> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Tom & Elsa Thompson said:
> >  Guess that says it all to me, it's about
> > changing policy without a public vote.  Kind of like using activist
judges
> > to get things done that can't be done legislatively or with a majority
> > vote.
>
> For a minute I thought you were talking about the five activist judges who
> stopped the counting of the votes in Florida in 2000 and put Goerge W Bush
> into the white house, even though he lost the popular vote, and he would
> have lost Florida had all the votes been properly counted.
>
> Sometimes "conservatives" want to hear from the people, and sometimes they
> don't.   ( I know, "Get over it")

No, don't "get over it".  It's a black day for democracy when the highest
court in the land decides there "isn't enough time" to count the votes in
an election.  Especially, when that same administration is now clamoring
for the discretion to postpone the next election.

I've hesitated to contribute to this latest thread because it was kinda fun
to watch and, whenever I post something, the topic is soon declared
off-topic for some reason or other.  I'd like to see more empirical
evidence introduced into the forum, too, Tom, but then the discussion is
immediately declared "too abstract".  (I couldn't find that rule anywhere.)
So why don't you try introducing some empirical sources and see how you
fare.  Take the high road.  If you think there are unsupported and
inaccurate assertions, don't counter with more unsupported innuendo;
demonstrate the inaccuracy with empirical source data.  Enlighten us. 
That's what we're here for.

The idea of governing St. Paul by referendum has been shown elsewhere to be
a method that quickly becomes an unmanageable circus of competing, public
marketing campaigns that ultimately depends on who has the most money to
publicly promote their message.  In short, another form of corporate
control of the political system.  It's one of the main issues on which I
disagree with Ralph Nader.  California, my empirical source, has become a
referendist's mess, to the point where voters have become inured to the
relentlessness of special interest marketing and simply reasserted their
apathy.  Imagine the desecration of your sacrosanct Farmers' Market
shopping experience if the campaign never ended.

So you see, there's always someone else to blame when you don't get what
you want.  Call the judge an activist and claim the City Council should
decide what the law means.  If they don't do what you want, call the City
Council a gang of out-of-touch liberals the throw the question into
referendum.  If the public doesn't agree with you, blame the monied special
interests and their marketing lies.  Then call the judge back in to
overrule them and, if he has the audacity to rule that the Constitution
applies equally to gays, have the judge investigated when all else fails. 
It's all being honed to a fine art.  I don't think I've ever seen a reign
of terror quite like this since the Inquisition.  Bow down before the
state-sponsored idol or be. . . investigated:  the late John O'Neill,
Colleen Rowley, Paul O'Neil, Richard Clarke, James Wilson, Jamie Gorelick,
Sandy Berger--and that's just a short list--all dared to speak up, all
were. . . investigated.  I predict this smoking ban issue won't end without
someone being. . . investigated.

Guy Western
West Abstract Street
the West Side

_____________________________________________
To Join:   St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion
Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

_____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul

Archive Address:
   http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/

Reply via email to