Yust Say NO!!!!
"People call us negative and anti-education. We're not anti-education...We're anti everything."
"We just want accountability..............
on account of we don't got nothin' better to do."
We're Concerned Citizens
Protecting the NO in N.Onimous.
15 comments:
Does anyone have an idea why the school district is holding this referendum in December instead of last Tuesday?
Does anyone know why the naysayer
clowns can't talk about anything else but the referendum date?
It's because they're out of bullets.
This has nothing to do with the merits of building a new school. It's the continuation of the naysayers perpetual attack on the School Board.
People are sick of you guys. Go away and stay away!
And why are you attacking community leader Jay Griggs N.Onimous?????
Too bad he doesn't have an employer to call.
My my, how can a self-respecting naysayer bring himself to write letters in the HSO these days now that the paper came out with an editorial this week supporting a "Yes" vote on the elementary school referendum?
One would think that said naysayers would now find the HSO so repulsive as to refuse to even use it as a bird-cage liner, much less a method to spread their anti-public education propaganda.
What! The HSO supports the YES vote?!?!
Now I am going to have to call the home office in Fargo and try to get the editor fired again seeing as that is always what I do when someone thinks differently than I do.
Order your gift tins early!
Firing Blanks:
Concerning the referendum date, doesn't it cost money to hold a referendum? How much does it cost to hold one?
Once again, you attack a concerned, taxpayer about a legitimate question concerning the spending of my tax dollars.
Do you think it would make a difference if the referendum was held in Nov. v Dec, i.e., whether it will pass.
If the referendum would have been passed last week, that would give the district an extra month to get bidding, permits, etc. going to meet the scheduled completion date. If you think it would have failed if voted on last week and would succeed if held in December, doesn't it look like the school board is manipulating the outcome at additional expense to the taxpayers? I do.
Remember when Kerry botched his Bush joke a week before the election? The Republicans thought they could use that little red herring to fool the public into voting for them again. That didn't work out too well.
I think the December 12 voting date issue is a lot like that. The naysayers think they have something they can hang their "Vote No" hats on. But voters aren't fooled by red herrings when real issues are afoot. Heck, even the HSO came around.
The naysayers are getting tinier and tinier and tinier. Pretty soon they will be so small we won't even be able to see them. We'll just hear a tiny little "squeak!"
As usual your arguments deal only with your pocketbook and not education.
How much does the election cost?
I heard $10K-12K. How many elegible voters are there in the District?
The cost most likely comes down to less than $1/voter. If you can't afford that I'd pay it for you.
"Once again, you attack a concerned, taxpayer about a legitimate question concerning the spending of my tax dollars."
You're damned right I'm attacking you losers because in the long run you are costing real taxpayer real money by distracting educators from doing their job of teaching kids.
These semi-harsh words pale in comparison to the damage your movement has done in this community.
People are sick of your whining about trivia, and they don't support you anti-government school crap either.
Someone here said they prayed that the last election would send a loud message to people like you. They're prayers were answered. Maybe this election will repeat the message for you OTBLers who are hard of hearing.
How many losses does it take for you to realize people aren't buying what you're selling.
Don't you have a blog of your own to post stuff on?
Aren't there any new High School Sports highlights to report?
HSO:
Do you often wear to top hat and carry a cane? It would go good with your tap dance routine. The referendum date is a legitimate question.
Set aside your personal attacks for a comment and try to give me a reason why you think the school board choose December over November.
"The referendum date is a legitimate question."
I agree. So go ahead and ask it again and again and again and again - here, in the HSO, at School Board meetings, on the street corner. I don't care because it isn't going to get you enough No votes to stop this referendum. As you say, you are the minority, and your squeak gets tinier and tinier every day. (I can barely hear you now.)
The Hudson School Supporters lynch mob will be stealing your "Vote No" signs and burning them on December 13th. So you better grab 'em quick so you can use them again next time.
Loser:
"You call me a loser. Why? Just because someone is a minority doesn't make them a "loser.""
I call you a loser because of the tactics and divisiveness your group has brought to Hudson. Have you put your personal attacks away? When your name appears on this blog you whine like a baby and threaten people's livelyhoods, yet you attack everyone who's opinion is pro public education on OTBL and that's OK because they are in the "public".
Can anyone go on to OTBL and make comments against their narrow point of view? Of course not! It doesn't fit with people who are absolutely right 100% of the time.You at least are allowed to state your case here.
As far as why the Board choose Dec. over Nov. I don't care to spectulate. I'm sure it's your contention that it was to give the YES vote a tactical advantage.
To me it doesn't matter. To most people, it doesn't matter. It doesn't change the merits of the referendum one iota.
Maybe you should be glad because it seperates the issue from the overwhelming rejection of the Republican national agenda.
The growth in this town is already here and continuing. Unfortunately, growth has both positive and negative consequences. While it improves the local economy, it also puts greater demands on public services. It's a fact thay your side continually denies.
Maybe you should have measured your response to what you saw as inappropriate spending from the begining? Instead, your side engaged in character assasination and now cry fowl when you're called a silly name like "loser".
Maybe if you'd brought some of your concerns up without the bulldog tactics, people might have compromised with your view with less
acrimony.
The fact is that no amount of spending is reasonable to those who want to dismantle the "government" school system as you do.
I don't know, Firing Back, but I think we've just been called POS Idiots by an extremely intillikjenk concerned citizen. Ouch!
Here are the facts that the “yes” thieves will never tell you:
The true cost of this new building including interest over twenty years [they always seem to forget the interest payments] is over 27.6 million dollars.
The school district currently has two slush funds which total over 20 million dollars. If they need a building so bad, why not pay cash and save interest expenses and further increases in taxes.
The cost per student in this district is over $11,000. Writers to the paper were able to quite clearly show how this number was derived. The school district’s two year-old numbers have been void of mathematical scrutiny.
The true operating cost of this new school will be at least 4.5 million dollars. It is an outright lie to tell the public it can be operated for less than one million dollars.
Finally, if the supporters out here see Meg Heaton and Doug Stohlberg as their intellectual stalwarts, then I believe the writers on this blog are less intelligent than one could ever assume.
Anonymous,
I find your reference to the "Yes" supporters as thieves offensive in the extreme. If you want to live in a society that has NO TAXES, maybe you should move to the Cayman Islands or at the very least not take advantage of ANY benifits that are made available to the public.
That includes driving on our roads.
As Ben Franklin said:
"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." Learn to accept it like other adults.
You and your ridiculous band of misfits have zero standing in this community.
I don't see you complaining about the cost to building and maintaining prisons. How much does that cost you in tax dollars?
The less education available, the more likely the crime rate is likely to increase.
Schools are an investment in our community. Where you see millions being wasted over a twenty year period, others see thousands of young lives being shaped into responsible citizens.
You say:
"Finally, if the supporters out here see Meg Heaton and Doug Stohlberg as their intellectual stalwarts, then I believe the writers on this blog are less intelligent than one could ever assume."
First, you don't need a Phd. to see the need is real, what you do need is common sense and a community minded spirit, neither of which do you seem to possess.
Secondly, if you are suggesting that you are the intellectual beacon for Hudson, God help us!!!!!!
One has to wonder why the "yes thieves" are not put in jail for their theft. Maybe it's because everything the school district is doing is legal. That's right. There are actual laws - passed by citizens - that allow them to go to referendum and then, upon its approval, build a new school. If anonymous thinks this is criminal, he better get busy changing the laws of the land to comply with his way of thinking.
As it is, anonymous and his groupies are shrinking, and shrinking. As Firing Back says, their standing in the community is now at zero. I can barely hear them anymore. Just a little tiny "squeak" once and awhile.
Too bad. So sad.
Good point. I'm sure anonymous wouldn't insist on jail time for all these "thieves" because that would cost him money to house them. So how would these "thieves" be punished? By paying fines to the evil government? That might suit anonymous because he would be forced to cough up less in taxes. But then again, wouldn't the taxers be criminally liable and unable to lower taxes. No matter how you look at it,
the Anonymous vision of society would be a catostrophe.
Post a Comment