<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: gRRRRRRRR&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:51:39 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Markland</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21712</link>
		<dc:creator>David Markland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 15:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21712</guid>
		<description>Are you for real?
By any means necessary was Malcolm X. But what do I know? I&#039;m just a blogger and not an anonymous commenter.

And there is a difference between semantics and deliberately twisting words around to deceive the populace, which should never be encouraged.
Term extensions isn&#039;t a life or death matter, and since its the same people who are trying to deceive the public that would benefit from it, I don&#039;t think this would benefit the public in any way. If its really important, they can try again later, but this time while being more honest.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you for real?<br />
By any means necessary was Malcolm X. But what do I know? I&#8217;m just a blogger and not an anonymous commenter.</p>
<p>And there is a difference between semantics and deliberately twisting words around to deceive the populace, which should never be encouraged.<br />
Term extensions isn&#8217;t a life or death matter, and since its the same people who are trying to deceive the public that would benefit from it, I don&#8217;t think this would benefit the public in any way. If its really important, they can try again later, but this time while being more honest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stopthewar!</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21711</link>
		<dc:creator>stopthewar!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21711</guid>
		<description>martin luther king vowed to achieve what was right &quot;by any means necessary&quot;.  meanwhile dave was on the sidelines arguing that what was right for the people should not pass because of semantics.  this is why you are a blogger and not a writer because your rigid, limited thought process does not allow you to think outside the box.  that is all from me.  a big shout out to ponydog, shizwalk and petra - what did i tell you? remnis aux fauxtabula!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>martin luther king vowed to achieve what was right &#8220;by any means necessary&#8221;.  meanwhile dave was on the sidelines arguing that what was right for the people should not pass because of semantics.  this is why you are a blogger and not a writer because your rigid, limited thought process does not allow you to think outside the box.  that is all from me.  a big shout out to ponydog, shizwalk and petra &#8211; what did i tell you? remnis aux fauxtabula!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Markland</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21710</link>
		<dc:creator>David Markland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 18:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21710</guid>
		<description>Yes, I am comparing Wendy Greuel, Dick Riordan, and the League of Women Voters to the Bush Admin.
Both believe that the ends justify the means.

As for the slavery comparison, you&#039;re right. I would argue it on semantics. Because, as far as I can tell, there would be no need to lie to the public to &quot;free them&quot;.

I could care less about how Rocky and Zuma Dogg feel on the issue - what does this have to do with the issue?

Bottom line is if they want to pass this measure, they should have done so honestly. Otherwise, we&#039;re sending a message to the politicians that people like you are okay with them lying to the public... even when it comes to so called ethics bills.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I am comparing Wendy Greuel, Dick Riordan, and the League of Women Voters to the Bush Admin.<br />
Both believe that the ends justify the means.</p>
<p>As for the slavery comparison, you&#8217;re right. I would argue it on semantics. Because, as far as I can tell, there would be no need to lie to the public to &#8220;free them&#8221;.</p>
<p>I could care less about how Rocky and Zuma Dogg feel on the issue &#8211; what does this have to do with the issue?</p>
<p>Bottom line is if they want to pass this measure, they should have done so honestly. Otherwise, we&#8217;re sending a message to the politicians that people like you are okay with them lying to the public&#8230; even when it comes to so called ethics bills.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stopthewar!</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21709</link>
		<dc:creator>stopthewar!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 18:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21709</guid>
		<description>you&#039;re actually trying to compare the league of women voters (who wrote the measure) to the cheney-rumsfeld gang?  as far as I can see, the objection to Prop R is one of semantics NOT the goal itself (as you said yourself in your post.)  

I look at it this way, if a measure was going to free the slaves, I would support it regardless of semantics.  You would argue semantics and keep the slaves enslaved.  

plus, the only reason people like the city attorney are against it is because it doesn&#039;t extend his term limits.  what does that tell you?  and from what i hear, most of these so called self titled &quot;community activists&quot; who are rabble rousing about this semantics issue are the crazy ones.  

but all that aside, i just don&#039;t have a problem with semantics.  i agree with both goals.  i understand the &quot;controversy&quot;.  i also understand that the effects of Prop R will be a good thing for the city and its people.  and even you don&#039;t argue with that, dave!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you&#8217;re actually trying to compare the league of women voters (who wrote the measure) to the cheney-rumsfeld gang?  as far as I can see, the objection to Prop R is one of semantics NOT the goal itself (as you said yourself in your post.)  </p>
<p>I look at it this way, if a measure was going to free the slaves, I would support it regardless of semantics.  You would argue semantics and keep the slaves enslaved.  </p>
<p>plus, the only reason people like the city attorney are against it is because it doesn&#8217;t extend his term limits.  what does that tell you?  and from what i hear, most of these so called self titled &#8220;community activists&#8221; who are rabble rousing about this semantics issue are the crazy ones.  </p>
<p>but all that aside, i just don&#8217;t have a problem with semantics.  i agree with both goals.  i understand the &#8220;controversy&#8221;.  i also understand that the effects of Prop R will be a good thing for the city and its people.  and even you don&#8217;t argue with that, dave!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Markland</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21708</link>
		<dc:creator>David Markland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:41:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21708</guid>
		<description>Ironic. Your tag is &quot;Stop the War!&quot; but you don&#039;t have a problem with politicians lying to us and bending the truth so they can build support for their initiatives?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ironic. Your tag is &#8220;Stop the War!&#8221; but you don&#8217;t have a problem with politicians lying to us and bending the truth so they can build support for their initiatives?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stop the war!</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21707</link>
		<dc:creator>stop the war!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:30:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21707</guid>
		<description>i don&#039;t see the problem.  i support both halves of the measure, so i will be happy to see them passed.  apparently some people are not happy with how the measure was phrased, but why get all agitated about semantics when the goals are important and necessary?  sounds like the opponents of this measure are small minded and short sighted.  councilmembers need at least 3 terms to get long term projects done.  so david, i agee with you that the motions included are good and so i will vote yes for Prop R and bring the power back to the people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i don&#8217;t see the problem.  i support both halves of the measure, so i will be happy to see them passed.  apparently some people are not happy with how the measure was phrased, but why get all agitated about semantics when the goals are important and necessary?  sounds like the opponents of this measure are small minded and short sighted.  councilmembers need at least 3 terms to get long term projects done.  so david, i agee with you that the motions included are good and so i will vote yes for Prop R and bring the power back to the people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cd</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21706</link>
		<dc:creator>cd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21706</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not so much a term limit extention packaged with ethics reforms as it is the other way around.  Frankly the &quot;ethics reforms&quot; are what almost made me vote no on the necessary addition of an additional term for councilmembers.

Two terms simply isn&#039;t enough time to know what is going on. If you think lobbyists have too much power and influence, it&#039;s because they know the ropes, they can offer information and advice, and green councilmembers can&#039;t argue because they don&#039;t know.  The same awful effects are felt in Sacramento everday.  Term limits at the state level have led to a more polarized, less educated body of representatives.  There are smart, savvy, capable people, sure, but you need time to learn any new job - especially a high profile, high stakes gauntlet like elected office.

Vote for Prop R - because you still retain the ability to vote the bastards out in two terms, or even one, if you so prefer.

Term limits lower your power - Prop R is a small step toward restoring it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not so much a term limit extention packaged with ethics reforms as it is the other way around.  Frankly the &#8220;ethics reforms&#8221; are what almost made me vote no on the necessary addition of an additional term for councilmembers.</p>
<p>Two terms simply isn&#8217;t enough time to know what is going on. If you think lobbyists have too much power and influence, it&#8217;s because they know the ropes, they can offer information and advice, and green councilmembers can&#8217;t argue because they don&#8217;t know.  The same awful effects are felt in Sacramento everday.  Term limits at the state level have led to a more polarized, less educated body of representatives.  There are smart, savvy, capable people, sure, but you need time to learn any new job &#8211; especially a high profile, high stakes gauntlet like elected office.</p>
<p>Vote for Prop R &#8211; because you still retain the ability to vote the bastards out in two terms, or even one, if you so prefer.</p>
<p>Term limits lower your power &#8211; Prop R is a small step toward restoring it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Lyon</title>
		<link>http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21705</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Lyon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 13:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://la.metblogs.com/2006/11/06/grrrrrrrr/#comment-21705</guid>
		<description>Great piece!  Thanks for the boost.  The only link you&#039;re missing is to Not PropR, the committee to defeat Proposition R.  It details the ways in which this measure weakens city ethics laws in addition to lengthening term limits.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.notpropr.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.notpropr.org&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great piece!  Thanks for the boost.  The only link you&#8217;re missing is to Not PropR, the committee to defeat Proposition R.  It details the ways in which this measure weakens city ethics laws in addition to lengthening term limits.  <a href="http://www.notpropr.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.notpropr.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
