Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Home RSS

Of the People

July 12, 2013

Editor's note: Due to a spell-check glitch, the original letter had an incorrectly substituted word. The error has been corrected....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jul-14-13 9:45 PM

Mr. (Bill)Gault: I concede your point, that limiting "How" one delivers speech, taints pure "free speech". Your retort, that my analogy (freedom to use the roadway, by necessity demands rules) is not "Reductio ad absurdum" by any stretch of your convoluted logic. Maybe it is a weak analogy, but merits argument.

Your anger, expressed by your "somatic-affective" reactions of " tension and agitations" to everything you disagree with tells me there will be no rational conversation with you. That behavior in a public official will lead to negative results. Guess you have not learned that lesson.

You hide behind Washington and Jefferson and imply you are the patriot! Absurd! Let me remind you Jefferson said, "patriotism is the refuge of scoundrels".

What is your hatred of Saul Alinski?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-14-13 5:58 PM

Boot Licking..hahahaaha thats funny coming from a RAG leader like yourself.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-14-13 12:52 PM

Reductio ad absurdum, nice try__Have you ever wondered whose boots you’d be licking if Washington, Jefferson, & Madison subscribed to your (Oblamo) [Alinsky] drivel?

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-13-13 9:47 PM

Mr. Gault: you wrote, "Limiting how your opponents present their views of government is not free speech, FC, no matter how crudely delivered.

Your point, "limiting HOW" one presents their views is not "free speech", is insightful and important. It is a point often debated in PolySci classes.

However, as an analogy, when i drive Del Prado it is reasonable that i follow the posted speed limit and stop at red traffic lights. These rules do "Limit" my movement but ultimately ensure my saftey on that road.

Human nature and common sense dictate that reasonable, civil rules be accepted in our public speech in order to be heard. No " rules or limits" would ensure conflict and ultimately chaos.

Hopefully, courteous and civility in our public speech is not beyond our collective consciousness.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-13-13 1:23 PM

Limiting how your opponents present their views of government is not free speech, FC, no matter how crudely delivered. Our form of gov’mt. is supposed to be a representative republic. Democracy is what results from too few participating in the voting process because they are intimidated, belittled, and otherwise treated as sub-human types not suitable for polite company. To say they are “angry”, “aggressive” & “uncivil” is a few steps away from saying their education is lacking, their manners are lacking, and no doubt a result of bad breeding, and therefor they should be wholly discounted and marginalized. Let anyone speak it is for the listener to decide not the censor.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-13-13 9:43 AM

oh_ I get it, Chicago style...

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 10:37 PM

There are zealots on both sides in this city (Democrat & Republican). Worse yet, there are zealots on both sides who will do or say anything to try to support thier view, irregardless of the facts. This city is no different in this respect. No one is absolutely right. Just as no one is absolutely wrong, save for that small minority on BOTH sides who by hook, or by crook, willtry to destroy anyone who disagrees with them. There is no meeting of the minds anymore, that above all is what is missing.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 8:40 PM

WOW. Lead: I think you just proved Mr. Perry's point for him. Perry points out that a certain smiling group is disruptive, not quite truthful and angry with everyone they disagree with and Ledorfellow thinks the letter is calling for "a desire for big government/communism/socialism". Really. Seems like the very thing the LTE was warning of: false allegations. JMHO

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 8:25 PM

AnglesOnly: Sept 10th is the actual Primary Election, but Early Voting begins August 31st.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 3:26 PM

Mr. Perry

The primary is September 10th, you are a month off, not August.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 3:22 PM

I think the message of the letter boils down to: don't believe what cant be backed up. And if the people making the claims use information, check the info to make sure it is not half truths, misdirection or just plain old BS. There are several out there right now who have no qualms about bending, manipulate or omitting facts to get the bottom line they want. Do your homework, and it will save surprize later. Oh yeah,.....then get out and go to the polls, or send in your early ballot. If you don't vote, then just shut up. Not voting means you don't care.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 8:04 AM

On July 4th I celebrated individual rights and freedom, not government. This letter wreaks of a desire for big government/communism/socialism.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 7:38 AM

The Tea party does have a common denominator with this "local group." Take the Mayor of "NO." Sullivan has repeatedly said no new taxes. His City Manager laid out a comprehensive plan of revenue diversification. Sullivan doesn't understand any part of it so he stands there and says, "No New Taxes." Infrastructure is supposed to repair and replace itself. Roads, vehicles and equipment that should have been replaced and repaired during the 4 years he was Mayor, was NOT done. Even when Department heads began parading before Council with their emergency requests for Police vehicles and Fire trucks this foolish Mayor thought it wise to again vote no on the purchases. Can anyone one remember when the Mayor voted YES on anything? Oh thats right, when he voted to put Gary King in as the City Manager. Gary King, the man who NEVER managed a City, anywhere. The guy who continued the practice of using infrastructure funds to balance the budget. Thanks foolish Mayor.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 6:25 AM

You should not group all who support the Tea Party in one category, as is your habit of doing. There is one local group that is a true abomination of the pricipals we stand for, do not associate the rest of us with such unprincipled people. Thank you.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jul-12-13 5:43 AM

Readers: Please note: in the 7th paragraph, I misspelled "assassination" with the word "assignation". I apologize for the mistake.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 15 of 15 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web