Saturday, December 19, 2009

George S. please contact me

I've been very impressed with some of the comments I've read at the Times-Call. One poster who calls himself 'George S.' had this to say:

What this thread is revealing to me above all else is this community's startling lack of adult reading comprehension. Let's see if I can sort all this out. ... One poster accuses me of trying to "intimidate" others out of their freedom of speech because I spoke out about robo-calls which came from a Virginia area code and which were "anti-family" bvecause they came at the dinner hour, the only time of the day when my family can sit down together. I wouldn't dream of stifling those calls, because they, and the obvious cost of making them (which the Times-Call interestingly did not report) are quite revealing about the interests behind an issue or candidate. Or revealing, anyway, to citizens who are curious and don't just drink the Kool-Aid. ... Another poster accused me of being against businesses and churches. Say what? He must have missed the sentence where I praised my own church for focusing on Jesus instead of profits, and to that I'll add 90 percent of the town's other fine churches. I specificially stated that LifeBridge's focus was far more on making tax-sheltered profits than on religion. It is a business designed to enrich a few, much like Jim Bakker's "Heritage USA" near Charlotte. It's a business that evades taxes (that's stealing from you and me!) by claiming a religious exemption. And am I anti-business? No, I own a business! What I object to are governmental bodies that favor their friends' business ventures over those other business people who have not greased the politicians' palms with money or favors, as is happening with the tract east of the museum. That kind of corruption is non-partisan. Sure, in the case of Longmont, favoritism and bought-and-paid-for decisions are being engineered by Republican office-holders, but in my native Chicago it was done by Daley's Democratic machine. Right or left, it's wrong. I have also been a member of some fine Chambers of Commerce in other cities where I have owned businesses, but not here, for the same "favoritism" reason. ... A poster stated that the LifeBridge development would generate lots of tax revenue. Wrong. If you had actually read the plan, you would know that most of the development would be LEASED instead of SOLD. Those renters would not be paying property taxes, and the "religious" LifeBridge landlord would be sheltered from taxes on the huge profit from those rents as well as that from property it did sell. Sure, businesses within the development would generate some sales tax revenue, but much of that would be competing for the same retail dollar as are existing businesses, so the net result would be an "ebbing tide" for everyone. ... And finally, because I dared to speak out against religion-industry profiteers and a developer-purchased City Council, I am branded a "liberal" or a "progressive." I am neither. I demand little from government other than to defend my property and country. Locally, I want it to ensure orderly growth which pays for itself and doesn't use more resources than we have, not rubber-stamped sprawl that rapes our quality of life and thus diminishes everybody's property values INCLUDING MINE, and that in turn diminishes the revenue available to provide city services (including police and fire protection) for all this runaway growth! And if I launch a business venture, I don't want to have to buy a politician to keep him from favoring his friends and donors over me. What the heck is partisan about that? What we really have to get over in this country is excusing wrongs just because they're done by members of our own political party; that's why I don't belong to one. ... I am a fiscal conservative. And though it's not going to be politically correct to say it in this thread, council members Benker and McCoy are fiscal conservatives too. Unfortunately, they were looking out for taxpayers in the long term, and that's pretty hard to explain in this era of Americans' short attention spans, desire for instant gratification and inability to see past the ends of their noses

George S., Longmont, 12/3/2009 9:25 AM

No comments: