I thought you were more balanced early in the race, but your finding conspiracies of late around every corner, your endorsement of regulatory planning, your apparent confusion between planning and zoning, and your mean tone, these developments have disillusioned me. As for your statement about “rational individualism and laissez-faire capitalism” not working in the real world, look around you. Our country was built by those forces. The industrial revolution, the explosion of wealth in America, our standard of living, these did not come from a command economy, from planners, from regulators, from the state, or from the left. They came from the unleashing of freedom under the rule of law. I know that’s a hard one for Democrats to understand because y’all use the rule of law to control people. But the rule of law in America used to be more about equal opportunity than about equal outcome. People were much more free to create, invent, engage, and even fail, without planning overlords to regulate things. I’d like to see the pendulum swing back in that direction because I believe free people are happier and create more, not only for their own benefit, but for the mutual benefit of everyone else too. The left seem to have a deep mistrust of free people, and frankly, where that comes from mystifies me.

And on your point about conversation and dialog, I’ve posted on this site everything you have written to me about things on this site, along with my responses. On Abe21, however, I find no contrary views. Am I to conclude that “A Better Elbert” is an Elbert without dissent? - a strange prescription from the party that holds dissent to be one of the highest forms of patriotism. I know that 1st Amendment free speech rights can only be enforced against the government, but for private publishers such as yourself, it looks a little cultish to only present one side to matters.

The definition of cabal is that it is a secretive clique, usually political in nature. Are you really suggesting that their were no politicians at the ACWWA meetings? Are you trying to suggest that a meeting with a dozen or so developers with designs on water for their business operations where no one from the ECWAB was invited does not qualify as secretive?

You do not have all of the facts at your disposal. Where were you when Metli denied that these meetings occured? I was in the room. I have talked to numerous participants who were in those meetings, have you? If you had you would know that not everyone who was there wanted to be involved because they knew it would breech the public’s trust level.

Then there is your veiled threat that I could be sued silly. Everyone knows that you feature yourself as a legal eagle. If it is a warning, thanks for the tip. If it is you flexing your brilliant legal skills…cool. It’s nice you have a hobby.

Brooks, just admit it, you are angry because I think the master plan should be regulatory. You gave me a tepid endorsement, but now you see me as an evil person who is after all of your rights. Don’t worry, I know you will be voting for Shipper or Andy. I think zoning makes sense. I do not want to privatize everything under the sun. Ayn Rand was an idiot. Rand advocated rational individualism and laissez-faire capitalism, neither of which work in the real world.

Now that I have said those things you can be guilt free as you vote for those Republicans that have your best interests at heart. You and Andy and Del and J.H. and any other person you desire can sit in a coffee house and discuss The Fountainhead.

I don’t care. I am done with your intellectual sniper fire. You don’t want a debate. You just want conversion. Not in this life time because your world lives by the rule that those that have are okay, and those who don’t are worthless annoyances. Too stark for me. Stop reading my site if it is such crap.

Robert Thomasson

“I will be giving as much as I can afford to stop this myth that a Master Plan has to be advisory.”

See: http://elbertcounty.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/the-peoples-master-plan.jpg

(This is why I include source documents in my blog.)

Making the Master Plan regulatory is the opposite of “empowering people to protect their own land and their own property rights.” Regulations don’t empower people; regulations empower the state.

Robert Thomasson

Some time back I posted a matrix from county road&bridge that ranked roads according to traffic load. It is my understanding that road maintenance is allocated according to this analysis. See http://elbertcounty.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/elbert-county-traffic-counts.pdf . I didn’t find County Rd. 105 ranked on the list.

I lost my lawsuit because a technicality overcame a large preponderance of evidence to the contrary. I would make the same argument again in a heartbeat. Public contractors in bed with the county paid for the flyers. It was a ridiculously cheap investment for them.

No question, in Elbert County it’s Republicans who grew government, grew taxes, and grew government spending, though you have to admit, those are traditionally Democratic traits. But you also know that political party is no indication of political philosophy around here. It has been a long time since the fiscal conservatism of a Kennedy (as in JFK) Democrat has been seen in the land. Maybe you can change that in your bid for commissioner.

I sincerely hope the following comment does not damage your run for office, but I hope your candidacy represents a move toward a viable two-party system in Elbert County. I hope your party will attract the cadre of liberals currently masquerading as Republicans, and that important debates for issues and candidates will be taken out of the control of the current single-party farce.

You are mistaken if you think I have any friends left at Republican headquarters, or the directorships of our infamous local quasi-governmental non-profits. If I ever did, those ships have certainly sailed. Purveyors of the status quo like their ability to control the options ultimately presented to voters, be it issue or candidate. It’s basically a Stalinist approach without the guns. No. They definitely don’t like me.

Where are the District 2 candidates?

I stand by my assessment that you are a leftist with an agenda. Only you can say whether that is a positive or negative assessment, though I don’t think of it in those terms. For example, I’m a conservative with an agenda. Big deal.

I complained to the Secretary of State over what I believe to be ECDC electioneering activities contrary to Colorado statute. You mischaracterized my complaint.

On open meetings and agendas, I expect the BOCC is within the letter of the law. If you think the BOCC agendas should be more specific, then lobby for that change. Complaining, after the fact, that an agenda item wasn’t more specific with regard to a particular issue is complaining about water under the bridge.

On property rights and the TRW agenda, I find your stance for your own property rights to be inconsistent with your stance on other people’s property rights. You trot out 5th Amendment takings talk when it suits you but ignore the 5th Am. when it comes to planning and zoning. The Constitution isn’t situational. It applies to all of us all of the time and you can’t cherry pick circumstances to apply it.

Last I looked you were a Democrat in favor of collecting the 1B sales and use tax and spending it on roads. Difficult as it is to conceive of how someone could make the leap to “tax and spend Democrat” from those facts, color me guilty on that conclusion.

On “apolitical,” you changed your web page to read “nonpartisan.” This is a distinction without a difference and the criticism stands. If the shoe fits, wear it proudly.

Our “system of government” is not founded on “argumentum ad ignorantium” or any other logical fallacy. It is founded on the Common Law, on premises contained within the Declaration of Independence, and the system of legalities outlined in the Constitution. “Innocent until proven guilty” refers to the burden of proof in criminal procedure and it makes a hell of a lot more sense than the French, and many other legal systems’ principal of “guilty until proven innocent.”

On the allegation that I am “often guilty of appealing to authority,” such appeals are only a fallacy when the authority is not in fact a governing authority for the matter. I don’t believe I cite non-governing authorities but in any case, you’ll need to flesh out this allegation with some examples before I can respond in substance.

Dialog is not per se productive. To be productive each person so engaged must substantively respond to what the other party represents, and then advance the conversation in a reasonable direction. Mouthing words at another party without due diligence to the conversation amounts to propagandizing.

While you’re certainly free to characterize my comments as “sniping, put downs, cynicism, ideological rants, incongruous, and cognitively deficient,” no shortage of ad hominems there by the way, my efforts have been and shall remain directed at encouraging sound reasoning from the public voices in Elbert County. While I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, where you come out in those assessments is mostly up to you.
Sincerely,
Brooks

And what of the pro-1B voices who remain strangely silent on the systemic growth trend in county revenues and spending that would continue without a tax increase? Those background increases would amply cover road and bridge improvements expected to be the object of 1B funds, which flyers indicate will be reconstructing marginal 1-lane bridges out in the Bijou. Yep, fixing those 1-laners with traffic loads of a couple cars a week will go a long way toward making us all a lot safer.