Lemmings

So after my write up yesterday about Eric Maundry and his blog "Sierra Madre Tattler" I realized that his blog followers - lets just call them lemmings - were just about as misinformed as he is. Both of his articles http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com/2009/10/does-bob-huff-love-ed-roski-too-much.html and http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com/2009/10/huffing-puffing.html have generated at least 30 or so comments each and I've decided to dedicate this article to responding to some of them. Lets start...

From article #1 -

"As a certain City Council person has been saying for years, if you really care about who you vote for willing to abstain from the "Free Candy Band Wagon", stop voting for the Republicrats, vote based upon ethical behavior, character.. Huff has to go. Unfortunately, you would have to vote 85% of the legislators out. This kind of corrupt practice has become so common place in Sacramento, it's starting to look legal. We may have to build an additional prison just to deal with these people. They should be prosecuted and given prison terms."

What exactly is this "illegal" behavior you're speaking of? If you think the legislators that are currently in office aren't "ethical" and exhibit bad behavior, what do you think that says about the PEOPLE who vote them into office? Your idea of prosecuting and giving prison terms to current legislators sounds like a fantastic idea - especially since you just finished reading an article complaining about the current economic standing of our state - did you forget that more prisoners = more tax dollars? Maybe you should abstain from voting, please.

"The whole thing is just sickening. And note the repetitious theme of suspending environmental protection laws. CEQA is trashed whenever the moneyed interests want a project in. Isn't that nice?"

Its been quite amusing to read CEQA related comments. Most of them have this sort of tone - "WE MUST SAVE THE ENVIRONMENT AT ALL COSTS!!!!". Let me tell you why I think you're a gigantic hypocrite.
1. You probably drive a non-hybrid car and everyone in your family who is of legal driving age probably has their own non-hybrid car. I'm betting that you don't carpool or take public transportation.
2. You probably run your AC all day during the summer and your heater all night during the winter.
3. You probably eat a ton of meat, most of which is probably cows.
4. Chances are, you're not a poster child for recycling.
Want to know a good place to start when it comes to improving the quality of our environment? Look no further than the tip of your own nose.

"Private profits and socialized risk--We developers will take the profits and leave you the citizens holding the bag."

Holding what bag? Roski is putting in $800 million OF HIS OWN money to fully fund this project. It will create an estimated 18,000 job, over 6,000 of which will be permanent. Once completed this project will create a projected $760 million in revenues for the area EVERY YEAR! You're saying that this is a bad thing in an economy that is gasping for its last breaths? In case you didn't learn in your remedial high school government class, we live in a capitalistic country where, yes, people make profits.

"California is just one big lie now."

Then move to Arizona, or better yet, Africa. Bye bye.

"2:44 - yeah, but I'll bet none of those Huffs have the stylin' pimp mobile we the California taxpayers bought for California State Senator Bob Huff."

Ughhhh... I hate when people say "we the taxpayers bought..." blah blah blah... Do you think that Huff doesn't pay income taxes? If you want to put it that way, just think that Huff paid for it with the money that HE paid in taxes. If you want to put it another way, lets say that there are 100,000 people within his district that pay taxes and lets just say that the state paid $41k for the vehicle out-right (which they didn't) - that means you spent 41 cents of your hard earned taxes on the "pimp-mobile". You can't even buy something off the dollar menu at McDonalds with that.

"And a big thank you to Sir Eric for bringing to the light of day, the insanity that seems to be so prevalent in the world of politics as evidenced in this incredible article."

You think that copy & paste make an "incredible article"? If it's this easy to win people over, maybe I should go into journalism... or politics.

"Aww, how cute. An apologist for Big Ed's favorite boy has come to lecture us. So Cadillac Bob needs a $41,000 automobile to conduct state business? You mean like riding around at 4th of July parades waving at the citizens? No wonder we're going broke. By your goofy logic the economy could be saved if the government bought us all American cars. And you do know, Mr. Revisionist, that the LA Times article had nothing about Tailfin Huff returning those wheels. Did they ever print a retraction?" - this is Eric Maundry in reply to one of my comments.

I didn't come to lecture you, I came to give you some insight on your complaints with Huff. You seem to like to make a lot of assumptions, like believing that I think the economy will be saved if the government bought us all American cars - did I ever make any mention of that? No. I stated that, yes, Huff did receive a state-paid-for vehicle to conduct government related business in, but you seem to misunderstand that this is an American vehicle so this money is being pumped right back into our economy. What do you think the "cash-for-clunkers" incentive was all about? You also seem to think that whatever isn't printed in the LA Times must not be true - articles only need to print retractions if they're wrong at the time it is printed.

"Wotta maroon. All that rage over the car, not about the Huffsters (MiMi and Cadillac Bob) getting dough from Big Ed, a person whose interests he voted to approve. You have to wonder if maybe it wasn't written by Cadillac Bob himself."

WOTTA MORON. You gotta think that if this dude is writing articles, he should at least know the names of the people he's writing about. It's MEI MEI, not MiMi. What interests did he vote on again? Because you fail to mention this in any of your articles. And I can say that I'm not Huff. =)

"The car that each and every legislator should drive on business time is the Ford Focus. Anyone who does not should be ashamed."

Why a Ford Focus? Why should they be ashamed if they don't?

"Two editorials in Thursday's LA Times take to task the Ed Roski assult on CEQA and subversion of legislators with cash. Further the ballyhood job creation claim really is about minimum wage stuff associated with stadium work. Most of which is part time. But the real thrust of the articles are that Roski has singlehandly opened a door that will destroy the desirable qualities of life in California."

A lot of people seem to think that this project only consists of a stadium and nothing else. This is also a complex which will house a state-of-the-art medical facility, theaters, restaurants, offices etc.. Many of these jobs will be permanent, high paying, and full time. What is wrong with part-time, minimum wage work? Ask anyone currently affected by unemployment and I'm sure they'll tell you that they'd take part-time work over no work any day. What, by the way, are the "desirable qualities of life in California"?

"If any of you were following the stadium stories in the local papers, and the comments in topix, it is easy to see that the huff, industry, and roski's team has many paid trolls to squash comments and opinions of independent media and individuals who dare question the needs or actions of the group."

I am one of the commentators on the Topix website and have been posting about the proposed NFL stadium for quite sometime. I've yet to see a paycheck show up in my mailbox from Roski. How do these trolls squash comments? Just because they don't happen to agree with the anti-stadium crowd and they happen to be more informed and less emotionally driven means that they're squashing comments? What a cry-baby.

"Here's the scary part about the pro-Huff poster. We get the usual parsing and funny nudges, but then we get immigrant bashing? I grew up in the south, and friend, substitute the word "negrah" for "illegal immigrants" and you're talking pure Klan politics."

How was I bashing illegal immigrants? I simply stated that we shell out $9 billion a year on illegal immigrants - AND ITS TRUE! But somehow, just because I'm anti-illegal immigration, I'm a racist? You are out of your mind.

Well there you have it - there were quite a few more comments, but not really worth mentioning. As you can see, many people just simply believe whatever they read and don't take the time to find the truth for themselves. I've also taken a big liking to people who make assumptions or false accusations without first thinking their thoughts through - it completely brightens my day when I prove you wrong.