That’s a massive “U”-turn in logic dontcha think, Charlie?

One minute those who opposed the stadium are “business killers” and the NEXT minute, it’s a question of WHICH businesses are “..in the best interest of Fremont.” Not at all, the same argument.

Gosh if I didn’t know better, I might convince myself that you were in this debate for debates’ sake –

MWHAHAHAHAHHA !!!!

But, let’s (again) play along –

What does it mean to be “swiftboated”, Charlie? You like to use this phrase a lot. I’ve heard many on the political right use it – especially when they’ve been trumped.

For me, being “swiftboated” is just a fancy way of saying “We got beat by the other guys cuz we weren’t smart enough to promote our case.” PHere’s a suggestion, Charlie – try making an appeal that makes sense for someone with an IQ that is greater than ambient temperature. Had you done so, you might have garnered more than a few dozen supporters and, more importantly, they might have been smart enough to do something about your cause.

Further, Catellus may be “obsolete” I’m not sure, because there are different kinds of “obsolete” and, I’m never quite sure what context you us jargon in. What I know is that Catellus appears to be building like crazy and creating a few jobs as they do so. While, I am not a particular fan, they have a right to conduct they’re business and they’re certainly adding to the F-mont tax-revenue base as they do. If you’ve got a beef with these businesses, you should take your case to Sue and Bill and Anu who have been supporting and influencing this development for many years.

The really entertaining NEW statement is the one which declares that I’ve been “officially shot down” –
– – — to which I immediately question – by what “official” authority Charles?

The court of public opinion?

YOU???!!!

Show me your badge, Charlie. Until then – I suggest you avoid making any reference to things “official”.

See, sadly, while you may be the self-appointed and lone remaining voice of pro-stadium obfuscation, there is absolutely nothing whatsoever “official” about it.

The anecdotal table-pounding continues.

And, it’s the very same kind of anedotal table pounding that Bill, Anu and Sue spewed widely throughout their respective reelection campaigns and which appears to have been a great strategy.

But, another strategy and style has finally gained a bit of traction. It’s a thinking mans or womans style and one which does not rely on anecdotal and personalized nonesense.

To your obvious chagrin.

The facts continue to be –

- Major business interests in Fremont opposed the stadium.

- FCN/Bacon were aligned with these business interests in their opposition.

- Anu, Bill, and Susie either did not have the presence of mind to consider the VERY obvious conflicts created by their proposal(s) – –

AND/OR – –

- – they didnt care about these particular ESTABLISHED business interests and were willing to subordinate same to the wants and needs of Lew.

The conclusions we can draw are –

Bacon is serious enough about protecting business interests in our community that he rallied a cause which was in defense of those same interests.

Anu, Bill and Susie, on the other hand, attempted (and FAILED) to “swiftboat” not one, but two stadeeumm plans, both of which would have seriously compromised many, many established Fremont business interests.

Do the math.

CATELLUS said NO!

NUMMI said NO!

WHEN ARE YOU GONNA WAKE UP???????

Bacon and FCN were aligned with these business interests.

Harrison and Anu and Charlie would have steam rolled over the concerns of these business interests.

Do the math.

(Just where were all of these proponents anyway?????!!!)

“When you have facts on your side – argue the facts. When the law is on your side – argue the law.
When you have neither – pound the table.”