Comments by KimW

  • Older Comments
  • Page 1 of 1
  • Newer Comments
Written on Anderson City Manager Dana Shigley tapped for Napa Valley job:

in response to HeardEnough:

judge me??? I'm not a contestant in your life. Here's the skinny, bucko. I think Ms.Shigley has done an outstanding job for the city. I don't care for these two dope smoking creeps taking shots at her. these two could care about Anderson. Their concern is only that the local pot pusher gets to keep his doors open. Ms.Shigley has worked hard to get where she's at. I offer no apologies to them or you. Actually, if we're judging, I've got you pegged for an obnoxious twit who's never got over the fact that he's had to go through life with a girl's name...And, no...I am NOT a nice person and NO, I don't want to be your friend...live with it...

Um, who the heck said that *anyone* wanted to be your friend, "bucko?" It would seem unlikely that *anyone* would.

I have no problem with Ms. Shigley, with whom I may disgree on this or that, as rational people sometimes do, without imploding and entirely self-destructing, as you appear to be prone to do.

Written on Anderson City Manager Dana Shigley tapped for Napa Valley job:

in response to HeardEnough:

oh...sorry...did you say something? oh...now I get it...only YOUR comments are relevant. yep,and I'm really enamored by your ability to evaluate people based on a comment. you're good, you're intelligent, you're everything I aspire to be...now go chase a parked car!

************

Sometimes a single comment is quite adequate. Now, however, I have *two* upon which to judge you.

Nice work.

Written on Anderson City Manager Dana Shigley tapped for Napa Valley job:

in response to HeardEnough:

Two comments from drug addicts. Now how much credence to you give them? None! pothead #1 mentions the closing of Prime as if it is devastating to the community. I guess it is if you spend countless hours there between bong hits. Oh...my GOD! they're closing shop on the drug dealers. There goes all those tax dollars. You two addicts are funny. Potheads are funny. That's why Cheech and Chong made money from their movies. You viewed their movies as documentaries, while the normal people enjoyed potheads being stupid. Party on, dudes.

***********

An amazing comment.

HeardEnough, whatever your opinion of "pot," or "potheads," your comment certainly reveals *you* to be an unsocialized boor, and certainly makes those you childishly attack appear far more capable than *you* of functioning in the sort of reality most of us live in.

I'd guess your comments about *anything* can, henceforth, be dismissed as entirely irrelevant to anything.

But do keep trying. The Post needs more comments, even if, like your post, they simply take up space.

Written on Anderson Council votes 'No' on Proposition 19:

in response to Common_Science:

Our forefathers had the public’s ears, minds and souls when marijuana was finally outlawed for all the right reasons in 1937. Our focus must be reinvigorated as to the methods used to snap America out of its complacency within those wonderous moralistic years. Lets make a vow to be vigilant and fight back with all the facts available on the most powerful tool - the internet.

If you feel the sense of purpose to go to just one website for honest inspiration to end the inevitable senseless tragedies awaiting our family, friends, and foes alike, look no further than:
http://www.opposeprop19.com/

Please take this message to heart. We can’t afford to let the $500 billion in hard-earned money the ONDCP, DARE et al, spent on education during the former drug war, to go up in smoke.

***********

Heh heh heh... ;-)

Given the usual lack of participation in our poor Anderson valley Post forums, the very last thing I was expecting would be a sense of humor.

Interesting how this topic seems to energize the readers of this local spin off of the Searchlight more than any other topic I can come up with in recent memory.

I certainly hope the City Council notes where the opinions of those voters who have bothered to express an opinion here lie, and equally that those voters have memories, despite their seeming disregard of those who have elected them.

Written on Anderson Council votes 'No' on Proposition 19:

I admit to being a bit confused as to why the City Council is attempting to "sway votes."

I was under the naive impression that elected officials are are elected to, um, what's the term again, oh yeah, to "represent" those who elected them. Hence, I assume, the term "representative democracy."

I do not recall being queried by any member of this *elected* City Council as to my opinion on the matter of Proposition 19, and I certainly have not heard of any data concerning any findings as to precisely where the majority of Anderson *voters* stands on this issue.

It would seem that carefully selected information provided by police chief Dale Webb will be the driving force of an attempt by the City Council, using the words of the article, to "sway voters," when in fact, those elected to the City Council were presumably elected by voters, and entrusted by them, to represent, in a legal and constitutional manner, the wishes of those voters.

I most certainly did *not* vote for anyone on this City Council in hopes that they would represent solely police chief Dale Webb and his opinions on this matter.

A cynical person might wish to ask both the City Council and the police chief in what way the *present* cannabis laws, based in large measure, upon federal laws, represent a more reasonable way to deal with cannabis in our society, since, when cannabis use and distribution was defined as "criminal activity" some seventy years ago - a savage empire of illegal drug cartels did *not* control that activity, very few societal problems due to cannabis were reliably noted, and a vast and costly branch of law enforcement was *not* maintained at enormous taxpayer expense to enforce those not yet existing laws.

Yes, this proposition is flawed in many ways, and it is certainly correct to bring them up and to discuss them. Laws, however, can be modified and tinkered with as needed as problems become apparent. Proposition 19 could even be repealed, if necessary, by yet another proposition.

Let the voters decide this one for once - not law enforcement, whose own interests, after all, are quite involved and invested in maintaining the status quo. And to the City Council, whatever the opinion of voters may be on this proposition, they will be watching you, and their votes will be based upon how you have represented *them,* and not how well you have represented the opinions of our police chief.

Written on Letters to the editor: March 10, 2010:

"Local governing bodies are supposed to enforce the laws equally for everybody, including qualified medical cannabis patients. Would the government officials be acting the same way if we were growing our own insulin, estrogen or other pharmaceutical?"

I certainly agree with you in nearly all respects, although I might quibble with the one quoted above.

Estrogen and insulin are hardly analogies - and probably deliberately chosen for that reason - concerning government control of personal and private production of pharmaceuticals, as neither lends itself much to abuse or resale for profit to unqualified users. Perhaps a better analogy might be the opium poppy, the traditional and original source for any number of perfectly legitimate and widely prescribed pain medications, among other uses. One may obtain a prescription created by a physician, for example, for codeine or morphine based pharmaceuticals and use them (supposedly) according to recommendations by the physician, and so long as the person who uses it possesses a valid prescription, and is not driving, the use is legal. However, in no case may this person cultivate opium poppies, even if the opium produced might provide similar pharmaceutical effects.

Why? Probably because the home grown opium and possible derivatives might be seen as lending themselves to to likely abuse and possible diversion to others not legitimately qualified to use them.

But that said, The compassionate use law concerning cannabis specifically *permits* cultivation for use by medically qualified persons, and it is somewhat disturbing to see Anderson and numerous other cities attempting to circumvent this law in such a flagrant manner. I most certainly did not vote for local officials in order to empower them to decide which laws *they* like, and then find ways to get around them.

Excellent letter sir. No argument with you was intended. My point simply concerned what I believe was a faulty analogy, and one easily shot down.

Written on Loose cats top complaint of APD animal services:

Perhaps the Planning Commission should propose that in order to own or feed a cat, the city should require a 120-square-foot cat house installed (weighted with gravel, no permanent foundation), $600; 84 feet of solid fencing with a locking gate not installed, $363.91; and a $100 registration fee from City of Anderson.

However, structures at 120-square and greater feet usually require permitting, and structures that require permitting require a concrete foundation. Other required expenses will include a security alarm, not necessarily monitored, odor filtration, as well as permit fees needed for construction.

Oh yeah. That's for cannabis. Sorry. ;-)

Written on Planning commission measures add extra expense to growing medical marijuana:

It would seem to me that there are two issues involved here:

The Planning Commission is obviously attempting to circumvent the intent of the Compassionate Use Act by suggesting restrictions which seem to obviously be intended to make compliance with them extremely difficult and costly.

Forgotten, apparently by the Planning Commission, and perhaps the Council, is that City Government is not charged to "rule" its citizens, but to "represent" them. If this is indeed the case, I, for one, will not forget their misapprehension of their duties next election.

If the problem here is that it is believed that the Compassionate Use Act is being abused, then deal with the legislation which permits it. I am made a bit uncomfortable by a City Government which finds no particular problem attempting to circumvent the law by placing unreasonable restrictions on what are essentially legal activities.

Written on Zoning to limit medical marijuana garden sizes, locations:

"That government is best which governs least"

How fortunate that nonsensical issues like this busy the Anderson Planning Commission, so that they are hopelessly muddled in self-importance, and hence unable to propose draconian measures to deal with other problems which threaten to destroy Anderson - barking dogs, wild turkeys threatening traffic on North Street, roaming cats, drivers with loud car stereos, birds making noise too early in the morning, bad grammar on store signs, and people in general who just come and go in Anderson like they own the place.

Perhaps the Planning Commission should consider getting a hobby of some sort.

  • Older Comments
  • Page 1 of 1
  • Newer Comments

Features