So, uh, Patrick...

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

In a thread below, you made a rather big deal out of Benton's promise to pay the first police officer fired as a result of 695 $50. I responded by telling you that if you could provide the department and officer's name, I would be happy to send the message to him personally.

But that brings up an even more interesting question: What efforts have YOU.... YOU PERSONALLY taken to get Ruth Fisher to resign?

I mean, I KNOW that your sense of what's right and wrong just COULD NOT allow you to go after Benton based on what HE said, and at the same time, ignore Fisher's lies to the people of this state just because her lies happen to agree with your agenda... right?

Feel free to document your efforts. Otherwise, it may be time to do a little labeling. You see, there's a word for the type of situational ethics that acting in one case (as you arguably have) while you ignore the other because it suits your purposes results in...

The word escapes me, just now, but I'm pretty sure you know what it is... you're such a bright guy.

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), December 24, 1999

Answers

Ruth can't resign, because she was instrumental in passing the public- private initiative, paving the way for a new Narrows Bridge with unlimited tolls. There's money to be made on that project. We have the best politicians money can buy. The construction industry owes Ruth too much. We don't want to hurt their feelings, or they might force us to buy cement shoes.

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), December 26, 1999.

Ah Westin, such a simple minded fellow you are. I know this might be difficult for you to understand, but not everyone is as selectively obsessive as you. I personally could care less if Benton pays the $50 or if Fisher resigns for two reasons. A) I consider both comments to be made "off the cuff" and more of a personal comment to express their feelings on the issue, and. B) Neither one of them are my representatives in state government. I have better things to do with my time that harass some person whom I didn't elect nor whom is my representative.

So why did I bring it up? Simple. You're the one who has thing fanatical obsession over the Fisher comment. I was just curious to see if this obsession of yours was based on an unbending desire to see that everyone who holds public office must keep EVERY word they say, or if it was based upon the situational ethics that you detailed. Seeing as you've named a number of conditions that must be met before you contact Benton I have to assume that you fall into that unnamed label category of yours. Although Benton may be a big fat moron, I will give him enough intellectual credit to be able to track down a laid off police officer. All you would really need to do is tell him that you've heard that several different agencies are laying off some of their police officers and ask him if he's kept his word. After all, he did make the statement, so it should be his responsibility to make sure he keeps his word isn't it? Otherwise that would leave him open to use the "I wasn't aware of it" Reagan/Bush excuse from Iran-Contra.

Was that a simple enough answer for you? I know that you do have trouble thinking beyond the confinds of your own mellon sometimes. Let me review: Both Rep. Fisher and Senator Benton made off the cuff comments regarding the passage and effects of 695. I don't care if either one of them keeps their word. YOU are the one with the obsessive feeling of right or wrong on Rep. Fisher's comments. I figure if you felt even 10% of that same obsession towards Senator Benton, then you'd be all over him as well. But apparently you're not. And I guess that makes you.....

-- Patrick (Patrick1142@yahoo.com), December 26, 1999.


Patrick, having been caught like a deer in the headlights, lamely attempts to engage in a little transference by "answering" thusly:

"Ah Westin, such a simple minded fellow you are."

While I admit to a certain ease in step one of manipulating you into taking step two, and while I also admit that even a dull normal moron can now see you for what you are, I would not necessarily agree with your weak effort to avoid the issue by name calling, nor would I agree with the label you've chosen to use.

Whereas I have proven what you are, you actually have nothing to back your playground statement up. A subtle, but nevertheless telling difference.

"I know this might be difficult for you to understand, but not everyone is as selectively obsessive as you. I personally could care less if Benton pays the $50 or if Fisher resigns for two reasons."

Having been caught in your own web of hypocrisy, you desperately seek, but fail to find, a way out.

You see, Patrick, here you are flatly lying. If you did not care about Benton acting as he indicated he would, you would not have made yourself out to be what you so clearly are by opening up your mouth on the subject. Clearly, had you "not cared," you would not have posted.

"A) I consider both comments to be made "off the cuff" and more of a personal comment to express their feelings on the issue,

Pity you didn't feel that way when you open ed the ol' pie-hole and shoved your foot in it up to your knee.

In fact, here is the "uncaring comment" you made:

"BTW, have you e-mailed Senator Benton lately? He made the comment that he would pay $50 to the first police officer fired because of 695 cutbacks. There have been several police officers who are in the process of receiving their pink slips due to cutbacks. Do YOU think Benton has cut the check yet? Probably not. The guy has about the same character as a warthog."

So, for God's sake, Patrick, if you're going to put yourself in these positions, at least TRY and be man enough to admit your biases, and move on.

"and. B) Neither one of them are my representatives in state government."

Presumably you knew that before you shot off your mouth about Benton, yet that did nothing to keep you from reaching the keys.

"I have better things to do with my time that harass some person whom I didn't elect nor whom is my representative."

What... like post to a 695 board?

So... it bothers you enough to condemn Benton for an action that you don't even know, one way or another, that he has taken. (You have no more idea if he's sent a check then you have an understanding of politics. In short, none.) But it doesn't bother you enough to condemn Fisher, if in no other place then this same board, for WILLFULLY, ACTUALLY and ABSOLUTELY lying to the people of this state?

And after all that, you try and sell us on the idea that you could "care less?"

Man, you sound like you work for Clinton. "So why did I bring it up?"

Because you're such a petty small thinker, so blinded by your biases that you'd support light rail and government as usual no matter WHAT the proof are that neither works worth a damn?

"Simple. You're the one who has thing fanatical obsession over the Fisher comment."

Interesting perspective. I am demanding that a politician be held accountable for what she says. You take a half-hearted swipe at Benton in a whimpy effort to do the same thing, and then you tell the whole world that I base it on MY "fanatical obsession."

You see, Patrick... that's what I like about you. Fisher sees it your way. She is, no doubt, a stellar member of your party. As a result, there is NO lie she can utter, no tax and spend action she can take that would draw your condemnation.

She lied about her intentions when this passed. So... how are we supposed to know when she's going to tell the truth on ANYTHING? Will a light go off in her forehead?

This isn't a matter of "obsession." Fisher had MORE then ample opportunity to withdraw her comment BEFORE the election. She did not do so, as if the threat of her leaving government would actually change anyone's mind.

She lied. She needs to exhibit SOME honor (look it up) and do the right thing. Except, as you have illustrated, she's probably incapable of it.

"I was just curious to see if this obsession of yours was based on an unbending desire to see that everyone who holds public office must keep EVERY word they say, or if it was based upon the situational ethics that you detailed."

No you weren't, Patrick. You were taking another shot at Benton. You were just so blinded by your hatred that you failed to consider the hypocrisy of your actions. I have just called you on it.

Simple, really.

BTW, you did get my response, didn't you? That if I got a name, and a department, I would personally send the message to him?

"Seeing as you've named a number of conditions that must be met before you contact Benton I have to assume that you fall into that unnamed label category of yours."

A "number of conditions?" Do you call requiring a name and a department a "number of conditions?" If that is what you "assume," then we can all conclude that you are now the poster-child for what the word "assume" means.

"Although Benton may be a big fat moron, I will give him enough intellectual credit to be able to track down a laid off police officer."

So... is this where I respond with a witty rejoinder?

"'Although Patrick may be a twisted, politically ignorant, poli-sci drop out; I will give him enough intellectual credit to be able to provide Benton with the information he needs to be able to send the check.'"

"All you would really need to do is tell him that you've heard that several different agencies are laying off some of their police officers and ask him if he's kept his word."

Well, I could tell him that, except the fact is that I haven't heard it about any of them. He might ask, "which departments?' to which I would have to reply, "I don't know; I haven't heard of any."

"After all, he did make the statement, so it should be his responsibility to make sure he keeps his word isn't it?"

Yeah, Patrick, that IS an interesting world you live in. Let's try this:

"After all, she did make the statement, so it should be her responsibility to make sure she keeps her word isn't it?"

You would, of course, hang yourself before you'd ever type THOSE words.

"Otherwise that would leave him open to use the "I wasn't aware of it" Reagan/Bush excuse from Iran-Contra." Actually, I'll take that any day over the now infamous "it all depends on what your definition of 'is,' is." summation of the entire Clinton presidency.

"Was that a simple enough answer for you?"

Which part? The part where I destroyed your lame excuses? Or the part where I have labeled you for what you are?

Both were, in fact, fairly simple.

Since you asked.

"I know that you do have trouble thinking beyond the confinds of your own mellon sometimes."

HHHmmm.... it seems I had no difficulty about THIS issue, eh, P.?

"Let me review: Both Rep. Fisher and Senator Benton made off the cuff comments regarding the passage and effects of 695."

You left out a small part:

"And I acknowledge that I have made no effort to hold Fisher accountable because her comments were were 'off the cuff' and she's not my representative anyway. But then, neither is Benton, and that didn't stop me for a second."

I mean, you ARE interested in accuracy, aren't you?

"I don't care if either one of them keeps their word,"

Patrick, you keep leaving things out:

"but I have gone out of my way to disparage Benton, while hypocritically saying nothing about Fisher."

"YOU are the one with the obsessive feeling of right or wrong on Rep. Fisher's comments."

Nice to know that you don't care about when politicians lie. But for the record, Patrick, YOU are the one that brought up Benton. Live with it.

"I figure if you felt even 10% of that same obsession towards Senator Benton, then you'd be all over him as well. But apparently you're not."

Well, apparently you fail to grasp reality. You see, only one of us has been making excuses for the politicians under discussion. I believe that when it's proven that a police office ACTUALLY loses his/her job because of 695, Benton ought to pay.

What's it going to take to make you think that Fisher, having given her "word," and then breaking it, ought to resign?

You see, Patrick, we both know that's impossible. The basic tenets of liberal politics and the democrat party are based on the avoidance of personal responsibility. Therefore, there is nothing that can be shown; no evidence; no tape; no utterance that can be made to get you to hold Fisher to her word.

"And I guess that makes you...."

The guy who's shown you up for what you are.

Since you asked.

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), December 26, 1999.


Well I got bored with reading your whinning about 1/3 of the way through. I knew I was talking way over your head, but it's always funny to see just how hard of a nerve I hit with you by the length of you lame attempts a response.

No, I don't care if Benton sends out the check. It was simply an example of a politician who made an off the cuff positive remark about 695. The specific subject and the person making the comment were inconsequential. The issue I was trying to get to the root of was EXACTLY what you're trying to accuse me of, setting a double standard in your quest to make politicians keep their EVERY word. The only problem is that your accusation doesn't work on me. I never said that I cared if Benton kept his word. I only wondered if YOU cared. Therefore, if I don't care about Benton being honest, why should I care about Fisher being honest? Oh, and I already knew he was an idiot WAAAAAAY before this 695 thing. His $50 remark did nothing to change that fact either way.

Oh, the Spokane City Council approved their 2000 budget on December 6th. The city will lay off 11 officers starting next year due to 695 cutbacks. The Spokane Police Department can be reached at (509) 625- 4000. Names of the soon to be unemployed officers have not been released, but again, all Benton really needs to know is that a specific department is making staff reductions. If he is really serious about forking over $50 to someone, then he'll call them up and ask for the first officer's name and where he can send the check. In case you're at a loss for words, I can draft an e-mail message for you.

benton_do@leg.wa.gov

Dear Senator Benton:

It has come to my attention that the December 7th edition of the Spokane Spokesman Review reported that the Spokane Police Department will be required to lay off eleven officers to make up for the impacts of the passage of Initiative 695. You recently made the comment that you would pay the first police officer who lost his or her job due to 695 $50. Were you aware of the situation in Spokane? If you were, have you contacted the Spokane Police Department to ask for information about the specific individuals who are losing their jobs? If you were not, can I assume that you will contact them in the near future? If you do not have their contact information, they can be reached at (509) 625-4000. I am anxious to hear if you plan on keeping your word about paying the first police officer $50, and if not, then why not.

Sincerely,

Jim Westin

(please feel free to cc me if/when you send your message. I won't feel bad if you use your own words, but please share Senator Benton's comments with the rest of us.)

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), December 27, 1999.


Well, Patrick,

Prior to your response, you entertained us with these tidbits:

"I personally could care less if Benton pays the $50 or if Fisher resigns for two reasons. A) I consider both comments to be made "off the cuff" and more of a personal comment to express their feelings on the issue, and. B) Neither one of them are my representatives in state government. I have better things to do with my time that harass some person whom I didn't elect nor whom is my representative."

You could "care less," but then even go to all that trouble to provide me with a suggested email (that you, yourself are completely capable of sending?) to give to Benton?

Odd behavoir (in, of course, several months of odd behavoir) for someone who could "care less."

and this beaut:

"After all, he did make the statement, so it should be his responsibility to make sure he keeps his word isn't it?"

While you have consistantly exhibited hypocrisy and the bias typical of the liberal, this one is a clincher.

You apply this "concern" over Benton (right after telling us that you could "care less") but then, fail to apply the same standard to Fisher.

Yup. Typical.

And, you reitterate:

"I don't care if either one of them keeps their word."

For once, it would be helpful if you could tell the truth. Your actions in this thread, indicate that you DO care... but only about holding Benton's feet to the fire.

I wouldn't have any problem with your position if you would hold BOTH of them under the same scrutiny, but your bias is so overwhelming that you have absolutely no intention of applying the same standard to Fisher that you do Benton.

Then you lie again.

"Well I got bored with reading your whinning about 1/3 of the way through."

While I have no doubt that my missives are many things, "whinning" is not one of them. I have confirmed your hypocrisy, and your determination of applying the double standard that is the hallmark of the liberal. I have proven, by using your own words, that you only care (and, Patrick... clearly you DO care, your phoney denials notwithstanding) about Benton keeping his word, while you, again typically for you, give Fisher a pass.

"Whinning?" Hardly. Painful for you to read? No doubt. Being confronted with the truth can be a painful process, particularly for one as brainwashed as yourself.

So, it's entirely understandable that you had a hard time reading your indictment. Particularly since you are, after all, guilty on all counts.

"I knew I was talking way over your head,"

In your BEST dreams you can't get there, Home Boy. Destroying you here, while causing you some discomfort, should not, as it obviously has, make you delusional. After all, P., this IS usenet, and we ARE talking about a subject you, allegedly, don't care about... right?

"but it's always funny to see just how hard of a nerve I hit with you by the length of you lame attempts a response."

Patrick, have you considered going back to that community college and getting a refund?

YOU accuse ME of a "lame response?!?!?!?!?!?"

Please. You haven't come up with a substantive response since I started slapping you around in this thread.

"No, I don't care if Benton sends out the check."

Patrick, if you didn't care... you wouldn't post about it. That's so simple even you can understand it. You certainly wouldn't have written the suggested email.

But, let us not lose sight of the crux of the matter, Benton's check notwithstanding; as your failed efforts at transference are notwithstanding.

The crux of the matter is that you are attempting to hold Benton to a standard that you don't apply to Fisher.

Was it Churchill who's known for saying, "Patrick, we've established what you are... now we're just haggling about price?"

"It was simply an example of a politician who made an off the cuff positive remark about 695. The specific subject and the person making the comment were inconsequential. The issue I was trying to get to the root of was EXACTLY what you're trying to accuse me of, setting a double standard in your quest to make politicians keep their EVERY word. The only problem is that your accusation doesn't work on me."

Of COURSE it "works on you."

I have posted here that I would personally email Benton the moment someone provide me with a NAME and a DEPARTMENT, so it could be checked out. I have posted that Benton should be held accountable for what he said. You would dive into a pool of warm spit befrore you'd do the same about Fisher. It truly is simple.

Or, can you point out where you have done the same?

You can't, of course. First of all, you attempt to spin this as an "off the cuff" issue. Well, that don't wash, because, as I have stated, Fisher had the opportunity to withdraw her statement before the election, and chose not to.

You can only care less that Fisher lied to the people of this state, because, typical of your ilk, it's only bad if a Republican does it.

"I never said that I cared if Benton kept his word."

So... you wrote this....

"BTW, have you e-mailed Senator Benton lately? He made the comment that he would pay $50 to the first police officer fired because of 695 cutbacks. There have been several police officers who are in the process of receiving their pink slips due to cutbacks. Do YOU think Benton has cut the check yet? Probably not. The guy has about the same character as a warthog."

.... because you didn't care?

Please. Give that "didn't care" thing a rest. The dozens of words you've written trying (and failing) to squirm out of your hypocrisy puts the lie to that better then almost anything else you've said.

"I only wondered if YOU cared."

Now Patrick... why would you wonder anything about little ol' me?

Again... I have made my position clear. BOTH of them should be held accountable.

You, on the other hand, are genetically incapable of applying the same standard to both.

Kinda speaks for itself.

"Therefore, if I don't care about Benton being honest, why should I care about Fisher being honest?"

I will, of course, believe that the moment you accuse Fisher of, how did you put it, "having the character of a warthog?" If you didn't care... what was the point? Just being childish?

In short, you do care. You keep WRITING that you don't care... but the fact you ever asked the question proves that you do.

"Oh, and I already knew he was an idiot WAAAAAAY before this 695 thing."

And perhaps you can enlighten us as to how you might know that? Or are we just to take your word on that as well?

"His $50 remark did nothing to change that fact either way."

Yeah... and?

"Oh, the Spokane City Council approved their 2000 budget on December 6th. The city will lay off 11 officers starting next year due to 695 cutbacks. The Spokane Police Department can be reached at (509) 625- 4000. Names of the soon to be unemployed officers have not been released, but again, all Benton really needs to know is that a specific department is making staff reductions. If he is really serious about forking over $50 to someone, then he'll call them up and ask for the first officer's name and where he can send the check. In case you're at a loss for words, I can draft an e-mail message for you."

But Patrick... why would you do that if you don't care if Benton sends a check... or not? Seems a little odd, doesn't it?

"benton_do@leg.wa.gov

Dear Senator Benton:

It has come to my attention that the December 7th edition of the Spokane Spokesman Review reported that the Spokane Police Department will be required to lay off eleven officers to make up for the impacts of the passage of Initiative 695. You recently made the comment that you would pay the first police officer who lost his or her job due to 695 $50. Were you aware of the situation in Spokane? If you were, have you contacted the Spokane Police Department to ask for information about the specific individuals who are losing their jobs? If you were not, can I assume that you will contact them in the near future? If you do not have their contact information, they can be reached at (509) 625-4000. I am anxious to hear if you plan on keeping your word about paying the first police officer $50, and if not, then why not."

Just out of curiosity, Patrick... when the legislature funds all MVET cuts for the police departments... and none of these people are laid off... would that, like, make any difference to you?

Is there some reason why you feel compelled to require him to send the check in question BEFORE anyone is laid off?

Did he offer to pay BEFORE anyone was laid off? Or AFTER?

Is writing a budget that PROJECTS layoffs the same thing as BEING laid off?

Do details make any difference in the confusion that is your life?

"Sincerely,

Jim Westin"

At last. Some truth rears its ugly head.

"(please feel free to cc me if/when you send your message. I won't feel bad if you use your own words, but please share Senator Benton's comments with the rest of us.)"

Presuming the layoff's actually happen, I WILL send the email in question.

Now then, if I might suggest one of my own for you?

fisher_ru@lewg.wa.gov

Dear Rep. Fisher,

Before the most recent election, you made the comment that you would "resign the next day" if I-695 passed. Were you aware of the outcome of the election? If you are, have you provided the Secretary of State with your resignation? If you have not, can I assume that you will contact him with your resignation in the near future? If you do not have his contact information, he can be reached at:

The Honrable Ralph Munro Secretary of State for the State of Washington Legislative Building PO Box 40220 Olympia, WA 98504-0220

Or:

360.902.4151

I am anxious to hear if you plan on keeping your word about resigning, and if not, then why not."

Sincerely,

whoever.

You can, of course, use whatever wording you like, but what the hey, this ain't bad. And the beauty of this is that unlike Benton, Fisher lied to us months ago, and has been serving dishonrably since early last November.

But I will give you this much, Patrick. I'm not going to use the ol' "I don't care" dodge. I do care. Very much. It's a damned shame that when it comes to members of your own party....

... you don't.

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), December 27, 1999.



And the pathetic stammering of Westin keeps getting longer and longer. Me thinks he protests too much. Obviously since he feels obligated to write short novels in his defense, he feels that his position is pretty shaky.

Perhaps you could explain to me how I'm "holding Benton's feet to the fire" and where I care about making him keep his word. Where have I led the charge to make him fork over $50? When did I make "Have you contacted Sen. Benton about that $50" my tagline for every message I post? When have I created a new thread devoted to the subject? I guarantee that I will never contact the man to hound him about paying the $50, nor will I ever mention it outside the confines of my showcase of your hypocracy. Can or will you say the same about your Fisher obsession?

"You can't, of course. First of all, you attempt to spin this as an "off the cuff" issue. Well, that don't wash, because, as I have stated, Fisher had the opportunity to withdraw her statement before the election, and chose not to."

So you did double check to make sure that she never did withdraw her statement before the election? Or perhaps contact her to get her take on the "I'll resign the next day" comment to ensure that it was not taken out of context? Or are you just taking the soundbites of the media at it's word and the absence of a retraction broadcasted in the media as confirmation? This would seem rather odd for a person who holds such a low regard for the media.

"Again... I have made my position clear. BOTH of them should be held accountable."

Sure you have. You've been babbling about Fisher since the day of the election, comment on it in every single post of yours, and actively promote others to pressure her to resign. And for Benton? Well you'll send him an e-mail if someone else can connect the dots for you and shame you into it. Yeah, that sounds like you're holding them to the same standard and holding both of their feet to the fire equally.

"And perhaps you can enlighten us as to how you might know that (Benton being an idiot)? Or are we just to take your word on that as well?"

Well I've had the misfortune of having to be in his presence on several occations, listen to his comments in the legislature frequently, and am familiar with his campaign work. I do like watching him speak on the Floor of the Senate though. When he stands to speak there is a bipartisan effort for other Members to do something else in order not to listen to him. All in all, I've gotten to know about him pretty well for almost half a decade now. So I feel that I have a pretty good grasp of the man to make a character judgement call.

"But Patrick... why would you do that if you don't care if Benton sends a check... or not? Seems a little odd, doesn't it?"

No, I knew you would care so I thought I'd help you out a little. If you wrote the e-mail it would probably would ramble on forever with little point.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.


Patrick,

Since you are so good at sticking your nose into other peoples responses in this forum, I guess I will do the same.

Did Westin email Ruth Fisher about her resignation? Well, yes, I believe he has, and on more than one occasion.

Since you are the one who seems most annoyed by Senator Benton, (or are you? You seem to have wavered back and forth, I could care less if he pays, versus the man is an idiot. If you didn't care, why bring it up? Don't you think some cop could use the money?) have you emailed him with names and Departments of layed off Law Enforcement Officers? I doubt it. Your only purpose is to criticize. But if you did send such an email, would you kindly forward a copy to Westin or myself?

Instead of composing emails for others to send, why don't you compose your own to send? You are a hypocrit if you don't.

I guess Westin is wrong about one thing, your not bright. Pity.... Don't bother to respond unless you have something to offer besides criticism and hypocrisy.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.


Well Marsha I've got to scratch my head over your rather confusing remarks. If you had been following along closely, I have said several times that since I don't care if Benton pays the $50 I'm not going to bother to e-mail him. I don't see how that makes me a hypocrite. If I did care, and on this I have not wavered on my comments, then yes, I would be a hypocrite if I didn't e-mail him. But as it is that would be an interesting e-mail: "Senator Benton, I don't really care, but I figured I'd e-mail you anyway..."

I wonder if I'm speaking a different language, because I thought this concept would be fairly clear. The issue I am concerned about is whether Westin really cares if all politicians keep their word or if he's just particular to keeping Democrats honest. I have expressed my view that I consider both the comments made by Benton and Fisher to be off the cuff, and therefore not important that they keep such words. Since Westin is trying to hold Fisher accountable, I am trying to resolve the issue by seeing if he is equally obsessed with making Benton keep his word.

As I've also stated before, the issue of whether Benton is an idiot and whether I care if he pays the $50 are unrelated.

To tell the truth, I doubt the payment of $50 is going to affect an unemployed police officer that much.

And again, I don't care if Benton sends the check. Can someone explain how that if I don't care, why I should still send him an e-mail anyway?

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.


Patrick,

You state "Since Westin is trying to hold Fisher accountable, I am trying to resolve the issue by seeing if he is equally obsessed with making Benton keep his word." Do you think you are some sort of arbitrator here?

Resolve what? There is nothing here to resolve. This is just one more attempt of yours to criticize, and participate in an argument.

If you don't care about the Benton issue, (you know, the Senator you care nothing about, but feel obliged to tell of his shortcomings), then why would you care about Westin or his so called obsessions?

Because you are only looking to criticize and argue.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.


"Do you think you are some sort of arbitrator here?"

Nope, just having some fun with Westin.

"This is just one more attempt of yours to criticize, and participate in an argument."

Well I admit that I like to participate in an argument, but then again, so does everyone else here who posts. Unless this forum turned into a place to share cooking tips when I wasn't looking.

"If you don't care about the Benton issue, (you know, the Senator you care nothing about, but feel obliged to tell of his shortcomings), then why would you care about Westin or his so called obsessions?"

Oh my, here we go again. I didn't say that I don't care about Benton AT ALL, I just said that I didn't care if he paid the $50. Despite his shortcomings, he is a fairly influential politician, and it is good to care about what they do politically. And I don't know why I care about Westin's obsession. Maybe it's just a subconcious reation to seeing "Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?" for the 10,000 time. But then again, why do we care about anything? "Because you are only looking to criticize and argue."

And your post would be an effort in what now? You've got me pegged as someone who only criticizes and argues, but to be honest, that's pretty much all you've done to me for the past few days. You asked me to come up with a solution to the tax burden in this state. I did that, but you dismissed it and repeated that I never offer any solutions. Seems to me that all YOU want to do is argue with ME! I don't care that you do that, but I did want to point out the irony to you.

Unlike you, I welcome any and all comments from people whether they agree with me or not. I even welcome the comments made by Weston since they make me laugh so much. That's what happens in a political forum. It's a free-for-all where ideas are exchanged, bashed, and reformulated. If you can't handle it, then perhaps you should look elsewhere.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), December 29, 1999.



Patrick,

If you place range burner pans in a plastic bag with 1 cup of ammonia, let it stand over night, the next morning, they will easily wipe clean. Works well for oven racks too.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 29, 1999.


Hopefully, this will fully explain why the issue of budgets, and what they predict, are worthless in the area of police or firemen being laid off:

34 take severance package prompted by I-695

by The Associated Press

SPOKANE - Reduced budgets caused by Initiative 695 have prompted 34 city employees to accept severance packages.

Five of the employees are department directors.

The Spokane City Council created the one-time severance program to reduce the number of layoffs city departments needed to meet a $3.6 million reduction in the city's budget.

"At this point I don't see us making any layoffs," said Pete Fortin, acting city manager.

The 34 severance packages cost the city $415,000. However, the savings to the city from the departures will easily exceed that over time, Fortin said.

Fortin denied five severance requests that could not show savings equal to three times the cost of the severance, as required under the City Council's package.

Now the challenge will be to replace five top department directors with decades of experience.

"I think it's a difficult time to advertise for hiring department heads with a change in government a year from now," Fortin said.

"There is no security for department heads - you are an at-will employee."

In November, Spokane voters approved a change in city government to a strong-mayor system, in which the mayor can hire and fire department heads.

The mayor now does not have that power.

I-695, approved statewide by voters in November, cuts motor-vehicle tabs to $30 and is expected to cost state and local governments millions in revenue.

In short, the city expects that there will be no "lay offs."

HHHHmmmm.....

Westin

Have you emailed Rep. Fisher (fisher_ru@leg.wa.gov) to resign today?

-- Westin (jimwestin@netscape.net), January 03, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ