And this means?

That's it! That's exactly what happens. Are we so bored we need to create our own entertainment by making local politics a soap opera? It's just stupid. :D'Uh:

Hey Sammy,

Remembering the recall and wanting to discuss it again and again are two different concepts in my book. From what I have seen people post about Elysian, she/he doesn't even live in this town and has never lived in this town so for you to support anything she has to say on Bisbee politics is questionnable. Does he/she live in this town? Has he/she ever lived in this town? I wouldn't count her/him as being the last word on anything. You think the recall was arbitrary, over two hundred people didn't seem to think so because they signed the petitions. There are many people out there who do not like Jack Porter and there are many who do like Jack Porter. Again, I don't see your point unless it is an attempt to belittle and bash the people who speak out against what you and Elysian, the Ron and Jack supporters, seem to believe. Is Jack worried or something, because you people seem to be trying to dig something out here? Now, I think that is something to think about.

Hey Mikey, when are you going to discuss the issue?

Hey Sammy the Paranoid Troll ,

What is the issue? You want to talk, what is stopping you?

Mike,
Clicking your fingers and saying DISMISSED doesn't work. Like any third rate magician you are attempting to misdirect this discussion and make it something else. I find it ironic that your response speaks directly to a matter of personal opinion and not the real issue of complaints against local government being based on personal feelings. Location has NO bearing on a good question or an insightful observation. Nor can anyone dismiss a comment from a poster when the address of the forum itself is the worldwide web. Are we attempting to make Bisbee a walled city? Location hasn't been an issue when OTHERS who also weren't from Bisbee have posted. Ironic again that it only becomes an issue when the poster is posing a difficult question that you don't want to deal with. Finally, unless the administration of this forum determines location to be a requirement for registration, which I do not believe it is, it isn't germane to this discussion. But you are apparently unable to discuss the real issue and would simply prefer to call posters trolls or label them as outsiders or see the issue as exclusively about Denise and Jack Porter.

Here we go again with Elysian's jumbled thoughts and second hand information. Are you or are you not friends with Mayor Oertle, was once involved with him, and is that not where you are getting your information? I think Betty Lindstrom will make a great Mayor and your friend Ronnie who spoon feeds you information so that you can post for him here and on Topix and Jack should be nervous. For someone who takes umbrage with people getting personal, you sure have no problem doing that yourself.

Wasn't trying to hide a thing, Eric. How clever of you to figure it out. Maybe you should advise your friend Jack that he would be better to stick to current issues and not try to focus on using others to attempt to discredit a recall which is in the past. Don't you think that people want to know what Jack is about now? His two visions for the future of Bisbee in the Observer were quite lame. He is going to have to do better than that. Stick to the big issues. I support Betty Lindstrom for Mayor. Betty isn't going to play dirty and Jack would be smart not to as well. Ronnie, well he is so washed up that isn't even an issue.

TOXIC DEJA VOUS!!

people who see things as I do

Ah yes, the pervert stalker contingent.

Ah, yes, these tactics will serve Betty's interests in running a positive campaign wonderfully.

As someone who most likely will vote for Jack, that's pretty funny.

I do find it amusing that Mike, like so many others, can't seem to decide what angle to take in attacking Elysian. As with every other skirmish Elysian has had, she is first one thing and then another. First on Topix she is a shill for Jack, now here she is in Oertle's pocket. It is never really the substance of the accusation that seems to matter to the accuser, just that it constitutes an accusation. Logical fallacies (like the ad hom Mike is employing here) do nothing to support the argument of the person using them. This bears some explanation, as it seems that some are completely unwilling to grasp the concept. If person A makes a statement, and person B disagrees with that statement, it is not a logical argument for person B to speculate into the motives or personal details of person A, because those details bear no relationship to the truth or falsity of the statement person A made. Let's try an example:

Setting: Mary is pro-abortion. Cindy is anti-abortion.

Scene:
Mary: I think the right of women to have abortions should be maintained.
Cindy: You're just saying that because you work for Planned Parenthood.

Cindy has not made a logical argument here. While it may or may not be true that Mary works for Planned Parenthood, it does not therefore follow that Mary is wrong in saying that there should be a right to abortion, because the two facts are not logically related. This is because the verity of an argument doesn't rest on the circumstances or motivations of the person making it.

Thus, no matter what connections Elysian may or may not have to which candidates, it is not a refutation of Elysian's opinion to speculate about those connections.

Mike also seemed to indicate that Elysian has employed arguments similar to his own in this thread and elsewhere. This is a typical 'pot calling the kettle black' argument. The problem with arguments like that one is that they are just as illogical as ad hominem remarks. This is because while the pot may or may not be just as black as the kettle, this does not mean that the kettle is not black. In the interests of Mike's position, he should stick to providing arguments that actually follow logic to support his cause. This has been a wakeup call from the wonderful world of Logic. Thank you for playing.

Elysian is getting (and we most of us get from time to time) a lot of flak. Like most attacks on these boards, they lack something in the way of good argument. So, this may help:


and we could all learn how to present our arguments better. (Hey, it could happen!)

Hey Tom Tom,

Everyone is a critic. Bottom line is you are the left and I am the right or vice a versa. Your example of logic is juvenile. Notice how you become the critic with me and gloss over the warped and twisted logic of Elysian ("she may or may not be the kettle"). Bottom line is that aside from the juvenile example of logic, there is way too much bias in your post to be believable. We all know about Elysian. By the way, what could possibly be her interest in Bisbee politics? What must Ron think of Jack running against him? Maybe Elysian already knows or can find out? Skeptic has it right.

Seems like links don't want to play nice for us guests, so

I have just reset the BBC code for links. It is now working. If it presents a problem again let me know.

ABOUT THE JACK PORTER RECALL: That was then, this is now.

ABOUT LINDSTROM'S FELONY: That was then, this is now

ABOUT THE PAUKEN THING: That was then, this is now.
ABOUT THE COMMITTEE THING: That was not a committee, it was personal.
ABOUT THE PERSONAL THING: That was not personal, it was a committee.

So I'll try to post this link again. Many of us might want to ponder it, and respond with some changes:

Whaaaaaaat?