register |  login
Loading Ad
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Tower

The "how" Longmont was Boulderized
Contributed by: Rich Yale on 1/22/2008

Boulderization of Longmont society rests ultimately on the public belief that Council liberals are omnipotent and that the progressives are intellectually infallible. But, since in reality liberals are not omnipotent and the progressives are not infallible, the present members holding the reigns to power have a need for moment-to-moment flexibility in the treatment of facts. The key compounded word to understanding is political- correctness. This word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to a conservative, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied by liberals to achieve progressive goals it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when group discipline demands this. It means also the ability to believe that black is white and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The mastermind controlling Councils liberal majority - Richard Juday - knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink Juday also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. Doublethink lies at the very heart of the Benker gang since the essential act of the Progressives is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from exposure for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the time to take account of the reality which the members deny. All this is indispensably necessary to ward off a public that grows more inquisitive with each passing day as to what the damage to Longmont's infrastructure and tax base the LifeBridge spectacular is really costing the fabric of society and the community of Longmont.

The clear and convincing truth is the public was tricked and deceived by liberals & NIMBYs in November 2007 who worked to kill LifeBridge annexation so the project can go forward with looser standards than Longmont, guaranteed $230,000,000 in tax revenue goes to Weld County, not Longmont and inadvertently opened the door to Boulder controlling Longmont's future property development policies. Although elected by Longmont, the majority does not represent Longmont interests but are beholden to Boulder Democratic Party interests instead by virtue of party support to the contrary of Longmont's Charter.




SUBMIT COMMENT

Rate the above story



Current Rating

Based on 6 user ratings.

Talk Back : submit comments to the story

*Note: you need to log-in to add a comment or rating.

< BACK | NEXT >
Showing 1-10 of 24 comments
Submitted By: Rich Yale
posted on 2/4/2008 @ 11:28:17 AM
Rated Story
Christians shouldn’t be penalized for developing real estate since they have the same constitutional rights as everyone else. 4C & LifeBridge simply wanted to use the same official annexation process channels that other developers are allowed to use.. Both the U.S. Constitution and the Colorado Constitution prohibit the state from enacting a law “impairing the obligation of contracts.” Art. I, Sec. 10, U.S. Const.& Colo. Const. Art. II, §III. This prohibition, called the “contract clause,” is generally interpreted to prohibit the government from retroactively interfering with matters governing private contracts. The bill of rights is self-executing; recognized rights established by the constitution do not depend upon City Council permission in order to become operative. Medina v. People, 154 Colo. But, on December 8th the new Government refused LifeBridge’s contractual relationships with 4C Corporation.
Submitted By: Bing Van Gorden
posted on 1/28/2008 @ 6:01:58 PM
(Not Rated)
One more thing, The Supreme Court has ruled on several occasions that a wall of separation exists. In cases where one Christian group has sued local governments because they rejected school prayer of another group of Christians.
Submitted By: Bing Van Gorden
posted on 1/28/2008 @ 6:00:15 PM
(Not Rated)
And your argument meant to dismiss Jefferson's interpretation of church/state separation is irrelevant. He was the third President of the United States when he wrote that famous letter to the Danbury Baptists. A Christian group that had been oppressed for years by other Christian groups! Liberals have been fighting for religious freedom by standing behind the wisdom in the separation of church and state. Jefferson, furthermore, was in contact with James Madison during the debate of the Bill of Rights. It was his sentiment as well.
Submitted By: Bing Van Gorden
posted on 1/28/2008 @ 6:00:12 PM
(Not Rated)
No, you are warping the language of freedom. Business deals don't fall under religious freedom. If the previous Mayor had her way, they would have been allowed to discriminate against people based on religious belief. This is fundamentally unconstitutional as it denies others their religious liberty. You seem to be advocating freedom for being for one segment of people while at the same time accusing liberals of doing the same. You have no basis for the statement that Longmont progressives are imposing their will on anyone! For what? Exercising their legal right to petition. You simply don't like their position. Which in no way infringed on anyone's religious freedom.
Submitted By: Rich Yale
posted on 1/28/2008 @ 9:24:58 AM
Rated Story
Thomas Jefferson was not in the Congress, nor was he a participating party to writing the First Amendment which does not have the word “separation”. “Freedom” is the whole purpose of the First Amendment. Without preservation of freedom the Constitution would be like food with no salt. For a thousand years government leaders claimed their authority to tell the people what to do came from God; with the First Amendment the new government was forbidden to establish Government’s own church to oppress the people; the people are free to exercise religion or not as they chose and can petition Government if it fails in its duties. Freedom is for all people. Just listen to Longmont’s progressives, freedom is qualified by them to people Longmont’s progressives decides gets freedom. This is not a claim to legitimate government that’s supported by the Charter or either Constitution. Progressives warp the language of Freedom into their own purposes.
Submitted By: Bing Van Gorden
posted on 1/27/2008 @ 11:03:08 AM
(Not Rated)
...and I have stated many times before that I share Jefferson's interpretation of the Establishment Clause that it "erects a wall of separation between church and state." It's liberals who founded this great country and it's liberals who will save it from conservative mis-governance.
Submitted By: Bing Van Gorden
posted on 1/27/2008 @ 11:00:26 AM
(Not Rated)
Richard that first post is ridiculous and wholly inaccurate. It is you sir who are paranoid of liberals, just reread your 3rd post. We lie to steal votes and pretend to be the good guys. I've made no illusions regarding conservatives. You site the LifeBridge annexation as an example of your paranoia regarding a liberal take over. I find that premise faulty for reason I gave. Your paranoia of the government is unjustifed as is your paranoia of liberals. As I suspected, after much pushing for a straight answer you finally revealed where you base your animosity towards liberals. The LifeBridge annexation petition was an act by citizens, not government. Whether you agree or not, it was a victory for democracy.
Submitted By: Rich Yale
posted on 1/26/2008 @ 4:34:19 PM
Rated Story
Mr. Van Gorden’s question of where are the inconsistencies in the First Amendment goes to the heart of the liberal progressive deception of the general public to steal votes under pretext of being the “good” guys. There are none as the response below shows with the actual language. The First Amendment protects the People, religion and sacred places from Government; it is the People’s Amendment, why would they protect Government from themselves when they created the Government in the first place? In the middle ages it was necessary for people to form trusts and corporations to protect themselves from the church/government which was one and the same. Today government is God over our rights so why is it not reasonable, sane and the right thing to protect our assets and children’s futures with trusts and corporations from demigods in Government today?
Submitted By: Rich Yale
posted on 1/25/2008 @ 9:46:09 PM
Rated Story
Liberals choose the words "establishment","prohibiting the free exercise" and "petition" from the same right endowed to everyone equally to Mickey Mouse why their knowledge of the 1st Amendment is infallibly correct: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Submitted By: Rich Yale
posted on 1/25/2008 @ 9:17:30 PM
Rated Story
Mr. Van Gorden, until the mention of LifBridge your writing reactions with regard to political policies which was otherwise normal switched to the onset of acute paranoia, blaming LifeBridge for every ill including any defender who refers to a opposing point of view. The burden of proof is on you to prove your conservative derangement syndrome spewing intolerance for anyone or anything that does not fit your tolerance template constructed from emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic is incapable of moral and constitutional error. Otherwise you contribute to the dissertation nothing of social redeeming value.
Showing 1-10 of 24 comments
< BACK | NEXT >
CONTRIBUTOR INFORMATION

Rich Yale

Longmont , CO

Rich Yale has posted 53 stories and 104 comments since joining on 12/13/2007. Rich Yale 's average story rating is 4.09.
SAVE AND SHARE THIS STORY
STORY RSS FEEDS
WANT TO WRITE FOR YOURHUB.COM?
Want to see the stories you write and the photos you shoot featured in the YourHub.com Thursday print section available all over the Front Range and with home subscriptions of the Rocky Mountain News and The Denver Post? All you have to do is register, then post a story or column, start a blog or tell everyone what events are happening in town. We will print the best stories, columns, event listings, photos and blog entries in our print sections.

ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Ad

Loading Ad
ADVERTISEMENT
Loading Ad