Snippets from County Council members, both current and incoming, about County Executive Pete Kremen announcing today his selection of Councilman Ward Nelson to fill the vacant seat of Councilman Bob Kelly in 2010.
Councilman Sam Crawford: “I enjoy working with Ward, I think he’s a great guy I think it’s a good pick. He’s going to hit the ground running, he won’t take any time to have to get caught up to speed on the issues. I approve.”
Councilman Carl Weimer: Weimer e-mailed me saying he didn’t want to comment beyond what he said on our story comments and on the Politics Blog. His statement: “Glad that Pete is now fully out of the closet regarding his alignment to conservative politics. I guess his Republican and Tea Party friends will have to throw his retirement party.”
Councilwoman Barbara Brenner: “I think it’s wonderful. Ward is a gentleman, he knows the issues, he’s very focused and I think it’s great. I’m just pleasantly surprised.”
Outgoing Councilman Seth Fleetwood: “I’m very fond of Ward Nelson. However, from my political perspective, I had hoped the appointment would have reflected the views of Bob Kelly. Going back to that principle of likemindedness,” Fleetwood said, “we’d hoped that had been a criteria used by Mr. Kremen. Perhaps it was a criteria he used, but he obviously dispensed with it in his final decision. It swings the balance on the council even further right than the last election did.”
Councilwoman-elect Kathy Kershner: “I think that Ward functions in the best interest of the community. I’ve seen him on the council and he seems to be a very highly-respected member of the council,” she said. “I’m going to look forward to working with him for the next 10 to 11 months.”
Outgoing Councilwoman Laurie Caskey-Schreiber: “I really like Ward personally but I’m disappointed that we’re going to have two conservative people representing the most liberal part of the county, the city of Bellingham. District 1 has always had somebody more reflective of its values than two people that are pretty much Republicans.”
Councilman-elect Ken Mann: “I’ll probably be on the wrong end of a lot of 5-2 votes now,” he said. For some reason, my notes literally erased after we spoke and I lost the other part of his comments.
December 28th, 2009 at 6:40 PM
I believe I predicted this.
You know, a few years ago he gave me a flu shot at a clinic at Haggens. He was so gentle I barely felt the needle. He also once went against some of his supporters to vote in my favor on an important issue in my neighborhood.
I may not always agree with his decisions but he is a pretty fair guy. I once saw him get extremely exasperated with the council audience and threaten some childish delays plus he threw a little tantrum. I thought it was pretty bush, but I saw Dan McShane display the same imperious behavior in front of a large council audience once as well…so….
Sour grapes from Carl, maybe the left will have to start working with the right a little more in this county. That can’t be a bad thing really. I’m clearly on the left 99.9% of the time, but even I felt the balance had been tipped so far one way that a stagnancy had set in.
Congrats Mr. Nelson, now go out and be worthy of my praise.
December 29th, 2009 at 7:54 AM
Ditto’s from the 99.9% on the other side!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 29th, 2009 at 8:42 AM
Kremen has made a decision. It did not take too long, which is refreshing.
Seldom are decisions popular with every one, and this decision will not disappoint. (pardon the pun)
No decision is perfect, and this one has both pluses and minuses.
The citizens do have representation by a person well versed in the process of governing. This is no small thing for either the citizens of Whatcom County, or the residents of District 1. Secondly, the residents of District 1 will have an open and competitive field from which to choose in 2010, less than a year away.
By all accounts Councilman Nelson has broad respect as a human being; I do not know Weimer, but I have met a respect Councilman Snapp. Both failed to mention Mr. Nelson’s character, which is a mistake on their part.
Last, is Nelson’s prior representation of District 1 while obtaining some bipartisan support, along with the Council having 3 incoming freshmen.
This decision is a solid, rational, and principled decision. The criteria above are important, and Kremen’s basing his decision upon these criteria, is not a mistake.
What has been disappointing though is Mr. Weimar’s haste to place a negative label on Mr. Nelson, and to do so publicly. His comments were clear that he thinks Mssrs. Kremen and Nelson are some sort of dirty Tea-baggers.
Unbelievable to think that we have come to the day when peaceful protest for smaller government, property rights, lower taxes, and the selling of influence to special moneyed interests above the citizens interests, would be ridiculed in such a negative fashion, by a local American politician.
There are a lot of citizens locally who uphold the principles above, and they deserve representation too. If they don’t deserve representation, then who decides which American viewpoints get represented? You don’t want to be on the losing side of this single viewpoint philosophy.
If one thought for one minute that Mr. Weimer was a person who welcomed viewpoints other than his own righteous view of the world order, his statement alone should put this misconception to rest.
Weimer’s public labeling and putdown of Nelson is in poor taste, and shows poor judgment. Mr. Weimer has to work with Mr. Nelson and his statements are an incredibly ineffective method to build a working relationship, with Mr. Nelson.
Civility has down hill in American politics, and especially here on the Herald blogs. We don’t seem to get much done when the politicians are fighting with each other. They seem to forget about us. The political games being played only seem to serve their egos and ambitions, which is not who they swore to serve.
Simple apologies have served mankind for centuries to bring people together to solve problems cooperatively, but their use by political so called leaders today, is conspicuously absent. It says something about the leadership skills of today’s crop.
Today, virtually all polling of American citizens demonstrates a deep level of mistrust of their government. This verbal crappola does not help locally.
I would like to see practical solutions to the challenges we face. Broadly supported solutions. The far right has had a chance to lead, and now the far left is having its chance to lead. Too often the only thing these two groups have produced is more fighting, name calling, and polarization. I am weary of this. Weimer’s statements are clear evidence of this.
Most Americans are in the middle of the road, how about representing them for a change?
Durable leadership is about performance and conduct.
Mr. Weimer, this is poor conduct.
December 29th, 2009 at 8:58 AM
I get you, even veiled. But voila we are on similar pages here. Does that feel as weird to you as I.
December 29th, 2009 at 9:24 AM
I get you, even veiled. But voila we are on similar pages here. Does that feel as weird to you as I?
I should add however that redemption is always possible, so using this one instance to characterize Weimer as not capable of good leadership for having an egotistical world view is also suspect. Who runs for office and does not have a good sized ego? Who posts more than 75 words consistently and does not have a world view accompanied by a rather large ego? In fact who here does not have a large ego? And with some of the world views here, who can deny the existence of some varied and, what may appear to others on the opposite side of an issue to be, strange or hypocritical views?
I do, however, agree that the Republican party has decided to drag politics into the gutter with some pretty strange arguments made by some pretty strange personalities lately. The GOP hardly wants to represent the middle, they are hostage to the far right. Most Dems are the middle that need representation.
I said Mr. Weimer could have been a little more conciliatory to downright classy by a different response, not that he is always on the wrong side of issues. I do think there is an indication that he may have bought into a little bitterness from the last election that is not serving him well, …………but but we can always blame it on Sam for ambushing him
Americans have always had a distrust of government. We question authority and change things when necessary. That’s the American way. History tells us what we see now is cyclical and nothing new. There was never this golden period when everything was Democratic bliss. That’s what makes some of the iconic works of history still relevant. Same as it ever was……. While the threats to civil peace represented by the re-emergence of right wing militias and the Klan, etc. is troubling, we have always dealt with these elements of our society and Americans are never going to be kowtowed by despotism of any kind.
December 29th, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Nice choice Pete!
December 29th, 2009 at 9:28 AM
I should have added to the last paragraph: That does not mean we may not give away our rights for consumptive gains, which is exactly what many are doing now–more worried about the short term gratification than the long term Kharma.
Don’t know how that short post happened?? Que sera
December 29th, 2009 at 9:31 AM
AFY, you mutt, yous wants to add up 99.9% on me side and then claim yous has 99.9% on yous side?
Yous little fuzzy math whiz…. are you getting your math tutoring at Fox again?
December 29th, 2009 at 9:36 AM
As Apexnerd pointed out, this whole process was gamed & tainted by Mr. Nelson’s participation in voting on the replacement potential candidates.
As a person nominated by Crawford with a glaring conflict of interest, he should have abstained.
This abstention would have quickly led to a majority of Mr. Weimer, Mrs. Caskey-Shreiber and Mr. Fleetwood likely deciding to pick a person more similar to the voter’s choice: Bob Kelly.
Mr. Nelson has managed to stain his reputation by blocking out other good and qualified candidates and essentially voting himself back into office.
Kremen could have avoided this but now leaves the tax payers open to a lawsuit from any number of sources for this so called “process”. I would guess this is likely not over yet.
December 29th, 2009 at 9:37 AM
Tim - are you saying someone is going to sue?
December 29th, 2009 at 9:40 AM
No, I am not surprised.
I have often felt that with civility, we can finally understand, that we have more common ground, than we ever realized.
Civility seems to project respect. How often do we hear about someone’s reputation, and only later find out that when we meet then that our opinion changes? Too often political messengers are not out to inform us, but to mislead us.
We seem to have stopped listening to each other.
I find it odd that with the negative comments of Weimer or others that I cannot tell whose opinions I trust. Without providing any detail on a politicians positions, I am left with blind faith, which may be the way to control and turn us into “true believers”.
Labels, demonisation, name calling, single issue litmus tests seem to leave us with no shades of gray, or any rational decision making process for the citizens.
I am comfortable that the vast majority of people, have shades of gray.
The red and blue people have had their day,
now it is time for those of us that are shades of gray.
December 29th, 2009 at 9:49 AM
It was a sad day when city folk got the right to impose their views on the county folk. As Mr. Karlberg so eloquently wrote it is time for common sense to prevail over the idiocy of right/lefted ness, and political ego stoking. So let’s wish the County Council well as they work for the good of the county residents.The rest of us should butt out.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:22 AM
But where is the Gray Party? It’s not the Tea-bags, it’s not Futurewise… where is that coalition in the middle?
And though I get the analogy, I’m getting sick of gray at this time of year…
Don’t you think we are more like a rainbow of all shades rather than just shades of gray? That seems limiting.
Wynne wants us to believe we are all bozos on the bus… I think some rise above bozo fairly often. But I get it, cute and yet…we need to think of ourselves as more than football watching, beer guzzling, skirt ogling, gun toting, bozos. We have enough reinforcement for that self limiting image already.
The most profound feature of modern political discourse seems to be
December 29th, 2009 at 10:26 AM
When a partisan office becomes vacant, the standard protocol is to appoint someone of the same party to the seat. That is not done out of allegiance to the party, but out of respect for the voters. It is no secret that even with nonpartisan seats, the voters choose between liberal and conservative bents, whether moderate or otherwise. It’s pretty clear they did not mean to elect a conservative when they put Bob Kelly on the council. I find it rather distasteful that Kremen believes he knows better than the voters on this. Given Nelson’s obvious conflict of interest in the voting and the substantial political shift Kremen seems to have purposefully engineered, I would think that at least an ethics investigation might help clear the air.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:44 AM
“Glad that Pete is now fully out of the closet regarding his alignment to conservative politics. I guess his Republican and Tea Party friends will have to throw his retirement party.”
Local Democrats, (including those who live in District 1), have supported Pete’s political career for decades. Parties hold to an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among disparate interests. Volunteers, other elected officials and party members who support candidates have a right to expect that their official will support their platform and goals more often than not.
Pete just turned on his life-long supporters. No matter what he says in defense of appointing Ward, Ward Nelson is and remains a long time Repubican and Precinct Committee Officer. Kathy Kershner is also a Republican PCO and Tea Party member. Some of her commnents on the Bellingham Tea Party blogs are downright cruel if not inhumane. In fact, In light of some of her very public statements, I actually worry about the disabled adults she purportedly cares for!
For those who have forgotten, Bill Knutzen was the only “non-partisan” candidate to receive an endorsement by the Republican Party.
In other words, not one of these people is “non-partisan.” Now, add Sam Crawford to the mix.
If the situation was reversed, the Republicans would be furious. Bob Kelly was much more liberal than Ward Nelson. Bob Kelly was sincerely concerned about our natural resources and individuals who are less fortunate than the rest of us.
Pete just kicked his long time supporters in the teeth — for what reason? To get back at Carl?
What’s with the political vendettas in this community?
December 29th, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Sam, re: lawsuits –
According to our Political Science profs, venue shopping refers to the activities of advocacy groups and policymakers who seek out a decision setting where they can air their grievances with current policy and present alternative policy proposals.
Studies of venue shopping recognize that advocacy coalitions who are intent on changing policy will “shop” around for a favorable venue, whether it is a court or a congressional committee, that is receptive to their claims about the nature of a policy problem and its solution.
Such activities can lead to dramatic changes in policy if a new policy image is adopted and a new set of institutions achieves some control over an issue.
A recent local example is Futurewise v. Whatcom County.
With the new political alignment and all of the fractous, if not downright dysfunctional political relationships (no one seems to be able to get along with anyone) I would expect more legal challenges, not less.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:55 AM
I can accept what Ken and Elisabeth say. I also can wonder what led to this? Maybe it’s just the attitude behind this kind of statement. Politics is politics, and if you can’t politic your own people and vice versa, there is a politicability gap.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Liz, the name calling, labelling, and demonization all push people towards polarization, which is what your are witnessing.
Conservative columnist Cal Thomas and Liberal columnist Bob Beckel got tired of this and wrote a book called :Common Ground”
They wrote the book together to describe a failing political system and suggestions on how to fix it.
When special interests gain more power than the citizen, bad things happen. The citizens don’t get their needs met.
The book is worth reading.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Elisabeth, does Ms. Kershner comment here?
December 29th, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Jurgen - you weren’t asking me, but I have the ability to search. According to my behind the scenes tools, Kershner hasn’t commented here since August 24. She has, however, commented in the past. Prior to that, she commented mainly around the June timeframe.
December 29th, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Isn’t it great right here in the lefty city by the bay, not only do we have a wonderfull view but also we get to hear the beautiful whinning of the lefties everytime they don’t get their way! To me it is pure music to the ear! I’s almost want to pull out me fiddle!
I’s know sour grapes are hard to swallow but you better get use to it cause in 2010 you are gonna to get a bunch to munch!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 29th, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Hey AFY!!!
How is Bellingham a lefty city?
And where do you hear anybody whining?
For that matter, how do city residents force their will on ‘county folk’?
Also, the point to sour grapes is that you can’t reach them to eat them,
hence the term sour.
Maybe you mean eat crow?
December 29th, 2009 at 11:26 AM
All I’s know is right now in me mind I see the faces of Madam E, Carl, Stan, Ken, SQ, Tim, and all those many McShanites and the expressions I’s see are thems chumping down on some very very sour grapes!
Its the best New Years ever!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 29th, 2009 at 12:20 PM
So, the big story, if the comments are to be believed… is the “shocking” lack of magnanimity of Carl Weimer’s response?
There have been dozens of comments on all the threads that cover this story, including the story which is found in the Local News section of the site.
No one is surprised that Ward Nelson was appointed. Not the folks who agree with the appointment. Not those who disagree with the appointment. There has been commentary praising the Executive’s decision, and there has been commentary critical of it. But no one is pretending to be terribly surprised by the decision.
But lets all get the fainting couches out of storage because Carl Weimer isn’t pretending hard enough.
Carl Weimer makes a comment about how Pete Kremen is favoring conservatives and Tea Party mad hatters with his decision, and the narrative of the commentary on these threads suggests that Carl has let some big cat out of the bag.
Does anyone seriously think that Pete Kremen hasn’t repeatedly demonstrated that he is conservative?
And the same folks who were commenting on the Politics blog during the campaign are now demonstrating a very shabby simulation of shock and disappointment that Carl isn’t praising a decision that he doesn’t agree with made by a person who endorsed his opponent this Fall.
What disappoints me the most is the complete lack of effort to make this convincing.
And I must say… I’m a little hurt. And disappointed.
When I post here, I don’t phone it in. I deliver the same level of performance whether I play to a nearly empty thread, or to a thread that goes on for over 200 posts.
To have seen these same bloggers deliver so many Oscar-caliber shows of manufactured outrage and make it look so easy, and then see them just phone this one in… it just…
Don’t you even care anymore?
If you are just going through the motions, and the magic is gone…
…look, if you want to see other blogs…
and spare me the “it’s not you, it’s me” speech…
…I remember when you cared enough to try and make me believe your pretend outrage was real. Those were good times.
…what happened to us?
It’s because I gained weight over the holidays, isn’t it.
December 29th, 2009 at 12:29 PM
And what would you have said had Mr. Kremen appointed a progressive to the seat? You most likely would have come to the understanding that he was just inserting a person with the like-minded views of Kelley’s. However, if it would have been Sam Crawford who stepped down, and Mr. Kremen had picked Dan McShane to succeed him, you would see the irregularity, and most likely have a bone to pick.
I think it was a terrible choice, and a swift kick in the rear to Whatcom County voters.
December 29th, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Seems like Mr. Kremens made his choice on what the voters ideologies are at present. Not what they were 2 years ago. Good job, Mr. Kremens. It is great to see a politician do what he thinks is right for the community rather than what the party wants.
ps. Had Mr Kremens picked McShane I would have said ‘Nothing had changed. It is partisan politics as usual and returned to my work to get E-verify instituted throughout the county.’
December 29th, 2009 at 4:02 PM
How, exactly, do you make the determination of what voter ideologies are “at present”? Not what they were two years ago?
Seth left the council — Ward left the council — so we had two open seats and two incumbents running for re-election. Laurie lost and Carl won. The Repubicans picked up two seats out of four.
Now, please explain to me, (in that wacky conservative logic that your so famous for) how the election results can be considered the voter’s “mandate”?
Hmm?
December 29th, 2009 at 4:05 PM
** Remember that Kersher and Knutzen both packaged themselves as “independents” during the campaign.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
December 29th, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Elisabeth asks a good question, despite the somewhat uncivil tone. I’ve also seen a discussion about the changing winds of voter intent, but the results were half and half. Two progressives were elected and two conservatives were elected. If Bob Kelly didn’t resign the council would have been more of a swing, with Brenner in the middle on some issues though lately she’s been far more fiscally conservative and not generally supportive of social programs on their own merit.
With Kremen’s appointment we have at least a 4-3 conservative majority with Brenner being a swing vote depending on her rationale, and, as I said, from her current voting record, it’s more fiscally conservative and not supportive of what local liberals/progressives would be supportive of (things like the mental health sales tax, the flood tax, the humane society contract — though she would eventually vote for it after arguing against it and saying she didn’t support future contracts unless they were cheaper, etc.)
So is it the will of voters that there is a conservative council or Kremen’s pick? Clearly that seems to be the debate between locals and I appreciate everyone on here willing to share their thoughts. I hope the chat continues. The resignation in and of itself was big local political news and the selection is even bigger for myriad reasons.
December 29th, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Jurgen,
She Kershner posts comments on the Bellingham Tea Party blogs, don’t you read them? (the one I’m referring to was posted last spring).
She has a contract with DSHS to review disabled adults expenses — or determine the level of care they receive?
From what I’ve read on the tea party blogs, she’s heartless. Now, that may not concern you, but I find it disconcerting, because the people who’s photographs she displayed (disabled adults) in her campaign brochures do not have the skills to fight her if she decides against them.
After all, Jurgen, she does not want to pay for people’s food, their health care or their rent or mortgages… do I need to spell this out for you further?
I wonder, does Kathy Kershner have a Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, VA or FHA mortgage? If she does, then she is also “part of the problem.”
And all of this, from a woman who has derived most of her life-long income from the taxpayers!
DSHS is her current employer. The Military is her former employer. As a retiree, she still enjoys free medical benefits, for herself, for her husband, for her children.
How do you spell hypocrisy?
In really big letters!
December 29th, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Fine Post Elisabeth.
December 29th, 2009 at 4:37 PM
E, I didn’t say I agree with her or take different sides on all issues than you, I was just wondering if she used a handle and what it was. I also didn’t vote for her. But like I said, lefties are not shrinking violets in this town, though I think they’ve been a little too “go along” with some issues–and if she is as bad as you say it will come shining through and that will be a good organizing point.
Maybe we’ve been too quiet about confronting these tea bagging obfuscators. But all I said that got everyone so riled is Carl could have been a little more of the seasoned pol he wants us to think he is and been gracious at least in the press and on-line and I’ll bet he wishes he had chosen his words better. (Just my opinion.) It couldn’t hurt.
Everyone packages themselves as independent thinkers not beholding to lobbies, but who ever believes that is gulping the Kool aid–on both sides of the divide.
December 29th, 2009 at 4:38 PM
MADAM E (I can’t make them any bigger on this blog, darn it!):
You have lost baby, get use to it and over it!
The most polarizing people there are: are the ones who constantly attack people who do not agree with everything they espouse, you know, by not showing people who disagree with you any respect, is really only showing disrespect to yourself, really!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 29th, 2009 at 4:48 PM
So veterans are entitled to benefits and health care . . . unless they’re conservatives?
December 29th, 2009 at 5:28 PM
The current council was 4 to 2 with Brenner sometimes making it 4 to 3. Had Kelly, my non-responsive -never return a call or e-mail councilman stayed on the council the council is would be 3 to 3 with Brenner the swing vote. Considering a conservative took Fleetwood’s seat and Kershner held Nelson’s in what is consistently referred to as a progressive district by his supporters that McShane would have won IF- (or at least liberal to the point that Kremens should have appointed McShane), says something.
I think the ’something’ was decidedly to the right considering the 2 progressive (Liberal/Democratic) candidates (one an incumbant) that won were much more widely known than their opponents. And Mann did much better against his unknown opponent than incumbant Weimer against Luke.
Or maybe those radical, Tea Party, terrorist, racist, Obama hating conservatives stuffed the ballot machines and the election was all a lie.
December 29th, 2009 at 5:57 PM
The voters lost, AFY.
Someone who claims that he knows what’s best for Whatcom County changed the political make up of the council.
Pete made the decision, not the voters.
Earlier, Sam Taylor called my statements uncivil. For the record, I have supported Pete Kremen for over twenty years, and he knows it.
But I can not and will not support this decision.
Not today, not next week. Not next year.
December 29th, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Elisabeth, the voters lost because the council refused to put in any more time or effort into naming a replacement. Rather than using the 2 weeks they had left in some special meetings to consider or question candidates and possibly finding a consensual replacement, the majority of the council threw it into Mr. Kremens lap.
In my ‘wacko conservative logic’-I believe the council could have made the selection of Kelly’s replacement a much more important issue than how they handled it. They even could have changed the process- you know like MA did with Kennedy’s replacement.
December 29th, 2009 at 6:25 PM
But can you find a way to make it work for you? Time will tell.
I think the uncivil tone thing was the “..wacky conservative..” jibe. He’s so sensitive. You’re not a council person so yo can be a little more uncivil and it’s O.K.
December 29th, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Silent majority has a point. Awk! (Boy I think my tongue just went numb, but my nose is staying the same size, weird.) The council punted, so the leadership was left to Pete in the absence of leadership on the council. Who’s to blame for that?
December 29th, 2009 at 8:07 PM
I don’t think it’s realistic to expect any seated council to choose a replacement for one of their own.
December 30th, 2009 at 8:05 AM
1st for the record, IMHO, there is not anyone currently on the council who is not an honorable person, I might ought to repeat that for some of you but just because someone has not believed, behaved, said, or done as you want does not make them dishonorable, BTW, that also goes for all those newly elected or appointed, maybe that needs repeating? I will even go so far to say that about he who didn’t get elected or appointed!
So, instead of spewing vile, or being disrespectfull to people just because they haven’t believed, behaved, said, or done as you wanted, why not wait and see what they will do in their new positions, agree when you want and disagree when you don’t, but acting like a reptile only makes you look like a reptile!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
December 30th, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Sam,
Don’t forget about good-ol’ liberal complacency as a factor in the last election. We’ve had it pretty good around here for awhile. I suspect Kremen just lit the match that will turn things back around next time. Bellingham plainly does not want two conservatives setting policy for them, anymore than we want a sharp stick in the eye. The de-polarizing nonsense is jus that. I think it’s pretty simple, Kremen either goofed or has another agenda. But it looks like we’ll have to wait awhile to see if I’m right.
December 30th, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Well I’s always thought libs had tunnel vision now it seems they might be having stick vision for almost a year!
That explains the nasty dispositions, I’s must say!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
December 30th, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Sam,
With respect to your post above, I think the will of the voters pointed clearly in the direction of fiscal conservancy and for good reason. Campaign funding that afforded Ken Mann copious pre-election visibility via the massive signage we saw blaring from landscapes around the county no doubt helped his case, this time. Voters might eventually start wondering where all that money and support came from. I think Ken and Carl are both in league with Futurewise, not what you’d call a local organization nor one that has the fiscal interests of Whatcom citizens in mind. Not trying to be reptilian, just my humble opinion.
December 30th, 2009 at 10:18 AM
AFY!!! You are funny and for the record I do look at some of those links you post and appreciate them.
December 30th, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Ken Mann won his election because of,
not despite,
his opponent.
Promising to provide services to every County landowner that seeks to up-zone their family acreage is hardly fiscally Conservative.
December 30th, 2009 at 10:29 AM
So let’s get back to the ambulance ride last week. Maybe Pete had a stroke. That would explain a lot, especially if it was on the left side of the brain.
December 30th, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Ok, I’s can’t turn this one down Jurgy, maybe he had made his decision and wanted to get the stick removed before Christmas (you see I don’t think Pete is totally conservative!)!!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
December 30th, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Yeah, but where was the stick? He always seemed a little stiff to me, especially in a suit.