I think the point that BBox was making is the fact that local politicians try and take credit for anything good happening and disappearing when things go bad.

Wouldnt you imagine that constituency would be swayed by the influence and contribution council members brought to a success like this?

Details like, who were the critical decision makers our council members were talking to and schmoozing with during this negotiation? How did they sssist in ensuring that the right connections were involved to make this happen? What unique incentives did they place on the table to ensure this decision was made in Fremonts favor? How did they personally contribute to this small step out of our current financial abyss?

Or, maybe not – - maybe you just suggest your involvement by describing the benefit of the deal to our community – but you do so very, verrry broadly – like when someone *permits* you a sound-bite moment or you print up your next re-election flyer. You forgo the specifics of your personal contribution and simply infer through association.

But why would you make such a choice? At least as interesting,is, why would you be permitted the opportunity to be less than specific when others have the chance to ask a question?

Doesnt each member of that triad which is made up of electorate, candidate, and media coverage want to bring into the light of day, those details of the kind that matter when constituency step into a polling booth ?