And Don’t Get Me Wrong…

…I’m not looking for silence….not in the least.

As I’ve said before, the more you post, the less credible you become, and the more your true colors are shown.  By all means, don’t stop writing, that isn’t what I’m after at all.  I think you’re writing can be very irresponsible and overly emotional, but the more your words are made public, the less chance that you’ll actually be put in a position to do any real damage.

Have a nice day!

You Are Part of the Problem

Ms. Fissinger, either you just don’t get it, or you just like to hear yourself talk.   Or possibly both.

Ms. Fissinger posted an article today that pointed out a story about a pet cat belonging to a democratic campaign manager that had been killed in Arkansas, and the word “liberal” was carved into it.  The person who did this truly is vile, and I sincerely hope this person is caught and gets every punishment due him.  Complete waste of a human being.

I would imagine Ms. Fissinger and I agree on the above statements to a large degree.  See how easy that is?  Completely opposing viewpoints coming together, even if over something as sick as this.

But Ms. Fissinger couldn’t stop there.  Before getting to the story about the cat, she felt it necessary to again paint all conservatives with the same broad brush.   Spewing venom.  Degrading.  Targeting those they don’t like.  Lying about our president.  (What’s actually funny is if you change the subjects of her words, she is describing herself verbatim.  But that’s another story).

Love this line:  “There is a poison, a cancer, an evil in our land.  And I don’t know how it’s excised.”  Wow, hyperbole much??  You are almost right, Ms. Fissinger.  With regards to this story, there is indeed an evil person out there, this time in Arkansas.  Why don’t  you point the finger at this person and don’t make it sound like all conservatives agree with and support this “tactic”?   Just like the person who bombs an abortion clinic does not represent all Christians, neither does this scum represent all conservatives.  You come across as an elitist, as someone who wants to divide people into classes so YOU can decide what is fair, and who has temper tantrums when you don’t get what you want.  Therefore, my problem (and that of most rational people) is with YOU, not your political party.   When you confronted Katie Witt during a city council meeting break, that was YOU, not your party. When you disrespect former mayor Baum, or councilman Santos, or businessman Steve Strong, you are demonstrating why YOU are acting inappropriately, not your party.

Have you ever asked yourself…why do I, Ms. Fissinger, spout off like I do?  My belief is that you aren’t really interested in solving problems.  If that were the case,  you’d speak in terms more conducive to actually solving the problem rather than speaking in ways that obviously turn off not just your real target but entire groups of people who very well may agree with you on some points.  No, I think you enjoy hearing yourself speak, and I think you like the attention you get when you speak during PITBH and writing stories at the Fiction ‘Riters of Longmont blog.  Very selfish motive, but if that’s how you roll, then that’s your prerogative.

People who create more problems than they help solve are generally not looked upon kindly by those who see the truth.  Will your eyes ever realize your real lies?

Great Take on Public Invited to be Heard

Chris Rodriguez posted recently on Longmont Politics a great article regarding the recent issue of limiting public invited to be heard time at city council meetings.

In this article, Chris lists several suggestions, all of which should be required reading for anyone wishing to speak at PITBH:

  • Not everyone will agree with what you have to say.  That should be obvious, but lately I’ve seen some people get upset that city council members may not value their opinion.  Get over it.
  • No one, elected or not, must accept, watch, or consider whatever piece of information you give them.  To you it may seem like common sense that any logical person should accept as fact and that it’s information people NEED to see, to others it may seem like propaganda.
  • Having people repeat themselves over and over, regardless of the number of people doesn’t make their issue more true or right.  It just means a lot of people got organized.  If consensus was based on this we’d have what is called “mob rule”.
  • There are many outlets to be heard and to communicate with elected officials, they include:  phone calls, emails, Coffee with Council, the newspaper (including Open Forum letters, the TC Line, and the online comment section), blogging, radio (KRCN 1060AM Monday nights at 6pm where Longmont is the only topic), discussions with advisory boards and committees – and of course Public Invited To Be Heard at this podium.
  • It seems lately attacks on staff and council are on the rise, not a good tactic to win people over.  The city’s rules on this aren’t draconian or over-restrictive; they are just trying to maintain some decency and decorum.  If you feel the need to make a personal attack, the previously mentioned venues are better suited than at this podium.  There are times and places for that kind of activity, I know, I’ve had my moments – but not here.  I don’t think that’s too much to ask, but lately people are nudging right up against that line, and they know better.
  • While you can talk about green cheese on the moon if you like, or political situations that have nothing to do with Longmont, this podium is not your personal soapbox and council and the public would be better served discussing Longmont issues at Longmont City Council meetings.  That’s not an unreasonable limitation or request, it’s common courtesy.
  • Some speakers are guilty of feeling they must be heard on every single subject.  That they must “check in” or “weigh in” at this podium.  This is not necessary and can be done at one of the other many opportunities citizens have to communicate with council.

Great advice.  We agree, that while the public has a right to be heard, the public should also not abuse that right and practice some common courtesy while exercising that right.  Let’s see if the main abusers recognize themselves and do the right thing in the future.

The Public Can Still Be Heard

Some great points being made today’s TC editorial comments about limiting initial PITBH time:

From Bill:
The first night of the newly elected Council PITBH was a manipulated performance to show the new members who is boss; and to enforce the point with the Mayor, who controls the speaking agenda that it is not the voters who make PITBH policy , but Kaye Fissinger. See her take control of Roger Lange’s Council Meetings from his first session as Mayor:

Notice how the police had to restrain her in ” Fissinger assaults Counci” during Mayor Baums”s service< ; . It isn’t that members of Council are trying to cut off free speech; they are trying to put down anarchy that Fissinger represents as a routine element of Longmont governance that is the issue. Will Longmont continue to have a dysfunctional government thanks to Fissiner’s mob manipulation or will it have representative government as the voters have approved?

From NoBoulderNo:
The Public Invited portion of Longmont CC meetings has grown more disfunctional every year. Other cities have had this problem and they’ve come up with various formats to gain reasonable control and maximize council productivity. One idea is to allow a limited amount of public comment on each item throughout the agenda just prior to council discussion. That means one speaks on the item topic only, no soapboxing or political grandstanding.
And from Vigilant.Patriot:
Some seem to think if they repeat the same lies over and over again it will somehow become truth. I see nothing wrong with asking people if what they planned to say has already been said by others, then it would be considerate to pass. Often it is the same people week after week with the same irrational rants.
All great points.  It isn’t about silencing the opposition (although prohibiting the above mentioned malcontent would certainly improve the overall health of Longmont politics in general).  It is about being more efficient and SMART with the use of meeting time, regardless of what the psychics at FRL would try to get you to believe.

Public Invited to be Silent? Not Really

I had a feeling when I heard that (gasp) a council member proposed shortening the initial public invited to be heard that certain local fiction writers would be all over it, and they certainly did not disappoint.  Just like clockwork:

1 – Council member proposes limiting initial time for the sake of efficiency.  Any other times would still be available as needed, and obviously no nefarious reason was intended.

2 – Doug Wray brings up the time when former mayor Baum made a similar proposal, complete with snide remarks and commentary and video clips.

3 – Kaye Fissinger drags Councilman Santos into the mix with the obligatory “page from his playbook” nonsense.

4 – Doug Wray demands that an apology be made.  A private apology isn’t good enough of course.

5 – Kaye Fissinger brings up Western/American Tradition Partnership as the source of all things evil in this world.  Again.

6 – Doug Wray twists the situation into a breach of first amendment and constitutional rights by council members he doesn’t agree with.

It is truly too easy to predict how things will play out from this group.  As usual, you are completely blowing things out of proportion and distorting the real reasoning behind the actions of city council.  This is why no informed person takes your journali…err, blogging, seriously.


To Teresa Foster:  Unfortunately, you’ve taken your stance against fracking and made it about you now.  Do you really believe councilman Santos is not adequately informed about the dangers of fracking?  Why do you think that the DVD you tried to give him contains the holy grail of information that is guaranteed to change the mind of any believer who watches it?  You have every right to your opinion, and I’m sure the entire council is quite aware of it.  But obviously, not everyone agrees with you, including several members of council, and attempting to make a big issue out of a piece of information you tried to disseminate being dismissed does no service to your cause.  From an outsider’s perspective, it appears you simply have some beef against councilman Santos.  Of course, I have no idea of your true intentions (Fissinger and Wray would appear to have the monopoly on opposition mind reading), but that is how it appears.  No information you’ve attempted to pass on is either A) new or B) going to change anyone’s mind, so why not just let it drop?  Your voice has been heard.


Equal Outcomes or Equal Opportunities?

Great letter in the Times Call yesterday.

Mr. Schaefer questions whether the best course for our country (or any country, for that matter) is to contrive equal outcomes or provide equal opportunities.   For a good dose of the former, go check out the Fictional ‘Riters of Longmont blog.   Mr. Schaefer gets it.

New Boulder County Precincts Approved

And not surprisingly, district number 666 is located at the 2300 block of Bowen Street.  Definitely consumed by the GOP, as predicted.

Twin Peaks Mall Sale Delayed?

Our resident local fiction writers guild has claimed they are watching the sale of the Twin Peaks Mall closely, and gloating over Bryan Baum’s “hail mary during the campaign” (classy tweet by the way).  Well, you aren’t the only ones watching how this is going to pan out, and be sure that any updates will be noted here (unlike someone else who chooses to leave incorrect information, because after all, he is just a blogger, not a journalist).  My bet is that there is some more to this story, but time will tell what direction it goes.

I think the truly sad thing is that there are a select few who would celebrate a deal falling through just so they can continue to point at former mayor Baum and play out of context audio snippets, regardless of the negatives that no sale would mean for the city.  We’re watching…