arcata's letter.

    Check out the archives someday. If you pay enough attention to things like that, you will understand that the only one actually answering questions Friday night was Sharon.

    Real anwers are sometimes hard and even embarrasing to hear. Not everyone knows everything and not everyone has the courage to admit this.

    Sharon doesn't know everything but she is incredibly courageous and ready and willing to learn, depend on her eventual staff members, like she did in the Air Force and help direct our BOS in a direction the people and professions know we all want to go. A creative and thoughtful sustainable prosperity that we all deserve as Humboltonians (and neighbors and friends).

    ReplyDelete
  8. :) DAMMIT, JON! I THOUGHT YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO RESPOND!

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Indigenous people," Jon. Tell me - even you HAD to wince at that.

    Or is liberal really code for "CLUELESS."

    ReplyDelete
  10. So Sharon is a one trick pony? Her knickers (and your's) are in a wad about the supervisors changing a 12 year old "guiding principle" that was stuffed in there by folks who were then voted out of office for being out of touch with the quiet majority instead of the loud nut jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Libjon: So did the kamikaze pilots of WW 2.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jim - Are you saying Kamikaze pilots had courage too? Nice. Way to keep perspective.

    Speaking of perspective, let's take a step back. To Rose, this is about character and knowledge so far. Chris is a big liar and Sharon is a sympathy - inflicting no-nothing.

    What about the issues? Not much mention of those, because we can't. It's the same game conservatives play nationwide and have my entire life, writ locally.

    And Rose, I still don't know if you are aware of this. Are you aware that you focus on personal attributes over substance? In this case I don't disagree. Knowledge is important and if you hold this standard, voting for the most knowledgeable candidate, we'll probably agree more than disagree. Unfortunately we will still disagree on this race.

    Of course this isn't what you will vote on in the 5th, nor will you vote on or support Chris' opponent because he is a big liar (in your view). You will be supporting Virgnia and Ryan because of their policies, but you just cannot express that.

    You can't say you disagree with the right of the public sector to regulate development within a standard setback of, say 150 ft of a river because most people disagree with this. Most people do want to protect salmon and other struggling species' habitats.

    Most people, if given the choice and 411 would also say they believe government should continue it's right, (our right as a community) to determine where growth is going to occur. We as a community don't want to continue a pattern of growth that leaves us further dependent on oil, we'd like to have choice in housing options, but there are others who like things just the way they are.

    So again, stepping back, keep up that strategy of saying you are against politics and then being entirely political, so much so that you seem to exclude policy discussion - at least in the Supervisorial races.

    I hope your DA analysis are not as slanted.

    ReplyDelete
  13. GIVE IT UP, Jon.

    "this is about character and knowledge so far. "

    See? You do get it. You just won't admit it.

    She's a very nice and well-meaning super well-educated woman without a clue.

    Sitting around talking about 'indigenous people' is all well and good, until you're face to face with the reality. C'mon, even you had to cringe as that was being said...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mumbo jumbo, Jon, is not the same as substance.

    Pie in the sky talk about 'hearing their voices" and "having a dialog" is just so much BS. Typical, but useless. Sorry. Even in liberaljon land. It's filler for 'I don't have a clue, but I'll fake it and speak 'with authority' as if I do know what I'm talking about.'

    ADMIT IT.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, libjon, courage and the fact they threw away their lives and changed exactly nothing.

    I knew Sharon when she was in SoHum. Very nice, caring person. I just hate to see her being used as a puppet.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You have got to be kidding me. Libjon, you are not even worth having a debate with as you lack critical skills. I attended both McK-town debate and Orick. Your perception of McK-town debate is completely off. Your bias is 180 degrees. Just STFU, go back to wherever you came from and stay there.

    ReplyDelete
  17. liberal jon what qualifications do Chris and Sharon have other than you and some others who disagree on the GPU.

    Here is a newsflash. There are other issues affecting people's lives today.

    This is not a conservative or liberal choice. Sharon has no knowledge of what a County Supervisor does. In Orick, she said when she is elected, she will do her homework. Do it before you file to run for office.

    Chris Kerrigan is not a man of the people. He is a spoilt adult who was supported by mommy and daddy and then the City of Eureka and now wants the tax payers to pay his way. He needs to show he can actually hold on to a job, make a commitment and Sharon and Chris need to debate on something other than unicorns flying in sustainable skies and the promises of imaginary candy canes that will fix people's economic situations.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Here is a newsflash. There are other issues affecting people's lives today."

    Yes, absolutely. And with an ear to his conservative base, Ryan will be wrong on many of them. However, it cannot be denied that the biggest issue facing the Supervisors is land use. I would like to hear another subject in which the Supervisors have as much influence. Everything else, from safety, to homelessness, to hunger, to women's rights, to the public sector's income vs expenses, to national defense, even to the day-to-day running of the county has another sphere, another person another race to influence it. On land use, our vote will have real consequences. Again, our vote for Supervisor, as one of 10,000 is probably one of the most consequential we can make in June or November, 2014 or 2016.

    The reason why isn't because candidate x supports the TAP program, it's because candidate x either believes, or not, to empower their staff at the Planning (and Building) Department to plan.

    The alternative is to let the Chamber of Commerce do it.

    But more importantly for this thread, Rose and anons, we are getting somewhere.

    I do understand that you say it's about character and knowledge, and to some extent I know this is true. It's also true for us liberals. However, liberals and conservatives often have different priorities for the traits they look for in a leader.

    What it's really about is not necessarily character and knowledge but about a discussion of character and knowledge pushing aside a discussion of policy.The reason why is that is a much more effective political ploy than talking about policy. This is one of the reasons Rose you can't discuss your politics, in our liberal county and state, you would lose votes and elections.

    So when we talk about BIG LIE #2 (Chris is a liar), or inability to answer (Sharon is clueless) or any of the other slimes - associate Sharon with our enemy in WW II or chris is a spoilt adult.

    This is Rush Limbaugh politics. It's about hoping voters vote the soap opera rather than their interests. There biases will be strongly influenced on what type of people Chris, Virginia, Sharon and Ryan are. Here is the thing - they are all good people. They will all serve on a BOS that will be successful.

    What we can do as voters is start to think about the future or we can simply react to what is going on today. That, I think is the difference. Many people might think this is about unicorns, it's not. It's real, we can make a difference with a modicum of thought and planning and...belief in civics and the public sector...(in addition to private sector).

    There is an important role for both and our Supervisors need to understand this. I don't think Ryan and Virginia do.

    BTW, keep thinking Sharon is clueless and feeling sorry for her. Oh, and, keep being concerned about her puppet masters. Both strategies will fail.

    ReplyDelete
  19. liberal jon has spoken. Both strategies will fail.

    jon like the failed endorsement of chris kerrigan by the hcdcc.

    sharon only got it because she is the only candidate that is a Democrat in the 5th District race.

    You radical lefties, any one who disagrees with you is labeled conservative and then derogatory for their beliefs. No freedom of speech and thought.

    jon you should go campaign for both chris and sharon. That will guarantee a win for their opponents on june 3rd.

    ReplyDelete
  20. For the record, I called the HCDCC endorsements. The only race I've called this June/November is Maggie.

    By failing I don't mean to imply Ryan won't win, that is up for the electorate to decide and Sharon has an uphill battle. But she has a good chance given this is a primary.

    Those strategies will fail. They do fail. That is why Rose cannot speak as a conservative or Republican and that is why conservative thought in HumCo blogville is populated by anons.

    "labeled conservative and then derogatory for their beliefs"

    Obviously you are not reading what I write. Good on conservatives, we need them. We just need you all to speak up more about policy and not the politics of the personal. I'll call out the lefties when we do it too - as I just did on the TE a week or so ago. Matthew O. even thanked me for my full-throated defence of SVB. (After he did, I put on my Kerrigan button as we walked into the HCDCC endorsement shindig. - Politics is funny that way.)

    "jon you should go campaign for both chris and sharon."

    Thanks anon - I will.

    ReplyDelete
  21. oh, also, make sure you get out there too for whomever you support. We need more public participation in electoral politics, not less.

    ReplyDelete
  22. lib jon there are conservatives who use their name too and unless you know every anon do not assume their party.

    Time will tell about your Maggie prediction.

    Personal not politics is not a conservative strategy. It was fine tuned by some of your local Dem heroes.

    You got chewed out on Tuluwat, an anon blog by anon people, labeling Heidi Benzonelli a traitor.

    A Democrat who makes the party look good. That is what you Democracy toting free speech advocates do; attack anyone not towing your party line.

    Compared to Tulubs and your blog getting 4 or 7 comments on the average, this blog gets traffic.

    So dont get smug. Who is more in touch with the voters?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Libjohn, you write the good party line. Issues? OK, no growth, no jobs, no future, no recreation, no rural living, that'll do for a start. Vote for libjohns visionaries and get ready to follow orders while living in a 10x10 cubical. On the other hand a vote for a thinking,moderate,compassionate,native like Sundberg will help put your life and its responsibilities back in your own hands.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I like Ryan. Mr. Jon, the biggest issue for the supervisors is most likely the budget, not the general plan. "Indigenous Peoples" and "them" was awkward for me, I grew up around the Sundbergs and other Native Americans. I don't know if it bugged Ryan or his family or not but it was strange to me. I can't quite put my finger why, but it did bug me.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Mr. Anon. That's a good representation of our fake issues. Liberals are pro-growth - the type of growth that is sustainable and added-value. Not the type of growth that allows for a couple of very well-to-do individuals for every 18 others that have to depend on public assistance even if they work 40 hrs per week.

    So yes, we are agreed, jobs, future, recreation, rural living. Those are all absolutely critical, foundational to a liberal vision. Thank you for pointing that out by trying to caricature the left. Take a listen to Chris speak on this. It's pretty awesome.

    Tim, you seem sincere. I'm just not going to go there. Not because of any political calculation, but out of respect. I don't want to make this about ethnicity or race. We need to make keep this discussion about policy and try to steer it away from the personal. If anything she said was offensive to anyone, talk to her about it, she is very approachable.

    Re budget, I don't think I can pull someone who is concerned about the budget away from the conservative in the race. But I'd like to challenge the conventional wisdom on conservatives as fiscal conservatives. *ducks head*

    ReplyDelete
  26. Jon, I can save you some time. I'll make you up a little template...

    Greetings ________,
    then 2 sentences on topic, __________________
    ___________________t
    hen blah-blah-blah you're partisan... blah-blah-blah...you're partisan (and Bush /Cheney /Halliburton/ Republicans... blah-blah-blah...talking points,... and btw, partisan, did I mention you're partisan... Have a wonderful day lj

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Who is more in touch with the voters?"

    Ask Richard Marks, Matthew Owen and Supervisor Bass. Richard has always been a "D", SVB probably a "D" because the "R"s have gone Glenn and Rush mad. M.O.? We can't know intentions, none of us can know another's intentions, but it sure seems from the way he has spoken to me that he appreciates the D's because of our improved ground game over the local R's and, well the 64/36 advantage at the top of the ticket in 2012 doesn't hurt either.

    Who is more in touch with the voters? The Dems. Proof? Try to figure out who the R's are endorsing this June - it will be difficult- I don't think they want to bother the candidates with their imprimatur.

    More proof? Why won't Rose state her political bias? Is it simply because she wants to play fair and non-partisan, or is it because it just won't fly to be conservative, not when being Republican means believing in conspiracy theories like *visits local R website* ...common core!

    http://web.humboldtgop.org/2014/04/bobby-jindal-has-had-enough-of-common.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Libjon has gone bonkers. Get off your stupid partisan butt and get a breath of fresh air. This isn't a dem. v Republican thing. I am a damn independent and d's like your crazy ass self is the reason I am an independent. You are NUTS.

      Delete
  28. Always have been CAPS LOCK NUTS anon. Oh, and don't get me started on independents (or anons).

    NUTS, clueless, BIG LIARS that's one side of the argument. That means we depend on the sane, knowledgeable and honest people in the room to tell the TRUTH!

    I really should go back to where I came from, shut up then listen to Rose and the anons more. If you put it that way, I kinda see your point.

    -or- we could talk about issues anon. Let's start with global warming. Does it exist? Is it caused by humans? What do we do about it?

    That is not something Virginia brought up at the HCDCC endorsement meeting, but she did spend half her time mentioning how much work she has done stuffing envelopes for her organization.

    BTW, Ryan and Rex are DTS (Decline to State) which means they are...wait for it... independents too.

    Two sides, fortunately or unfortunately that is the world we live in, you can chose to accept it and work to change it (something for which I would be on board) or, ironically, focus on labels and insist on not placing one on yourself.

    What I'm trying to do by focusing on partisanship is to start, once again, talking about policy. The only way to get back to talking about policy in our country is through politics and the only current (ie, since the Civil War) way to address politics in any sustainably winning way is through the Democrats and Republicans. And in today's world, one side is fairly consistently liberal, the other conservative.


    ReplyDelete
  29. Ahhh. The world through the eyes of Lib jon....only 2 sides. Wow...and the earth is flat too huh?

    Well jon the earth is round, life is multi faceted and people are different. They come in all shapes and opinions. But poor Jon sees only 2 sides....The people who agree with him on everything and everybody else. How boring. How small little jon.

    ReplyDelete
  30. LOL! LJ, to think anything comming out of Kerrigans mouth was actually filtered through his pot addeled pee-brain is a hoot. Salzman tells him what to say. That's bad enough but RS has a brain and knows its all politics and that his BS is BS. I respect him because he is a very good con man. Most of the other drones/libs are simpl-y followers. OMFG! LJ, you libs have run Ca with a free hand/checkbook the last 40 years. The whole f'ing shit-hole failure is yours. And you want us to stand in the circle jacking off with you.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Policy ... Or.....personal. That is one of the most important distinctions between left vs right in Humboldt and nationwide.

    It isn't black and white, the are shades of grey. Both sides play politics, both sides play up the soap opera. But one side earns a good living doing this in addition to trying to increase their power. It is the reason we have largely anons making these arguments here. It's also why a very nice woman working hard for conservative causes like SVB has to run as a Democrat.

    Let's break down the last comment Luntz style.

    Kerrigan's mouth, pot addeled, pee-brain, is a con man, jerk-off.

    I think you policy argument imbedded in the character assaults is the public sector is spending too much. I don't disagree, why don't we talk about that? What do we want to do as a community (local and state) how, and where are we headed.

    Get you act in order conservatives so we can have this discussion instead of having food fights. As Sharon says, let's invest in the conversation, if we don't power and thus policy will be more about brute force whether physical or by lack of resources. Unfortunately, I think that is really the bottom line with much conservative thought.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh, and yes two sides.

    I recommend this app, highly. 270 to win. It has all the presidential election maps quickly scrollable to you can see the state-by state electoral results over time in less that a minute. It's been two sides since 1856, and it won't change in our lifetimes, just an FYI.

    the wonderful diversity of life is found withing the power structure of our country. The power is wielded by people who become active and organize themselves in two parties. That system represents the best hope for our republic and Democracy. And there are only two political parties right now.

    I personally don't think that should be the end of the discussion. Some basic chagee would help, say so a vote for Nader wouldn't in effect be a vote for Buss.

    But that would be the first step. Not voting Green or Libertarian, because if you do you in effect are working against you interests with your voting franchise.

    ReplyDelete
  33. LJ, you lack reading skills too. You are the anti-liberty prog in the circle jacking off. Dumb Ass!

    ReplyDelete
  34. anti-liberty jon4/18/2014 5:40 PM

    anon - those commas separate your words. I'm just copying what you said, no subject. I realize the target for each slime was another of us proggies.

    So yes, I guess we can now add illiterates, anti-liberty, and dumbasses to that list too.

    Also, anon - what should we be doing to plan our county's future development?

    Rose - to that template add - lets focus on the politics of policy and civics, not the politics of the personal. And, just fyi, I'm actually more interested in the national media than the national policy makers.

    Also, add politics should lean toward joy, not anger. Think about it, there is a hole bunch at stake and despite the significant differences between the differing visions, we are all fighting for our own vision of a more wonderful Humboldt.

    In the end, we do have more in common than not. It's difficult to remember that sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Nothing in common with you LJ. You are an anti-liberty prog and another fool that thinks the BS that he blathers makes him cool. You are a drone and quite pathetic. You could not pack my water bucket.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Jon - you are not a man to ride the river with.

    The term refers to one who is self sufficient - and equal - not to walk too far ahead, nor to walk behind or need to be carried, but to walk side by side, and form a strong team.

    You want to take what others build and tell them what to do, not from a position of strength, but from a desire to build yourself up by doing so.

    It's a problem

    You can justify it every which way but loose, but there truly is no real justification. You want it, so you think you should have it - you believe every sham talking point that comes your way, and thus, in your new religious zeal, you wish you impose your newfound piety on others.

    It's a shame really. There will be no meeting of the minds here. You're across a chasm that is impossible to bridge, and since it is of your own choosing, you're condemned to your fate.

    ReplyDelete
  37. pathetic jon4/19/2014 6:21 AM

    So anon 8:14.

    You don't love your family.
    You don't enjoy good food.
    You wouldn't in the end give everything for them.
    You don't struggle sometimes to make ends meet.
    You don't sometimes wonder how we are blessed to be a part of one of histories greatest experiments - whether you see that to be humankind or the U.S.A. or whatever.
    You want a future for your children or loved ones that is better than today.

    I would feel sadness that we don't share these things in common. But I'm going to wager we do.

    The thing is, don't let hate and fear run you life. We don't need it, it hurts us as a country and county.

    The stock and trade of the radio talking heads is to make you hate and fear liberals. It happens 24/7 365. The thing is, there is nothing to fear except losing an election. Once you get over all the baloney Rush and Glenn* have been feeding you, you'll find that we do have a lot in common - more than you'd like to admit.

    * Here is an example scrolling down the Humboldt Republican blog
    "India: Muslim Politician Says Women Who Have Been Raped Should Be Hanged In Accordance With Islamic Law…"

    This has absolutely no relevance to my own deep and wonderful experience on the Muslim half of my family. The headline says it all. It's meant to polarize with fear - why? Because then you separate and when separate you are more likely to be able to guide politics and policy in the direction you prefer.
    It's basic stuff. You just have to pay attention.

    So I'll be eating breakfast this am in Humboldt County, then cleaning the house this lovely Saturday. Maybe you will be doing something similar, maybe not.

    ReplyDelete
  38. not a man to run the river with jon4/19/2014 6:36 AM

    Greetings __Rose___,

    It's interesting you mention religious zeal Rose because this sounds religious to me ..."You're across a chasm that is impossible to bridge, and since it is of your own choosing, you're condemned to your fate."

    So I agree with you about the chasm, and I also agree about meeting of minds (as in not). But that's the point. My question is, what is the chasm. I know it's there, that is what I am saying to you, the chasm separates left from right world view.

    My point is you define the chasm thusly. I don't think you define your side often, so I'll demonstrate how you define our side and let you fill in the definition of yours.

    Our side is condemned to its fate, which is really a shame. We are prone to believing every talking point, we then impose these thoughts on others, we are liars, no-nothings, over educated ninies (OK that last one is mine, I'm getting into this!)

    We are angry, we desire to build ourselves up and take what others have built.

    Let's say all that is true. The truth is it shouldn't matter. What matters is policy. Let's get back to that K?

    Let's define the chasm by policy, not personal traits, because in the end, personal traits are unknowable, and, btw, we are all highly flawed, (I mean those of us on this side of the chasm!! :) )

    So, a policy question might be who built what - and did they actually build it or did they use the labor of others and have tilted the system so all the money flows to them? We could start there, but of course we won't.

    Where we will start is you telling us the TRUTH, and we should listen because you are on the right side of the chasm.

    And lets be clear, there is a chasm and you are on the right! :) Blammo!

    ... did I mention you're partisan... Have a wonderful day namtrtrwj

    ReplyDelete
  39. The last two posts are so typically progie. They are no liberals. Who unlike progs respect liberty. As far as religion goes, LOL! First Eco United the fastest growing church.

    ReplyDelete
  40. AND I no longer a d. Pughey. I am done with that

    ReplyDelete

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