LOGO

Mayor-State Rep add to
Tacoma’s negative image

Weather Forecasts | Weather Maps | Weather Radar


Share on Facebook



Reader Tools
ADD TO FAVORITES
MAKE US YOUR HOME PAGE
SUBSCRIBE
UNSUBSCRIBE
NEWS TIPS
SUBMISSIONS
News Links
KING 5 NEWS
KIRO 7 NEWS
KOMO 4 NEWS
NEWS TRIBUNE
SEATTLE TIMES
SEATTLE P-I
TACOMA WEEKLY
BUSINESS EXAMINER
TACOMA DAILY INDEX
R.R. ANDERSON'S TACOMICS

The body of another Tacoma serial killer Ted Bundy victim has been unearthed in Vail Colorado.

Former Tacoma Police Chief David Brame, who murdered his wife and put a lead pill into his own sick mind, is used as an example in the Tacoma Voters Pamphlet as to why to vote no on City of Tacoma Charter changes.

And Tacoma Mayor Marilyn Strickland and Washington State Representative Laurie Jinkins added to T-Town-Sin City’s negative image with the following statements in a Tacoma News Tribune opinion piece.  

“The misguided message that voters should just dismiss all 12 amendments without weighing both pros and cons is crass, cynical and presumes voters lack the judgment to evaluate each on its own merits. Just saying ‘no to all’ is the laziest form of political argument and is contrary to the way our democracy works.”

What Strickland and Jenkins are attacking is an opinion piece written by Karen Seinfeld, a former Pierce County Superior Court judge and retired state Court of Appeals judge. David Seago, retired News Tribune editorial page editor, four former Tacoma mayors, seven former City Council members and other civic leaders not to mention New Takhoman Publisher John Hathaway and former Tacoma City Councilman Tom Stenger.

Nowhere in that opinion piece did it state, “That voters should just dismiss all 12 amendments without weighing both pros and cons.”

No Strickland and Jenkins we are not crass, cynical or lazy.

If all of the above hadn’t considered the pros and cons of all twelve City of Tacoma Charter Amendments the opinion you attack never would have seen the light of day.

Strickland and Jenkins opinion piece is nothing more than the lowest of the low political attack ad that questions the integrity and credibility of the opponents when they cannot support their own position with facts.

So ergo Strickland and Jenkins have just given you the best reasons to vote no on all twelve Charter Amendments.

Does one of those Charter Amendments fill a single pothole? No.

But do they increase the power, greed and ego of the current Council of None? HELL YES!

However the real question to be answered is, “Why would Jenkins tie her can to another Tacoma failed Mayor?”

The simple answer Dear Readers is Washington State Representative Laurie Jinkins wants to be Tacoma’s next Mayor and will be running for the said office in the near future.

We get mail

This in from Just Call me Ishmael:

Perhaps we should accept reality and realize none of the Tacoma City Council seem familiar with ethics and, therefore, really cannot be blamed for violating them.  They subscribe to 'situational ethics,' which dictates 'if I think the outcome will be good (in my opinion), then what I do to make it happen will eventually be ethical (in my opinion)."  

 The poor creatures are classic examples of the liberal and permissive society which says 'Me, first,' and which presumes anything the individual wants is acceptable - without regard for the impact on immediate family or society.  We have all seen this behavior in grocery or toy stores where some spoiled child is wailing and screaming 'I want it.  I want it.'  People used to grow out of this stage, but today's population - and all Evergreen graduates - merely transition to adults who no longer just 'want' it but 'take' it. 

The Mayor - and pretty much any other Council member - is a very nice person.  She is pleasant, smart and well educated.  She simply comes from a generation that assumes "I know better than anyone else what is needed.  Therefore, whatever I want to do MUST be good for society in general." 

This is where the majority of proposed charter changes arise.  The proponents assume that their needs and / or thoughts MUST be right and, therefore, anything they can do to make it easier for them to achieve their personal agendas must be good for everyone.   The situation IS - situational - ethical to them.  I.E. if the council can get its greedy little mitts on the TPU revenues, the council can spend, spend, spend like Santa Claus on every little project the Council thinks will be good (or at least popular).  If something is good (or popular), it MUST be ethical, right? 

Alas, the result will be TPU will live from month to month on incoming revenues with no base or reserve (much as social security and state controlled pension systems have been looted by the federal and / or state governments].  The Council is not concerned with fiscal conservatism nor maintaining a strong budget at TPU.   Bleeding TPU dry to further immediate 'feel good' causes is a good thing in their eyes.  The Council, which never thinks beyond the next election, will neither foresee nor work to prevent the collapse of the system, because it is not THEIR problem.

Whereas buying votes with feel good programs which can influence the next election IS their concern.  The current Council will not be in office when the system goes broke.  (again, if one needs an example, please note the federal government which cannot fix critical infrastructure such as bridges or dams because it has frittered away OUR money on buying votes by giveaway programs, or consider the state of Washington which is considering a major increase in gasoline tax to pay for the roads it cannot fix because it has blown the highway monies on so-called 'Rapid Transit', truly an oxymoron.). 

Raising taxes always seems a viable source of revenue to governments - 'do not manage budgets, simply expand them.'  The problem here is that only 50% of Americans are paying taxes nowadays and if the government manages to bleed them dry, there will be no one to pay the increased taxes.   The mindset described above is also the basis of most if not all of the other proposed charter changes.

Tacoma's City Council seems to believe that socialism IS 'the way and the light.'  They cannot let little things like ethics interfere with their personal plans which - after all - 'are bound to make everybody happy.'  Give the Mayor a break - neither she nor the majority of other politicians has any more familiarity with ethics than a pig has with holy water.   They cannot be expected to observe what they cannot see.

Has Tacoma Mayor Strickland

violated city’s ethics code again? 

Uses taxpayer paid for official photo to promote personal political agenda

To view the opinion piece click here.

web analytics



Click Here to comment
***

Copyright The New Takhoman
1995-2014
All Rights Reserved.
Resources


HOME PAGE




ONLINE NEWS




CITY COUNCIL




COUNCIL AGENDAS



POLICE


FIRE


LIBRARY