Selling beer and wine in Morton—trusting the citizens of Morton
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on August 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
.gif)
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do plan to return to them soon.
Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
Even though I was at the Village Board meeting on August 18, 2008 when the Board of Trustees approved amendments to the liquor ordinance by a 4-2 vote, I watched the telecast of the meeting Wednesday morning to reaffirm my impressions of the meeting. Each of the four Trustees who voted to approve the amendments claimed that the members of the community supported the proposed amendments.
Trustee Darrell Vierling claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments. He also stated that if the amendments passed, in a future vote, he would not support the addition of hard liquor. (This seems to contradict his statement that he is supporting the amendments because of overwhelming public support for them. The beer and wine amendments are acceptable because of public support for them. However, if public support for hard liquor is also present at a future date, he would not support the addition of hard liquor.)
Trustee Tony Huette claimed that support was 3-1 in favor of the proposed amendments by e-mail, claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments through phone calls, and that when talking to the community a majority favored the proposed amendments though no ratio was given.
Trustee Stephen Newhouse claimed that support was 2-1 in favor of the proposed amendments through his personal contacts not breaking the support down beyond that. He was the only Trustee who seemed to suggest that he would support the amendments even if his perceived understanding of support was different than the actual support level—i.e. even if the majority of the community was opposed to the amendments, he would still vote for the amendments. (This is my interpretation of what he said. He did not specifically state “I would vote for the amendments even if not supported by the community.”)
Trustee Betsy Yarcho claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments.
Trustee Ginger Hermann claimed that support was 10-1 in opposition to the proposed amendments.
Trustee Jeff Kaufman did not give specific information on contacts he had before the vote.
All four of the Trustees who voted in favor of the amendments claimed they did so because of strong public support of the amendments. And yet, just minutes before, three of the four (Betsy Yarcho was the exception) VOTED NOT to hold a nonbinding referendum to determine the will of the community.
The two Trustees who voted against the amendments, however, did vote to hold an advisory referendum before the amendment vote was taken and before it was specifically discussed. One of the public speakers on the 18th asked for a referendum. At the August 4th meeting, if I remember correctly, two of the public speakers called for a referendum.
The only conclusion I can draw is that at least three of the Trustees don’t seem to TRUST the citizens. If the four Trustees are correct that a vast majority of the community supports the amendments, they should welcome a public vote to substantiate their position and to prove that the public does, indeed, support the amendments. The ONLY way I know to substantiate that claim is to ALLOW the VOTERS to vote on the issue.
No public opinion poll has ever voted. The Trustees never gave any specific information on the total number of citizens who were involved in their so called overwhelming support for the amendments. The only way in a democracy to specifically know the will of the people is by a VOTE of the people. The three Trustees along with the mayor seem to be afraid of the actual RESULT of a vote of the people.
Why is that?
“He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.” [said by JESUS] Luke 11: 23 (NIV)
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.” I Corinthians 3: 19a (NIV)
“For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” II Timothy 1: 7 (NIV)
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
My book—The Black Sword: The Secret U.S. Army in Vietnam—is available by mail (not yet in book stores). See post on August 31, 2008 entitled The Black Sword.
I suggest you check out the following website if you are a policy holder of Farmers Insurance Group or thinking about having them insure you in any capacity: www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
https://affiliates.visionforum.com/idevaffiliate.php?id=367
The above link is for a company—Vision Forum—that provides unique products for the family. I am an affiliate for the company and receive a small commission whenever someone uses this link and then makes an unreturned purchase while using the link. Check it out. I think you might like the products offered. I do. See my more complete explanation on my post of February 1, 2008 entitled “Affiliate program with Vision Forum.”
Based upon past historical data: 3,287+ UNBORN BABY MURDERS have occurred in the last 24 hours in the United States. See my post “BABY HOLOCAUST” posted January 22, 2008.
I’ve been involved in a problem one of my clients has with Farmers Insurance Group. My previous posts in relation to this problem were:
September 10, 2007 post: “Beware of Farmers Insurance Group”
September 11, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group’s response”
September 18, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company received the requested list”
September 19, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Company’s response to the list”
October 16, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and my request for information”
November 27, 2007 post: “Farmers Insurance Group does not respond to my request”
January 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group latest stall”
January 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group is sent a response”
January 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group pays some money”
January 19, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group continues to be obstinate”
January 26, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group receives another request”
February 11, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group shows how low they will go?”
February 12, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group: If I were going to respond to the final letter”
February 13, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and associated companies”
February 14, 2008 post: “Farmers Insurance Group and how others rate the company”
I will not be continuing my Creationism posts today. I do plan to return to them soon.
Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. I am sorry for the change in plans. Plans, in reality, often are altered for one reason or another. “The best laid plans … often go astray.” Thank you for your understanding and patience.
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
www.farmersinsurancegroupsucks.com
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
Even though I was at the Village Board meeting on August 18, 2008 when the Board of Trustees approved amendments to the liquor ordinance by a 4-2 vote, I watched the telecast of the meeting Wednesday morning to reaffirm my impressions of the meeting. Each of the four Trustees who voted to approve the amendments claimed that the members of the community supported the proposed amendments.
Trustee Darrell Vierling claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments. He also stated that if the amendments passed, in a future vote, he would not support the addition of hard liquor. (This seems to contradict his statement that he is supporting the amendments because of overwhelming public support for them. The beer and wine amendments are acceptable because of public support for them. However, if public support for hard liquor is also present at a future date, he would not support the addition of hard liquor.)
Trustee Tony Huette claimed that support was 3-1 in favor of the proposed amendments by e-mail, claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments through phone calls, and that when talking to the community a majority favored the proposed amendments though no ratio was given.
Trustee Stephen Newhouse claimed that support was 2-1 in favor of the proposed amendments through his personal contacts not breaking the support down beyond that. He was the only Trustee who seemed to suggest that he would support the amendments even if his perceived understanding of support was different than the actual support level—i.e. even if the majority of the community was opposed to the amendments, he would still vote for the amendments. (This is my interpretation of what he said. He did not specifically state “I would vote for the amendments even if not supported by the community.”)
Trustee Betsy Yarcho claimed that support was 5-1 in favor of the proposed amendments.
Trustee Ginger Hermann claimed that support was 10-1 in opposition to the proposed amendments.
Trustee Jeff Kaufman did not give specific information on contacts he had before the vote.
All four of the Trustees who voted in favor of the amendments claimed they did so because of strong public support of the amendments. And yet, just minutes before, three of the four (Betsy Yarcho was the exception) VOTED NOT to hold a nonbinding referendum to determine the will of the community.
The two Trustees who voted against the amendments, however, did vote to hold an advisory referendum before the amendment vote was taken and before it was specifically discussed. One of the public speakers on the 18th asked for a referendum. At the August 4th meeting, if I remember correctly, two of the public speakers called for a referendum.
The only conclusion I can draw is that at least three of the Trustees don’t seem to TRUST the citizens. If the four Trustees are correct that a vast majority of the community supports the amendments, they should welcome a public vote to substantiate their position and to prove that the public does, indeed, support the amendments. The ONLY way I know to substantiate that claim is to ALLOW the VOTERS to vote on the issue.
No public opinion poll has ever voted. The Trustees never gave any specific information on the total number of citizens who were involved in their so called overwhelming support for the amendments. The only way in a democracy to specifically know the will of the people is by a VOTE of the people. The three Trustees along with the mayor seem to be afraid of the actual RESULT of a vote of the people.
Why is that?
“He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.” [said by JESUS] Luke 11: 23 (NIV)
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.” I Corinthians 3: 19a (NIV)
“For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.” II Timothy 1: 7 (NIV)
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Galatians 6: 7-8 (NIV)
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:31 AM
2 Comments:
Why should there be a vote on this particular issue as opposed to any other. Elected officials face issues like this all of the time where the public opinion on the issues might not be well known or clear and the elected officials have to make a decisions based on what they thing is right and what best represents the interest and views of there electorate in many cases this applies to far more important issues than grocery stores being able to sell wine and beer. On the other hand if you think that issues like this should be directly voted on then perhaps we should move to direct democracy instead of representative republic.
On what basis do you oppose the sale of beer and wine in the grocery stores? They already sell it at the 3 liquor stores in town. Do you actually think that more people are going to start drinking just because it is in the grocery stores. That is not going to happen. If people have a problem they will find a place to buy it! They sell cigarettes there already do you think that is responsible for some people being addicted to nicotine? Use some common sense would you.
Post a Comment
<< Home