Just today, a girl scout came to the door and sold me six boxes of cookies.

Is she a criminal? Am I aiding and abetting a law breaker? Will this activity now be counted as part of Simi Valley's crime statistics? Did shortbread cookies, thin mints and peanut butter cookies just turn her and me into part of the criminal element of this city?

I dont think a cop will be willing to arrest a girlscout. I think the Simi Valley riots would occur. I imagine a girl scout kicking and screaming. And by accident the police officer accidently tipping her over and she gets hurt.

Why is it that citizen Santos doesn't trust the police to enforce the law equally to everyone that the committee on public business has labeled a criminal? Are you saying that some capitalists are more equal than others?

The first time a girl scout calorie pusher shows up call the cops and watch her get the same ticket as everyone else. Otherwise the hot dog man could sue the city.

Also, be on the look out for the sneaky baseball players selling either milk chocolate or crispy candy bars. Is it 3 strikes and you're out for raising money for a new ball field?

If the city council wants to outlaw girl scouts fundraisers I say " Bring it on!"

We've got spirit, yes we do...

We've got spirit how about you?

Would the law ban selling newspaper subscriptions?

¡Si la venta de maíz con las especias llega a ser ilegal en el valle de Simi entonces proscribe solamente comerá maíz con las especias!

I agree with the Star. Simi Valley's actions are un-American and calls into question the so-called conservative values espoused by the members of the council. Their hostile actions taken against small entrepreneurs are more reminiscent of Soviet-style regulatory policy than the America, or for that matter, the Simi Valley I grew up in. I the shadow of the Reagan Library, the Gipper must be uneasy with the machinations of the council's regulatory zeal. Why do the citizens of Simi Valley tolerate such intolerance?

I also agree with Dennert. There seems to be two sets of rules at work. De-regulation or concessions for big business and over-regulation and bureacratic harrassment for the little guy.

I'm not a fan of this decision either. I don't think this constitutes a public nuisance. I buy flowers all the time on street corners and they keep the supermarkets and the flower shops honest.

Why can't we let the economy decide. I mean if the corner flower sellers weren't making any money, they wouldn't do it, right. This is how a free market works. Apparently, there is a demand for it.

My purchases should also be viewed as buying from local sellers, many live in Simi Valley's west side. Nice people by the way.

What amazes me is this is a top agenda item, but increases in violent crime and increases in emergency response times is not.

A lot of commercial property owners will be making a windfall from renting parking lot space to all these displaced vendors. Anyone have any idea how many vendors there are and what sorts of daily rates they'd have to pay? 100 vendors paying $50 a day could be over $1,700,000 annually, in the pockets of a few strip mall & parking lot owners.

The City Council has gone too far! They are running Simi like a banana republic and like a bunch of bullies! It is time for change!It is time to elect new blood to the Simi City Council and to get a new City Manager and Attorney! Every Spring I look forward to buying strawberries and mangoes from a guy on Fitzgerald, now he won't be there! They took the signs away because it helps the incumbents. They have gone too far, we need to take our City back!

Machiavelli--

I used to go to that stand on Fitzgerald too. What a shame.

Seriously, that guy isn't bothering anyone. His stand was part of what makes Simi great. Now, we want to turn everything into a homogenized world we live in where all the houses look the same, the strip malls all look the same, and our lives look all the same.

Whatever happened to the little hidden treasures in Simi Valley like a fruit stand or a chuck burger?

I always hear these statements about people wanting to take our city back. If there are policies that people disagree with I encourage citizens to become involved. Sadly, my experience has been that most people in our community are not very involved. That is demonstrated by the low citizen turnout for most City Council meetings and the fact that our incumbents seem to always run for office unopposed. If the people in this blog really want to make a difference they should begin to attend the various meetings for neighborhood council, planning commission, city council, school board, parks & recs, etc, etc. Sitting around and blogging won't change a thing.

Bubba,

You are blogging? Are you saying you are just sitting around? No, of course not.

The chances are the people who are here do take part. The problem is with the people who are not here, they are the ones not paying attention.

You're a glass half-empty kind of person aren't you Bubba?

Bubba can you suggest some low cost and effective ways to build name ID that a working stiff can do while running for office? I'd put up signs but my friends don't own enough property.

Neighborhood Councils in Simi were created to control the flow of opposition the Council might face, not to enhance it. We need a new voice on the Council. They are being to black and white on issues. The sign ordinance for example. They had a good ordinance, but they did not enforce it, or try and change it to address concerns, instead they just said no signs at all. With street vendors they already had requirements that most were meeting and paying for, but instead of enforcing they just said no one can operate. This is insanity and it is wrecking our quality of life in Simi.

Last election I noticed that there was no opposition to the incumbent City Councilmembers. I also noticed that our last election for Mayor had only one candidate.

In response to Tony, you have it wrong. I am a glass half-full person. I'm the one saying that people should get involved and challenge the incumbents if they want to make a difference. Everyone else seems to be sitting around whinging about things like the sign ordinance and neighborhood councils, acting like everything is hopeless. If you don't like the incumbents, run for office or help someone you know run for office. If you don't like how the neighborhood councils operate sign up to participate and have your voice heard.

Who here has even attended a Neighborhood Council meeting? Who has been a member of the Neighborhood Council Executive Board? I have. Have you? What about you Machiavelli? What about you Tony? How have you guys been involved in your local government?

BubbaK prove you were on a neighborhood council. Since you hide behind a false name you can claim anything. I can claim whatever I want also and you cannot prove it is false. I may have been on the City Council at one time but you'll never know. The Neighborhood Councils were designed by the power structure in Simi to maintain the power structure, duh!

Bubba-

I have been on Neighborhood Councils. I belong to many community organizations working in Simi. I get involved in many campaigns, as you and I discussed in the Supervisor's race. Finally, I blog too.

If your point is to get involved, I am 100% behind you. If you are involved then you know why nobody runs against these incumbents. In order to ask the voters to change representatives, you have to have a reason that people should be upset with a particular member. Then you have to put it out in writing for all to consider. For instance, you may say that they have backroom deals with a large waste company or that they are spending 50% of their time in Arizona and don't deserve to be our representative anymore. Then people in the community (and on blogs) say you are slinging mud - then you lose by 800 votes because people thought you were too negative.

Why would anyone run for office under those conditions? You have to raise or spend your own money to do it, only to have the good ol' boy network run you down. In that case the good ol' boy network had no longer favored the rep and that's why she fell, but they weren't going to let someone from the outside in. Now try to knock off the former chief-of-police, who is now the Mayor. Or why not trying to knock off Elton's favored son Becerra for Council. The answer is simple you will lose and they will not only win the election they will tarnish you in the community like no others... So let's see why didn't anybody run against them?

Tony,
All great points! Also don't forget that if you are already on the Simi City Council you are on track to get as much campaign money as you need from developers and members of the Chamber of Commerce. You also can no longer get your name out there with signs because they are banned. You also have the VCRCC ready to pour unlimited amounts of money into the race against you. Maybe Simi City Council members should be limited to two terms.

These are some pretty general allegations that you guys keep making. Barbra Williamson blogs here now and then and I don't see anyone accusing her of being involved in backroom deals or taking money from developers. You guys like to make unfounded allegations of shady deals, yet never offer any real proof that this stuff actually exists. I've spoken with all the members of the City Council at one time or another, and all of them genuinely care about this community and are passionate about making it a great place to live. To use these broad labels and accusations against them is unfair and baseless.

As for Tony's gripe about the outcome of the Dantona campaign, the citizens of this community made their choice and it was Peter Foy. Dantona didn't have any shortage of money or supporters, and the allegations concerning Mikels' residence played no part in Dantona's eventual loss in the runoff election. It was a competitive election that could have gone either way, so I don't know what you're complaining about.

You guys also seem to be suggesting that there is no point in running against an incumbent, yet the Dantona race demonstrated that an entrenched incumbent can be beaten if citizens are passionate enough to get involved. Your own example contradicts your argument.

Bubba,

You're amazing! It was you on this site, under the Dantona 500 blog item, posted February 15, 2007 at 2:33pm that said he went negative especially during the primary and that cost him. It has been my opinion from the start that he had to do that in order to show why Mikels shouldn't be the Supervisor, but you and others like you immediately criticized him for it and said "how dare he sling mud". I'm not complaining, just showing an example of why people don't challenge the entrenched incumbents. I think the people were wrong and Foy proves it everyday he makes a decision, but that's politics.

Foy didn't have to do anything but smile for the rest of the campaign. Meanwhile, the good ol' boys form a circle around Foy and make Strickland rescind his support for Dantona (the better candidate). Now you can argue that may have helped or hurt Dantona, but shows that fighting for a seat in this community is fighting straight up a hill. As I said before, and as you notoriously do, you ignore part of the post, that said that Mikels had fallen out of favor with the good ol' boys. You can beat an incumbent if the good ol' boys are okay with it.

I can appreciate someone like Samson who wants to debate the issues, but you seriously can't even be honest about your thoughts. When you get called on it, somehow forgot you said it. Bubba save your interested-voter, free thinking citizen stump speech. You are so entrenched in the good ol' boy thinking you can't even tell when its happening.

Okay Bubbak, how about this. I challenge all five City Council members to come on this blog and say they have never accepted a dime from a developer for their campaign, never accepted an expensive dinner or present and never accepted donations from business people in the community who eventually had business before the council. If they do not come on then we know they have. Also Bubbak you present no proof these things do not happen.

All you guys know how to do is whine. If Dantona is so great then you need to get to work on re-packaging him for the next election. It is unbelievable that you guys are still complaining about Judy Mikels. For goodness sake, she lost in the primary and hasn't been a factor in local politics ever since.

Here's an idea... if you think Dantona is so wonderful ask him to run for City Council. I'm amazed that I tell you to take positive steps to elect your man and all you can do is sit around and complain about the VCRCC or make blanket, unsubstantiated accusations against local elected leaders. If you really believe in your cause then take action. Attacking me or the members of the City Council accomplishes nothing and only makes you look desperate and ineffective.

Bubba,

You must have been asleep for awhile if you don't think Barbra has been criticized for taking money from developers. She has taken just as many arrows as everyone else on the Council. Some might say she has taken more arrows than another Council person who really should be taking the bulk of the complaints.

Again Bubba you show your true colors in that you only hear what you want to hear and go deaf for the things you agree with. That's a problem in this country and you are one of many who display this problem. We need to listen with open ears to all sides of the argument before casting judgement, but that seems to be too much for some.

Bubba,

You must have won many awards for debate in your history. (Sarcastic, in case you didn't notice)

I simply rebut what you say and when you come back and all of sudden I am attacking you? Try to be an adult. I told you why people don't take on the incumbents and you dispute that info. I show you an example and since you have nothing else, you simply get frustrated and say have your guy run for another office.

The argument had nothing to do with Dantona, it had to do with entrenched incumbents and why nobody runs against them. There was no whining, but I was backing up my argument with examples - as you always ask for. Instead of disputing my points, which you obviously can't, you simply blow a gasket and spew out some non-sense.

Well it was pleasure debating you. Obviously we can discount anything you have to say, even though you represent the average voter, which proves that we will not get incumbents out. Have a good day.

Until you guys stop whining and actually do something you are nothing more than a bunch of windbags. The members of the City Council continue to win elections running unopposed. Meanwhile you guys just sit around and dream up conspiracy theories to excuse away your lack of action. Attack me all you want, but your arguments have no credibility when you aren't even attempting to run an opposition candidate. Making personal attacks against the incumbents won't drive them from office. Either do something about it or stop behaving like such a baby.

Tony, I already refuted your argument. You complain about entrenched incumbents, but in the recent Supervisor's race it was the incumbent who was bounced during the primary. Dantona didn't lose to an incumbent. And yes, the members of the City Council are incumbents, but guess what, nobody is running against them. Unless you run an opposition candidate the incumbent will win automatically. Pretty easy math really.

I understand your point. Your point is that, quote, "people don't take on the incumbents". In other words, quote, "entrenched incumbents and why nobody runs against them".

Let's just examine your statement for a minute. Judy Mikels was an incumbent and Jim Dantona did in fact take her on. Judy Mikels lost in the primary. Gee, you seem to have disproved your own argument.

Enough said.

I just read Chauncey's discussion on the recent Council election over on the Dantona 500 item. Interesting and probably true.

As I said before Bubba, Mikels was..... nevermind.

I am curious: Does Judy Mikels still live here? People that charged that she was planning on moving were attacked as mud slingers. So, now that there isn't a political context, were we right?

Did the good ol' boy network back up a candidate that was voting for bad projects partially because she wasn't planning to live here?

Did Glen Becerra really support the massive projects that Judy Mikels support? Didn't he know the charges that she was just waiting to live Simi Valley behind true?

Tony,
Give up trying to reason with BubbaK, he is a punk! You notice no City Council people have come on to refute what we said. BubbaK starts attacking other bloggers because he is stuck trying to defend the indefensible and then he starts crying and attacking. I think it is likely he is a member of the VCRCC.

Well hello Boys....
Been out of town on the slopes, but I am back and see that you're talking about me...again.
Well here's the facts! Yup, I've taken money from developers....And I will continue to take money from developers....want to know why? Because it costs money to run for election, and you boys don't seem to want to cough any up.
Now, having said that, I will tell you there are developments I have voted against, even though the developer supported me during the election. Let's see, Smily face comes to mind, as does the Morrision Project, then there was the Larwin Project...oh, but I probably voted FOR the house YOUR living in! I don't make deals. I just say it the way it is, and that probably gets me into more trouble than its worth, but I figure being up front it the best for everyone concerned. Even the developers & city staff will tell you, talk with Willliamson, she won't play games with you, she will give it to you straight.
Everything I vote for effects me the same as it effects everyone in this valley. I get telephone calls 24/7 on my personal cell phone...why? Because I freely give it out to help anyone who needs help. I love you arm chair wanna be's who sit in judgement of me and my decisions. You should try making some. Neighborhood Councils is a blessing for the city. It serves a purpose of letting the Council know what is going on in YOUR community. They are your eyes & ears, but you want to make them out to be something horrible...Well you can't. And Im not a part of the "good ol' boys club"...all you have to do is watch the council meetings.
So, now, you have heard from ONE council member, why? Because you ASKED.
Good night boys.

Barbra,

You do a great service to the citizens of Simi Valley by engaging them in the topics of the day by cell phone, in person, and on websites.

Thanks,

Brian

God bless you Barbra. Even though I don't always agree with you you'll always have my vote. The biggest reason is because I believe you are direct and honest, and that's all I need to know.

Good Morning Bubba,
Thank you. I love being direct and honest, because most people don't quite know how to handle it.. LOL
Thanks for the kind words and your vote.

Tony,
I guess BubbaK owes us an apology. He said we were lying that Council members take money from developers and asked for proof and Barbara gave it. Now let's see if the other four come on this blog.

Get your facts straight. I never said that council members didn't take money from developers. My point was that you guys like to level accusations against members of the City Council behind their backs, yet Barbra Williamson blogs regularly and I have seen no such charges made to her face. You demanded that the members of the City Council respond on this blog, but when one of them does respond the silence is deafening. Why don’t you tell Barbra Williamson to her face that you think she and her fellow council members are “running Simi like a banana republic and like a bunch of bullies”. Why don’t you repeat to her your accusation that “Neighborhood Councils in simi were created to control the flow of opposition the Council might face, not to enhance it”, and that that “the Neighborhood Councils were designed by the power structure in Simi to maintain the power structure”.

The truth is that NotBubbaKidd is nothing more than, as Barbra so eloquently put it, an armchair wanna be. I don’t owe anybody an apology, least of all an irrelevant windbag like NotBubbaKidd.

LOL! BubbaK you just proved you are nothing but a gutless little sissy! You can't even own up when you are wrong and you are wrong so often you punk! Talking behind their backs? You must be crazy, I wrote that here on a public blog. Barbara is free to answer the questions I posed since they were posed publicly. Tony and I said they take developer funds and that challengers don't get those funds and Barbara came on and said like the others she does take the money from developers. In terms of Neighborhood Councils let her answer, no one cares what you have to say Bubba because you are a nobody and a never was! The Star today said the Council is now going to ban panhandlers, what's next? Maybe they can make a law against being homeless, maybe they can have a law against being ignorant, of course that would be bad for you Bubba!

Not Bubba Kidd...
Why don't your direct your questions to me here on the blog, one by one, and I will answer them, truthfully and as accurately as possible for EVERYONE to see OK?

As far as developers contributing to challengers, I can tell you that they do. They did for me when I first ran. Some of you guys act like the council members get $500,000 from one developer. This isn't a presidential election guys...its a little city council, in Simi Valley California, where by law, a developer can only contribute $1,000 to any one campaign. Everyone says they don't want Simi Valley to become a "San Fernando Valley", that's why they moved here, and yet when we try to make this a better place to live, all of a sudden we have no heart...we are the bad guys...I suppose if we ever come up with an ordinance that says overcrowding in single family homes(15/20 people to a three bedroom house) is unlawful, everyone is going to scream at us...UNLESS, of course they live next door to one, and have 12 cars lined up and down the street...
Oh well, I look forward to Not Bubba Kidd's questions...ask now or forever hold your peace!

Barbra,

What is your opinion on School Board Trustees receiving as much as $10,000 per donation from developers? A Trustee who refuses to be available to the public and reports that their biggest accomplishment was building a $19 million dollar Educational Conference center that the County will "rent out" to supposedly recoup costs.

A Trustee that claims to be an "Educator" when they are actually a Developer?

Do you believe that someone should claim to be an educator and pose as a teacher on campaign literature because they were appointed to a School Board by four individuals that do not live in District Four?

According to the City Website on ethics for Council Members and appointees, they are not supposed to use the city property or city logos to promote or implie the city's endorsement. Yet Kunicki and former Mayor Bill Davis posed on campaign literature in front of the Simi Valley City Hall sign. Do you believe this was ethical?

When a new development is proposed do you think a School Board Trustee whose campaign was paid for by developers will advocate for the maximum amount of fees from development to support our infrastructure and schools.

Why would a City Council Member endorse such a candidate?

Barbra,
So why does Simi Valley allow 15 to 20 people in a house that was built for 4 to 6 people and allow them to park 12 to 14 cars on a street? I thought you did not want Simi to be like the Valley?

The City of Simi Valley has no control over the number of people who can live in a single family detached home. I wish we did! Sacramento is the one who has their head buried in the sand on this issue. And I suspect the reason why is because of the Latio vote..that's just a guess, but I believe it to be true.
I have made suggestions as to how to control this, but the City Attorney is concerned about the legal aspects of those suggestions.
Do you have something in mind that could work?

I'd love to hear your response NotBubbaKidd. What is your proposed solution to the issue of overcrowding in single family homes? And why do you think that the City Council should get involved in an issue such as how many people can live in a home, yet not be involved in other issues such as regulating street vendors? Why is it that you bash the City Council for getting involved in certain issues, and then bash them for not getting involved in others?

Is it true that Girl Scout Cookies sales are going to be illegal?

Guest opinion
Why the city adopted Ordinance 1109
By Paul Miller Mayor of Simi Valley

The Acorn has taken issue with the City Council's recent decision to regulate peddling activity on city streets and sidewalks, saying the new law will not improve our community. I must take issue with The Acorn's position.

In adopting Ordinance 1109, the City Council was responding to concerns of the local business community that peddlers could unabashedly use public streets and sidewalks to set up a competitive enterprise directly in front of a longstanding "brick and mortar" business, without needing to do anything but pick up a license (no test involved) at City Hall.

Meanwhile the "brick and mortar" business was required to get the same licenses, plus rent or buy a location, get a zone clearance to ensure proper zoning, provide adequate parking and handicap access, get building permits and inspections to provide a safe environment for their customers, provide a specified number of seats, provide restrooms of adequate size for their business, allow source control inspections of their waste stream, etc.

And now that the flower shop owners, for example, have done all of the above and possibly spent significant advertising dollars to bring people to their business, they find a flower vendor selling flowers to their customers on the sidewalk right in front of their store!

And what about the hot-dog business owner who invested significant sums that he or she may have scraped together over a lifetime to open a "brick and mortar" business, and the hot-dog cart parks legally right next to their driveway every day at noon on the city street (no rent needed). Is this fair? I don't think so.

While I am a believer in a minimalist government, I do believe that government has a proper role to protect and to serve the members of our small business community who constitute the backbone of our local economy.

Beyond these economic considerations, there are public safety and personal property issues that guided the City Council to enact the ordinance. Peddlers often position themselves in areas not designed for business transactions, placing the public at risk by creating traffic hazards, disrupting traffic flow and distracting drivers. Some will park in front of homes or businesses for extended periods of time. They cannot provide parking, restrooms or trash containers.

In presenting its case, The Acorn paints a picture of a poor mother of four selling flowers by the freeway being deemed a lawbreaker. Let's be clear. The ordinance will not prevent individuals, properly licensed, from selling goods.

What it does is specify the manner in which these sales may be made, so that they are conducted safely and without negative impacts on the community. I doubt anyone, if being objective, would quarrel with guidelines that are designed to be protective of the public health and safety.

The Acorn calls on the city to enforce existing laws before enacting new ones. Current requirements that a vendor obtain a business tax certificate and solicitor's permit do nothing to address the very matters the City Council is concerned about- traffic flow, property impacts and personal safety. That is precisely why there was a need to craft such an ordinance as the one the City Council adopted.

I would hope that, upon further review and reflection, The Acorn will better understand the basis and necessity for regulating peddling and will reconsider its opinion on passage of the ordinance.

The selling of Girl Scout Cookies is not done in the Public Right of way. It's on private property, hense...it's ok to sell...AND buy cookies. I prefer the Thin Mints. :)

So, the law stops girls from selling in front of Target? If not, could a flower seller set up shop there?

What part of the former statement didn't you understand????
YES, if the Girl Scouts get permission from Target, they can sell cookies in front of their store, on the sidewalk!

Do you need permission to hand out petitions in front of Target? Last time I checked the law backed people in political causes to get signatures.

Would the police really ticket Girl Scouts for selling Tickets in front of the library?

What about at the corner in their neighborhood. The sidewalk is public, yes?

Are there still newspaper stands outside of City Hall? Isn't that soliciting on public property?

What about vending machines on public property? Isn't that soliciting, don't they have signs on them advertising their contents?

What about the bus stops on public sidewalks that have advertisements on them. Isn't that a sign on public property?

Can a candidate buy the advertising space on the bus stops throughout town?

If not... why not? Does a potential advertiser contact city Hall to secure space on the bus stops? Does City Hall have only certain approved advertisements on their bus stops?

Can advertisers start to advertise on our City Buses like they do in other cities? Where do we draw the line?

BubbaK you really show how ignorant you are everytime you post! I did not bash the Council for allowing 14 to 20 people in a single family dwelling. I asked why the City allows it, if they are so opposed to becoming like the Valley. Barbra answered that the City Attorney does not want to take it on, then she asked if I had an idea to deal with it. If you read my post again you will see I never said it should be dealt with or is a problem, Barbra said it is a problem and I asked why she allows it.

To NotBubbaKidd,

You asked Barbra, "So why does Simi Valley allow 15 to 20 people in a house that was built for 4 to 6 people and allow them to park 12 to 14 cars on a street? I thought you did not want Simi to be like the Valley?"

But now you are stating that you asked the question but that you "never said it should be dealt with or is a problem."

So that means that you are asking questions about issues where you are unwilling to put forward a proposed solution, that you think aren't necessarily problems, and that you don't necessarily believe need to be dealt with.

What is your purpose here if you are requesting answers to issues that you don't believe are problems? Why do you demand that others respond to your questions while you are simultaneously unwilling to offer any solutions of your own. Based on that response it seems that your only purpose here is to be a gadfly that sits around and makes personal attacks against others while contributing nothing of value to the discussion. As far as I can tell you are not involved in any meaningful way in the local community, nor do you add any value in discussions on these blogs. I guess the only words I can think of that describes you is "useless" and "irrelevant".

Again BubbaK, you are ignorant and boring. If you read Barbra's posting to me you will see she said "I suppose if we ever come up with an ordinance saying people cannot crowd 15 to 20 people into a single family home, people will yell at us, unless they live next door to them." Barbra identified this as a problem in Simi. Since it is a problem she identified as needing an ordinance, I asked her why there was not an ordinance, as she had stated that she did not want Simi becoming like the Valley. In her response she blamed Sacramento and "Probably because of the latino vote". There is a really funny letter to the editor today about the vendor issue and how by 2009 the Council will ban all people from living in Simi. Very funny. Too bad BubbaK you are such a whiny little nobody.

I think I'll just call you Mr. Useless since your commentaries serve no purpose and add no value. I suspect that you resort to your repeated personal attacks to cover up your own inadequacies and inability to contribute anything meaningful to society.

BubbaK,
Everyone can see you did not respond to my posting because you saw that I was right, and you were wrong as usual. You are such a coward and liar. You say I insult and then you insult me. The only thing you know less about then presenting a good argument is fornication.

Yet another pointless post from Mr. Useless.

After reading all the posts between Bubba Kidd and Not Bubba Kidd I have decided that Not Bubba Kidd has won the debate. Bubba Kidd as usual answers no questions, resorts to personal attacks and is generally a know nothing who thinks he is someone.

You guys should hang out together since you both like to endlessly rant and complain about other people, yet simultaneously contribute nothing meaningful to the world. Mr. Useless and Mr. Pointless.

BubbaK,
You are a nobody and a never was who acts like someone while using a fake name, you are a true coward!

A guy using a fake name calls me a "coward" for using a fake name. Hilarious!

I called you a coward because you are a coward. If you would ever like to meet face to face to have a chat, just tell me where and when. I assume you'll be the one in the dress. Heck, I'll even buy you a non-alcoholic beer.

NBK: Not only are you using a fake name, it's not even your own. So, you're a misogynist and an alcoholic? Seriously, what if BK was a woman? Only men, and only those men who drink are allowed to have opinions? Moreover, only men who adhere to strict gender guidelines? Wow, I'm glad you're with the Lefties.

I thought that liberals were suppose to stand up for women and alternative lifestyles. You guys keep claiming that conservatives are a bunch of homophobes, yet NotBubbaKidd's attacks seem to perpetuate stereotypes and project an outright hostility toward women and gays. Hmmm.

LOL! Sounds like Owen and BubbaK have a lot in common. Their both stupid and weak and only know how to lie and attack others. I invite BubbaK out for a beer and a chat and he responds by crying and getting his fascist buddy Owen to help him out. Pathetic!

I'm still troubled by NBK's slur against women and gays. Don't you liberals have some sort of program where you send people who don't exhibit correct thought and ideas. You should check into the same rehab clinic that treated Michael Richards. You need professional counseling, please get help before it's too late.

I think you should check into the clinic that treated your good friend the Reverend Ted Haggart. In terms of a gay slur or slur against women where was that? When I said you would be wearing a dress? Actually I said that because I assumed you are a woman, if wrong, I am oh so sorry.

Sure you did. In that case, are you saying that women shouldn't drink alcohol? Perhaps, given your repeated and continuous insulting of BK, you think that women are somehow intellectually inferior. What did you mean by the Haggart comment? Are you insinuating that BK, whatever his or her sex may be, is homosexual, and that this needs to be corrected by going into treatment? We're learning a lot about you on this thread.

Owen and Bubba,

Give it a rest with this gay and woman slur. There wasn't a gay or woman slur in there. There was an attack on your manhood - in that you wear a dress and can't even drink alcohol. It was not an attack on women or gays. Just an FYI to you two, gays don't go around wearing dresses... But you already know that and just want to keep kicking crap at each other.

You all lost the debate when you started name calling. A sure sign that you have lost a debate is when you start name calling... Everyone engaged in this name calling, it's boring. Anything interesting to say? No? Okay, then you can stop posting to see yourselves post.

I simply pointed out that a member of the so-called "tolerant left" insulted someone by reference to very strict gender roles and behaviour. Not only has nobody else condemned it, you gave him a pass. Congratulations on allowing such blatant bigotry. To quote a too often used line on this site, "the silence is deafening."

I don't drink alcohol. Does that make me a pansy? If so, does that diminish what I have to say? Why do you all allow this tripe to go on. Why do let such things be said so consistently against the few right-wingers on here? Do you find this amusing? I don't allow people on my site to make worthless personal attacks.

I apologize Tony for the rude behavior of Owen and BubbaK, they are both insensitive to others and they are out of the mainstream and do not understand the big tent concept. It is people like them who supported Bush and his lies that have meant the deaths of thousands of american kids. We should all pray for them.

This topic has certainly been educational. In this thread alone NBK has called me a "punk", "gutless little sissy", "ignorant", "boring", "whiny little nobody", "coward and a liar", "fascist", "a nobody and a never was", "a true coward", and "stupid and weak". Then he tops it all off with bigoted remarks that indicate that he is intolerant toward gays and women.

Meanwhile, Tony not only gives NBK a free pass on his bigoted comments, but he admonishes Owen and myself for engaging in name calling.

You lefties just crack me up. Nice way to be fair and balanced.

Of course as usual BubbaK does not own up to anything he said or wrote. Just like Fox News, that has made the term "Fair and Balanced" a joke. Why? Because Fox News, like BubbaK and Owen, only reports their side and they attack any other point of view. I will pray for you BubbaK so that Jesus may guide you. God bless my friend.

Bubba/Owen,

I gave nobody a free pass. In fact, I said "all", meaning anyone, who called names or impugned someone's manliness or sense of self, as losing the debate the minute they do it.

Then I commented to "everyone" that this was boring for the rest of us. So Owen and Bubba, you can stop being offended by my comments and feel free to start talking about issues. If you or NBK are not, then fine, but those insults don't deserve anyone's time.

Oh yeah, one more thing - I'm a lefty? I am a middle of the road Rep, but maybe that is a lefty to you.

You're only middle-of-the-road in your own mind.

Oh, well thanks for the heads up on that. Thank goodness you told me, I must have been confused.

I don't like Gallegly, so I must be a liberal? I don't agree with you, so I must be a liberal? I only want to discuss real solutions, so I must be a liberal? Well I'll tell you what, if Republicans like you are the main stream of the Republican party - I wouldn't want to be a part of it.

Thankfully though, you are not the mainstream, in fact, you are the extreme. So have fun over there on the edge of the cliff for the Right Wing... We'll be solving problems over here in the middle.

I don't erase messages often. I figure if I erased everyone's dumbest posts I would become your editor and be in charge of making you sound better.

With that said, if you ever see a personal attack that goes too far, e-mail me and I will erase it. I don't check every thread every day and sometimes I miss stupid comments.

Some days nobody posts and some days there are 40-50 messages.

Keep it clean or people discount your most important thoughts.

Every liberal on this blog claims to be in the middle, no matter how partisan their views. I just love how defensive Tony gets when he thinks people are calling him a liberal, yet his response is then to call others right-wing extremists. Fair and balanced you are not.

Bubba,

When did I claim to be fair and balanced? I'm not the Fox News Channel. I have strong beliefs in my opinions and I give them more weight. I'm pro-choice (would never have one but not my place to tell someone else), but absolutely opposed to late term abortions. I believe in the right to own a gun, but not an assault weapon. I believe in talking first, but if that doesn't work you have to fight. None of that is liberal, but none of it is conservative.

I believe the middle is where most of us live and solve problems and there is this extreme/partisan place that others live that I believe is not conducive or helpful in solving the problems we face.

I think you fall in to this extreme/partisan place.

Tony,
You are right and BubbaK and Owen are wrong. Don't try and point out facts to them as they are part of the flat earth society. They are part of the most extreme part of the republican party. They are the kind of guys who write letters to the editor claiming creationism should be taught and not evolution, that global warming is a myth (even though John McCain said the debate over global warming is over, now we are talking about what to do about it), they write letters saying Pat Robertson should be President, they write letters attacking immigrants, etc, etc. Reason such as yours is lost on them.

I'm interested - why do you oppose late-term abortions? And why would you never have an abortion? Or, since you're name is Tony I'm assuming you're a man, why would you not want a woman you impregnated to have an abortion? Should she have the right to abort even if you are opposed?

I am opposed to late term abortions because it is my belief that if a pregnancy is aborted around the 6th month on, you are killing a baby that could by all accounts live outside the mother (with a little help medical help obviously). A woman should have had plenty of time prior to then to make the choice to terminate the pregnancy, when the fetus isn't formed (in my view, living by itself). This is where the argument starts, pro-lifers jump in and say life begins at conception. I am not saying I disagree with that, but early in the pregnancy I believe there is a choice to be made. If you can reconcile it with yourself and your faith (or lack of) then that is your decision.

I personally could not reconcile my beliefs and my responsibility for that life being taken because I wasn't comfortable with the pregnancy or it may cause me a lot of stress and hardship. If I was responsible enough to do the act to create the child I should be responsible enough to take the responsibility for it.

Interesting question on the woman wanting the abortion and I not. In my own life I probably wouldn't be with someone who could do that, but playing along with devil's advocate I don't think I would have any choice in the matter. And to be perfectly honest since I can't have the child transferred over to me, not sure I should be able to stop her from having the abortion. Though it would be very difficult for me to deal with, the woman carrying the baby should have final say. Again, I'm thankful I don't have to have that conversation, but I'm sure it happens and can't come up with any good way to reconcile that issue.

Owen,
Would you have supported Adolf Hitler's mother in having an abortion, if you could go back in time?

I love how Tony and NBK can make all these assumptions about how others think, declaring themselves mainstream while calling anyone who disagrees with them on certain topics to be an "extremist". You can tell a lot about a person by who they associate with. If the rest of Tony's friends are anything like NBK then maybe he shouldn't be so self-righteous.

Bubba,

I didn't call Owen an extremist here did I? In fact, I apologized to Owen on another thread, because I had misstated his opinion. You are the only person here I called an extremist/partisan.

Very little of what anyone says appeals to you. At least I can see some of Owen's, Ditto's and even your points on different comments. That's how I know I'm in the middle. But if you would like a model to determine your leanings, feel free to click the link below and it will give you a score. My came out at 22. I would think if you fall between 15-25 you are a centrist. If you are between 5-15 you are a mainstream liberal. If you are 25-35 you are a mainstream conservative. If you fall between 0-5 or 35-40 you are in the extreme. Feel free to test yourself. It's a simplistic test, but gives you some ideas about your thoughts.

I really don't like talk of "extreme" and "moderate" as it seems to be very difficult to define and immensely subjective. On that test, Reagan is the ultimate extremist. I don't think that would resonate with many people. Does believing in the entire Republican Party platform make someone an extremist? Also, I've been called an extremist numerous times on this site, though I don't remember specifically by whom, and I don't care to search for it.

Within our parties there is much room for disagreement. There are Pro-Life Democrats and Pro-Choice Republicans. Often Christians who are Pro-Life are called extremists, but sometimes these same people fully support the welfare state. How does that measure up to Libertarians who oppose the government but are Pro-Choice? Who is extreme, who is moderate? I tried to get this issue pined down once before, but nobody responded.

Yes, the test is simplistic and creates false dichotomies, as any test is bound to be. I, personally, prefer the "Political Compass" http://www.politicalcompass.org/.

BubbaK and Owen are so far right they make Franco look like a lefty. So Owen, would you have supported aborting Adolf Hitler or not?

Not Bubba,

Just curious in view of your last question: did you ever see the film "The Boys from Brazil"?

If so, what did you think of the ending?

If not, rent it and then tell us what you think.

Good flick! It is good, thought provoking entertainment, well worth the time and a couple of dollars in my opinion.

I saw the cookie pushers in front of target. Do they have to get permission to be there? What if they ask for a donation, aka panhandling?

NBK: I take that as a compliment. Franco believed in government control of everything, a position much more closely associated with the Left than the Right. Fascists and Communists really differ on very little, they're practically the same.

About aborting Hitler, we don't and can't make those kinds of decisions. That thought experiment has no bearing on anything. We don't know what a child will become, so no matter what I answer, it doesn't have any relationship to the decisions that we are forced to make today.

Never saw the movie, but read the book. Kind of slow.

Dear Mrs. Williamson,

How can you say that Girl Scout Cookie sales are fully compliant with the new law. When it states, that all vendors on private property must have permission of the "property owner" through a T.U.P. Aren't all Girl scout troops required to file the T.U.P. prior to the sales? Usually, store like target are just renters of the space, they aren't the actual owners of the property> Must shopping centers are owned by Real Estate Investment Trusts? So, would the Girl Scouts be required to have the T.U.P. signed by the Real Estate Trusts? How do they do that? What's the legal process? Also, what about the T.U.P filing fees... aren't they about $50.00 for the permit and $1000 for the clean up bond? Are the Girl Scouts expected to post this first to be legal private property vendors? I think you should advise all of us of the "correct" procedure before you just spew whatever response comes to mind?

Thanks in advance.

ANDY

Dear Mayor Miller,

I'm also a big fan of thin mints. Read my last post to Mrs. Williamson... I'd like a full explanation of the new rules from you as well.

Thanks,

ANDY