A superior slate at candidates' forum
Original post made by Spencer Little on Oct 24, 2006
The three had facts, dates, statistics, all manner of important information ready to go for each question. They were eloquent, concise, and direct in their logic. The three non-allied candidates (Vincent Bressler, Richard Cline, Heyward Robinson) seemed confused and unprepared.
Richard Cline stated that cops should write more speeding tickets to raise money for the city despite the fact everyone knows money from speeding tickets goes to the county, not the city of Menlo Park. The non-allied candidates only gave vague statements on the bad conditions of our city, yet the three allies point to facts about our potential future such as the Derry project and possibly building playing fields at Bayfront Park.
The non-allied candidates did nothing but oppose them. The allies can agree, the non-allies can only disagree. I believe we should vote for people who can say yes, and agree as a group on a plan. We should not vote for a bunch of nay-sayers who do not present new ideas or accurate information.
on Oct 25, 2006 at 1:01 pm
A "strangely" similar letter this author has been published twice in the Almanac's printed edition, and now appears again. The author was reported to be a paid campaign employee by the Duboc, Boyle, Winkler campaigns in their required financial statements.
When I googled his name, I found that he's a recent high school graduate. Maybe these are his own thoughts, but when he's received money from those he endorses one has to wonder.
on Oct 25, 2006 at 4:48 pm
Richard Hine is a registered user.
CONCERN BYSTANDER: The Almanac is posting letters and guest opinions from the newspaper into Town Square.