The EGGHEADS of E Democracy speak out on Fair Housing Lawsuits
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Friday, December 26, 2008
Custom Search
Friday, December 26, 2008
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- Little Canada gets tough on apartments
- Minnesota greed: From white collars to prison stripes
- Merry Christmas to ALL from A Democracy Town Hall
- Fire engulfs a 64-unit building in Burnsville, for...
- This could be our next senator.
- Democrat Mascot Escapes Zoo
- Plaintiffs lose summary judgement in Saint Paul Fa...
- Automakers bail out
- Aurelia Tessmer Relator -vs- The City of Saint Paul
- Convicted St. Paul killer is suspect in another ki...
154 Comments:
STOLEN from the bowels of a liberal cesspool "Saint Paul Issues and Forums".
From: Jay Wilkinson Date: Dec 24 03:21 UTC Short link
Judge Ericksen tossed this suit out on summary judgment after having to sort
through 4 boxes of documents presented by the landlords in support of their
double-barrel shotgun approach to litigation. She ruled against them on all
counts.
"Much of Plaintiffs’ evidence does not support a conclusion of racial animus
toward African-Americans, and none of the evidence shows a specific link
between the alleged racial animus and any challenged decision sufficient to
support a finding by a reasonable finder of fact that an illegitimate criterion
actually motivated a challenged decision."
Its 53 pages long and if you don't want to read the whole thing, the last page
or so of the opinion is amusing:
“Without some guidance, we will not mine a summary judgment record searching
for nuggets of factual disputes to gild a party’s arguments”); Nw. Nat’l Ins.
Co. v. Baltes, 15 F.3d 660, 662-63 (7th Cir. 1994) (“District judges are not
archaeologists.”); United States v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955, 956 (7th Cir. 1991)
(per curiam) (“Judges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in
briefs.”); Nicholas Acoustics & Specialty Co. v. H & M Constr. Co., 695 F.2d
839, 846-47 (5th Cir. 1983) (“Judges are not ferrets!”).
and then:
"The multitudinous documents filed by Plaintiffs increased the burdensomeness
of the Court’s task in deciding these motions, for Plaintiffs’ failure to
winnow out the relevant documents meant that the burden of doing so fell to the
Court. In the immortal words of [perhaps] Mark Twain, “I’m sorry this letter is
so long, but I did not have time to make
it shorter.” However, the Court has carefully considered the documents
submitted and the arguments made by the parties in making its decision, and
determines that summary judgment is warranted."
I think she's been saving those lines.....Her footnotes indicate that it may
not have been Twain's quote, Andy.....
The following file was added to this topic:
Steinhauser_housing.pdf (application/pdf, 146KB)
From: Jay Wilkinson Date: Dec 24 03:24 UTC Short link
Oh, yeah, at least one forum poster is quoted in the opinion.
From: Chuck Repke Date: Dec 24 04:58 UTC Short link
This was always the most insane case I had ever seen directed against the
City of Saint Paul. This truly was a group of property rights advocates,
joined by a group of angry landlords with multiple code violations willing to
waste a lot of money to make sure the City wasted more defending itself.
The first part of the claims was that the City was involved in a
conspiracy/racketeering (RICO) case designed to hinder private landlords to the
advantage of Saint Paul PHA. The assumption here being that somehow the City
thought
it would be profitable if all private landlords went out of business so that
the not for profit PHA had longer waiting lists. This would be a smart
thing how? We were never made to understand. Why these landlords were
signaled
out was again a mystery never answered by the plaintiffs.
The other part of the case was the claim of violation of the Federal Fair
Housing acts, that somehow the City's inspections were designed to discriminate
against communities of colors. Their proof was that since the majority of
tenants in their buildings with code violations were minorities therefore the
City must be out to get them because they had minority tenants. The code
violations were just incidental or made up to get their tenants. Why their
minority tenants...? Again one of those great mysteries.
All of this was pulled together into one neat case when after getting over
2.5 million emails from City officials to review it was determined by the
plaintiffs attorneys that the emails that the City did not produce must be all
of
the evidence proving that there was actually this conspiracy.
You can't make these things up.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Jay Wilkinson you neglected to tell the citizens this isn't over. It will be appealled to the 8th circuit and then from there if need be to the Supreme court.
By the way Jay is your home up to snuff?
On another note.
Jeeesh, no one over at SPIF posted anything about Christmas. Maybe it is because most of them do not believe in God. Their religion is the Democrat Party.
Bob, you won't get Jay to post here. Chuck & Eric excluded, the men of E Dem wear pink under wear! Gloria Bogen, Repke's ole lady has more courage than this lot.
PANSIES!!!!!
This is typical of judges schooled and learned in the ways of fixing cases for the government.
Typically, you will see a judge like this adopt verbatim, the governments proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Judge Johnson of Ramsey District Court gets an ass award for this, for granting summary judgement on behalf of the county and a few of their employees charged with discrimination and the sheriffs office accused of corrupting service of process in violation of statutes.
What Johnson did is to pretend in court to be interested in both sides arguments and in the end, asked both sides to submit proposed findings of fact conclusions of law and then he takes it under advisement.
Then, he rules on the motion in favor of the county and the order for summary judgment consists of the EXACT proposed findings of fact and conlusions of law as drafted by the county defendants.
Johnson signs it without any case analogy from either his law clerk or himself.
Something you folks might find disturbing, is that in one of my cases involved were attorneys from two different countys and one private attorney representing the countys as defendants, right after the summary judgement motion hearing, these attorneys and Judge Johnson were caught chit chatting like it was some social occasion on at a high society meeting.
It is amusing Bob, and that the cases cited prove that these judges are lazy mother fuckers who will simply use these cases to justify their inability to understand what evidence is and so they reject you and the evidence and your left with an appeal.
Jeff Matiatos
Jeeesh, no one over at SPIF posted anything about Christmas. Maybe it is because most of them do not believe in God. Their religion is the Democrat Party.
Wow. What an asshole-like thing to say. Are you demonstrating how you think Christians should act?
Two things:
1. Electronic Democracy has not been heavy on the postings at all lately.
2. I'm on a couple of other lists and one networking group with many of the same names, some of us did wish each other a Merry Christmas.
Many people who believe in G_d do not celebrate the Christmas observation. People of the Jewish faith for instance.
If you want to be an Intolerant, then it would be technically 'Jesus' not G_d that determines whether you celebrate Christmas or not.
Eric
Love it "bowels of www.e-democracy.org with their 50 thous grand from Blandin, does not have the "Blood and Guts" of great journalism. to present both sides
RICO suits are educational,Constitutional,forensic documents for the Jury to decide.
From FreedomLawSchool
Posted by: "petes farms" petesfarms@yahoo.com petesfarms
Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:30 am (PST)
Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is
"without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828) Elliot v. Piersol
“Second, a judge is not immune for actions, though judicial in nature, taken in the complete absence of all jurisdiction.[29] Mireles v. Waco 502 US 9, 116 L Ed 2d 9, 14, 112 S Ct 286 (US 1991)
Eric, thank you for the usual asinine comments.
FACT is, there is a great number of atheist and communist members of E Democracy Saint Paul Issues and Forums. I am not intolerable of them, I want folks to know what kind of birds flock together in that group.
Most on that list do not believe in GOD Eric so how could they possibly believe in Jesus.
ERIC, the Jewish people are celebrating GOD.
Happy Hanukkah!
With Gods grace
we will see these fair housing lawsuits in federal court before a jury.
The essence of this case is-
Innocent women and children have been condemned to the streets by an unjust crime strategy.
I apologize to my Democrat friends who read and post here and are of the christian faith. I was merely expressing my disdain for SPIF.
FACT is, there is a great number of atheist and communist members of E Democracy Saint Paul Issues and Forums.
WRONG!
Fact is:
You were made to feel inadequate by some over there so you left and started your own blog and want to prove to the world you measure up or, you're better than 'them'. Its an unhealthy obsession of yours.
Hence your comment:
I was merely expressing my disdain for SPIF.
Exactly. So, there is no 'FACT is'. Unless, you can list the members of E-Democracy and then check mark who is a communist and who is an Atheist (though they celebrate Christmas FYI- that's how little the holiday has to do with religion).
Eric
Jeeesh, no one over at SPIF posted anything about Christmas. Maybe it is because most of them do not believe in God.
Bob, that sentence says if you don't celebrate Christmas, you must not believe in G_d. That's where I pointed you're wrong and used the Jewish Faith as an example. They believe in G_d but, do believe Christ was the son of G_d and therefore there is no reason to celebrate Christmas.
Hanukkah is not a celebration of G_d but, an observation commemorating the re-dedication of the Temple in Jerusalem or the re-taking of the city from opposing forces a couple of hundred years before Christ was born.
Eric
G_d
whats with this ^ Eric?
Also thank you for the history lesson.
"WE ARE ON A TRUTH SEEKING MISSION"
That is more than I can say for SPIF. SPIF is a good place to talk about wildlife.
Back to the real topic.
I want to see more depo's Bob.
Mike I am going to give you your wish. And dedicate the post to all the Eggheads of SPIF.
Eric said;
WRONG!
Fact is:
You were made to feel inadequate by some over there so you left and started your own blog and want to prove to the world you measure up or, you're better than 'them'.
my response;
Eric, I am a better person than most of the participants who are regulars and in control at Saint Paul Issues and Forums. I know this for a fact. So do many others here.
You are in the minority of opinion here Eric and I have done all I can to keep you around. SPIF doesn't have a history of protecting unpopular view points and A Democracy does.
Eric, point to one average JOE who post at SPIF. You can't! They claim to desire diversity at SPIF Eric. How would a citizen with bad spelling and grammar get along over there at SPIF Eric if they had a difference of opinion? They would be treated like shit by a bunch of in mature eggheads ERIC.
No they didn't make me feel inadequate, and you know it. Because you are one of those morons that participated in this kind of childish behavior at SPIF. When the "CLIC" over at SPIF doesn't like something someone might have to say against their precious city hall, they attack you with everything they got. When it happened to me I thought wow these people look foolish, and so did others. No Eric I have DISDAIN for them and you. I wouldn't put an innocent woman and child on the streets. The likes of you and them would!
Eric said;
Its an unhealthy obsession of yours.
Hence your comment:
I was merely expressing my disdain for SPIF
my response;
There is NOTHING unhealthy about exposing Saint Paul Issues and Forums for what they were past and present.
I know you don't like it Eric, tough shit. The bureaucracy in this city stinks and it is due to a one party system for to many years entrenching themselves in every aspect of city government and covering each others ass. SPIF is just another branch of this bureaucracy.
There has never been much opposition to this party until NOW. Eric fears alternative opinions and this is what we have here at A Democracy.
Eric, Bob didn't start a post about SPIF out of the blue.. Jay W. seem to be asking for it.
The eggheads set out to create the perfect socialist life, but didn't count on a few things. Their god is God sort of spelled sideways
E-G-O.
They are takers. They haven't built the city, and want to appropriate it for themselves and don't care how they do it.
Eric you have your nerve to bitch about this blog and Bob.
Bob should have titled the blog
"The Chuck and Eric Show"
In Spite of the terrible things Chuck and Eric say to me I have come to respect aspects of their personalities.
However, I think they are dirty rotten scoundrels because I believe they know this city is condemning innocent women and children to the streets to combat crime and they defend this behavior with lies and misinformation. So the city is good at covering their ass when it comes to violating civil rights of the citizens deemed less than desirable, IT DOESN"T MAKE IT RIGHT!
We have a lot of dirty rotten scoundrels who have convinced themselves they are doing the right thing.
Forms are open to the Public at www.e-democracy.org the RICO post was started by Chuck Repke
Profile's at e-Dem are easy to find
Repke is the "relator" http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-issues/messages/topic/6yHam8jhNrKpAmM6Oh8Bt7#post-6yHam8jhNrKpAmM6Oh8Bt7
Its Great that www.e-democracy.org has published the URL for any legal beagles to pick apart.
Thanks Chuck
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-issues/files/f/282-2008-12-24T032142Z/Steinhauser_housing.pdf
53 pages cannot be changed,altered,is before the US Justice Dept. QuiTam usually filed under SEAL Grand Jurys here we come
Sample of Criminal Indictment filed under SEAL,
Why do you EggHeads think Judge Erickson stated "without prejudice" this Judge may be guilty of conspiracy when and if the RICO lawsuits go to Jury Trial
as far as I know RICO was not filed Under SEAL
In Spite of the terrible things Chuck and Eric say to me I have come to respect aspects of their personalities.
Bob,
Do Chuck and I personally insult your appearance, family, education or any of your personal choices?
No. However, we absorb those very blows daily.
We go after the argument that this blogs tries to push forward that the city is involved in a conspiracy. I say its not. That is not saying that you can't find some corrupt individuals among the thousands of emplyees but, they are not in cohesion to have a Racketeering scheme going on.
Chuck brings facts to the argument. I take the words of others posting here and dissect them.
Now, the truth is, without Chuck and I, this would be a boring blog with everyone in agreement patting each other on the back and stroking your own egos. You're welcome.
As far as G_d goes, its an Old Christian and Freemason thing.
Eric
The lawsuits look pretty clear. All the landlords needed to do was to make a simple request for documents using simple words.
The problems was the city and judge didn't cooperate, making many words necessary. Then the judge blamed it all on the landlords.
I come for the fights. :)
I know why we haven't heard from the Scorekeeper he is a landlord.
The score is.
0 & 1 in favor of Chuck, Eric and the City.
Can't we all just get along!
The local Federal Court consitently sides with the citys and the Federal Appeals COurt consistently overturns them and orders the cases to trial. That's when the city usually pulls out the taxpayers checkbook to be able to continue the cover up and ensure they can keep thier corrupt ways.
G_d defined
Click above
The lawsuits look pretty clear. All the landlords needed to do was to make a simple request for documents using simple words.
The problems was the city and judge didn't cooperate, making many words necessary. Then the judge blamed it all on the landlords.
This is why some can't follow the rules.
The burden in any courtroom in America is on the Plaintiff. They are the ones who brought the case. They are the ones making the accusation. They are the ones who must produce the proof. If they do not meet the burden of proof then the case is dismissed. Its not the job of the Judge to make the case for the Plaintiff.
If you (and obviously only you), really think it was a pretty clear open and shut, then look at your attorney. Your Attorney should have been clear that the proof is not there.
If the Plaintiff's counsel couldn't make a simple Freedom of Information Act request then you have real problems. Seeing that over Two and Half million emails were turned over, I'd suggest it wasn't the document request where you had your problems.
It was the over-reaching case itself.
Eric
With this "G_d" Eric is disrespecting Christians.
The local Federal Court consitently sides with the citys and the Federal Appeals COurt consistently overturns them and orders the cases to trial.
Bull-fricken-Crap.
The Appellate Court almost always uphold the lower courts ruling on the federal level.
Can you show three cases within the last ten years that back the claim?
One of the biggest mistakes in this whole thing was going to federal system. On behalf of the Plaintiffs. The state system is more apt to fluctuations than the federal.
The federal system if rather tight as its the final say in the judicial process.
I'll move to Des Moines and kiss Bill Dahn on the mouth if this ruling is over turned.
Its over.
Eric
Click above to view a member of Saint Paul Issues and Forums home.
Hot Dago Sandwiches. Remember that post about Dijedios a couple of years back Eric?
You didn't think "Hymie" was a Jewish epithet.
8:14, don't forget about the communist that showed up with commie banner signs in tow to the Mayors interactive meeting with Saint paul issues and Forums.
Afer they staged their rally seeking support they commented at spif.
Do we have to discuss religion?
Eric or Chuck, what about spoliation of evidence. The high court has ruled on several cases concerning spoliation. Wouldn't they have to rule against themselves to throw this case out?
From the judgement;
"The multitudinous documents filed by Plaintiffs increased the burdensomeness
of the Court’s task in deciding these motions, for Plaintiffs’ failure to
winnow out the relevant documents meant that the burden of doing so fell to the
Court. In the immortal words of [perhaps] Mark Twain, “I’m sorry this letter is
so long, but I did not have time to make
it shorter.” However, the Court has carefully considered the documents
submitted and the arguments made by the parties in making its decision, and
determines that summary judgment is warranted."
NOW THE FACTS;
This judge, rambled on for 45 mins of a one hour hearing. She gave the plaintiffs attorneys only 15 minutes to point to the nuggets as she suggested they needed to prove their case.
Possibly she had been eating the truffles and didn't have time to hear about the nuggets.
The nuggets are in the boxes and we will eventually get to spend this gold right here in the light of public scrutiny.
I was at the court hearing and the judge was obviously bought and paid for ahead of time. Every single time the landlords attorney started making a point, the judge cut them off and started asking questions that took the focus into a completely different area. Perhaps had the judge let the attorney put on a case she would have found her truffles or whatever the hell they are.
9:37
Then you're screwed. If a Federal Judge, who doesn't have to run for election ever, is on the take, then you've got nowhere to go.
Want to try real hard and explain WHO bought and paid for this judge? I know you won't. You can say anything on here without proof, accountability or responsibility. Ever.
The real world operates different.
------------
Bob,
You all can re-try your case if you want on here but, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. You had no case, because you had no evidence. Your lawyers made a gallant try but, they didn't have much to work with.
The people won here. The people's interest were represented by the City and we won.
Eric
Ralph,
You have a memory like the RICO men had evidence.
I was the one pointing it out and other epithets you and others felt were OK because you've always said them.
Eric
The people won Eric?
Less than 12% of the population of the city vote and decided it was a good idea to violate citizens deemed less than desirable. And of this 12% how many of them actually know what is going on with housing and the crime strategy associated with it?
I will try very hard in the next elections to let the 88% who don't pay attention to city politics know what is going on. I am saving a war chest to unseat Coleman in the next mayoral race. Then I will be taking donations to unseat the city council members who do not change their ways.
And to back Ralph up here Eric. I distinctly remember you didn't agree with any of us on the racial epithet "Hymie". You were siding with the store keeper downtown to have his right to name his store with the racial slur "Hymies".
I will dig through the files to find the topic. Does anyone remember the title?
Eric we haven't lost. The 8th circuit has to rule on this, then it may go to the supreme court.
Dawkins, Kelly, and the rest of you, past and present, picked a fight with the wrong people. Vendication will come in the form of a civil resolution or political fall out. Either way we win!
Two things....
First this case... Bob, Bob, Bob, everything that has ever suggested as being evidence of either a RICO conspiracy or of a Fair Housing issue depends on you believing the motivations attributed by the plaintiffs on the City. As you all like to say the "spin." Everything that has been suggested as being evidence of guilt can be explained just as easily as being supportive of the City.
What this case never had was anyone admitting to either being in a conspiracy or being asked to participate in one. But never the less there were hundreds of thousands of people involved in this conspiracy according to the plaintiffs. There was also no benefit to anyone from this RICO case, somebody has to get something for it to be RICO! And, again, as to Fair Housing you have to believe that that City of Saint Paul has an inspections department that wants to demo all of the buildings they inspect rather than to repair them... despite them giving year after year of extentions on demo orders.
There is no error in facts to appeal Bob... your side presented no evidence.
Second, as to my religion or lack there of... I always find it facinating that I am equally attacked by the left and the right for sharing the same religious beliefs as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.
Enjoy your holiday of love for you fellow man...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
None ya all speak to kindly of my friends in the city of Saint Paul.
The city sure enough showed us kindred hospitality. It is who ya know boys, always has been that way. Sara Jane Olson caught on real fast.
Ma Barker is right! I guess it is who you know in this city.
Hey Eric was Sara Jane a friend of yours? How bout you Chuck? How many of you SPIFers were friends with the politically active police car bomber, murderer?
WOW! These elections can get real nasty!
8:54 said...Eric or Chuck, what about spoliation of evidence. The high court has ruled on several cases concerning spoliation. Wouldn't they have to rule against themselves to throw this case out?
A.. I assume you are talking about the missing emails. When the judge gave summary judgement against the plaintiffs on this she was clear that you would have to have at least one email that was evidence of a conspiracy or one piece of paper or some testimony of some first hand witness of the conspiracy in order for her to rule that the plaintiffs were disadvantaged by the missing emails.
The plaintiffs case was we have no evidence so whatever we don't have must prove our case. No court is going to support that. In order for the plaintiffs to say that anything missing harms them they have to have something and then whatever we are missing would have made our case stronger.
She begs them for evidence, they give her rumor, allegations and assumptions.
...and Bob I never met Sara, I think she hung out with those forgiving Christians...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Bob said: "Less than 12% of the population of the city vote and decided it was a good idea to violate citizens deemed less than desirable. And of this 12% how many of them actually know what is going on with housing and the crime strategy associated with it?"
Bob, you've quoted this 12% figure several times. Where did you get this? This just seems to be one of those "facts", can you give us any citations of this?
I'll save you some time. Check out this link from Ramsey County's website. The only 12% turnout I found was the 2003 primary...
http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/NR/rdonlyres/B578D6E2-7800-40D9-9A5A-65A45266318B/13715/citycountyvoterstats19922008B.pdf
I don't live in St. Paul, and I'm neither a landlord nor a renter, so I don't have any skin in this game. but, as my moniker indicates, I'm a stickler for details like spelling. In this case, I'm calling you out for cherrypicking facts...
Sara Jane Olson was good friends with Andy Dawkins. You should have thrown that bitchs family out on the street Andy. They were living with a criminal.
Thank you for the link 11:31
The city's population at the 2000 census was 287151
In 2007 there was 151,473 registered voters in the general elections.
30,620 citizens voted. Do the math. My numbers aren't off by far. I remember reading something in the Pioneer Press concerning voters in Saint Paul. I believe this is were I got my figures.
You have to admit we could do a better job of engaging citizens.
Don't know Sara Jane. When I moved to St Paul, Sara Jane was already in jail.
What difference does it make?
I'm looking for what I wrote about Hymie's. Probably something like if its his name- its his name.
However, to suggest that growing up in Chicago and not knowing Hymie can be a racial slur, you'd have to think I slept through the 84 presidential campaign when Jesse Jackson apologized for calling New York Hymie-town. I didn't.
Eric
You're going to run a campaign?
(BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!)
Unless there was a mass case of voter suppression, its doesn't matter how many people voted, just that all who wanted to, had the opportunity to vote. The election is still legitimate and the results matter.
I just checked the turnout numbers in Saint Paul from last month. About 142,000 people voted for President. The Democrats took 80% of the vote.
So, even with a higher turnout, the results are the same. The people spoke are being represented.
Spend your money on a city referendum. See how many voters want less code enforcement. That will tell you the truth. If that's what you're really seeking.
Eric
and Bob I never met Sara, I think she hung out with those forgiving Christians...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Chuck, Dawkins had some very shady friends like Sara Jane Olson and it has been proven he was a slumlord. I have the pictures to prove it. This being said, Dawkins didn't find any difficulty in kicking around citizens he deemed less than desirable. He looked down on others when his on shorts were full of shit.
This PUNK Dawkins went after my friends Rita Rodriguez and Gary Tanzer who were guilty of having a messy yard. It didn't mean a damn thing to Dawkins Rita was very ill and the fact he was threatening her to take away her home may weaken an already stressed immune system. Well it did bring on an early demise for Rita. My friend Gary was heart broken over losing Rita and the thought of losing his home and he shot himself.
Well Barb Benson got her wish. Thunes aide who lived next door to Rita & Gary.
Dawkins is a low life piece of shit and Kelly isn't any better.
Spend your money on a city referendum. See how many voters want less code enforcement. That will tell you the truth. If that's what you're really seeking.
Eric
my response;
This isn't about less code enforcement Eric and you know it. It is about fair and honest government and we are not getting that and I do not believe the majority of citizens even know what is going on.
Who doesn't run on that, what issues will your candidate bring to the table?
Who are you going to fund?
What is your candidate going to do the manage this city?
What is the case against the current mayor?
Aside from answering those questions- in detail, you'll have to figure out how to win enough votes from the DFL with an Independent candidate. Can you cut into 40% of the DFL vote by kicking the DFL around? No.
If your candidate is as put together as the RICO case- save your money.
If Chris Coleman decides to run again, he will be re-elected. Through these tough economic times across the nation for big cities, Chris Coleman has been recognized as one of the best big city Mayors we have.
What are you bringing to the table?
Eric
As a dfl strategist you would like to know your adversaries objectives wouldn't you Eric.
I understand we have a lot of work to do. Who said we couldn't support a democrat? A real one, not one of those phony Independence or Republicans who run as a democrat just to get elected. Maybe we will find a good Libertarian candidate to support. Possibly a Independent. A Republican. Maybe we won't support anyone and we will just raise hell.
As close as the elections are in this city Eric, a fly could sneeze and effect the outcome. If I pass out 30 - 40,000 Watchdog News papers it would most diffenently have an effect on any election.
We are going to have a good time Eric!
Who's this Chuck and Eric characters? As long as I have been reading here there has been plenty of evidence and facts. Just because a local judge can't or does not want to make a decision in a hgihly political case doesn't mean the plaintiffs are not right or that they had no evidence. As far as the email ordeal, what I remember was that the city destroyed years worth of email and only turned over email for later years. There were other documents they destroyed also. The appeals court has already ruled that just the act of destroying them makes a predjudice against the plaintiffs. I think this case is far from over boys.
Techinally www.e-democracy.org could lost their Tax Exempt Status by pdf a Court File without Permission of the Author who is Judge Erickson......
The City ha wilfully failed to address Criminal RICO Complaints.
mandating Grand Jury or US Attorney Intervention .
Come on Repke you surely know what Title 26 501c3 is
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-issues/messages/topic/5yrzK9UH5OCRkwl3FuI6sg
Numerous Groups fighting Judges, former AG Candidate Dale Nathan, is one hope he runs again 2010
http://www.mncourtreform.org/cases.html
Ethics ofCurrent Canvass Board member Kathleen Gearin, who also sits on the State Committment Panel, SCAP
E-Democracy.org likned to the Church of Scientology Title 26 501c3 Video Judge Erickson wilfully failed to address the Citys Criminal Complaints.of Mail,Wire Fraud Title 42s3631, 6th Amend Commerce
We all have to obey the Law
http://xenutv.wordpress.com/2008/12/13/how-to-file-an-irs-501c3-complaint/
Carter is outta there for sure. Lying s o b said he was concerned about gentrification, Ya sure!
Melvin, any crack heads in your family? :)
Eric said;
You're going to run a campaign?
(BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!)
*Bob could probably run a campaign better than you Eric. And it wouldn't cost his canidate $7500 to lose. :-) Say didn't you get $7500 to lose a campaign for Montgomery?
Montgomery should have returned her phone calls to the property rights advocates. Then all those Watchdog News Papers with property rights issues wouldn't of been passed out to her and her neighbors.
RICo cases are jus beginning, Erickson aparantly heard only Civil Complaints, If the Criminal RICO was addressed, This Federal Judge is mandated to notify the US Attorney.
Its the beggining of the End for the City of St. Paul HANG TOUGH
http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/recentlyadded.asp
Typo Error
Interesting 8th Cir. Read
http://www.topix.net/us/federal-court-8th
Unbealivable the Info out there Thanks Bobby 2009 Hold Prime
Thaks Sharon.
Eric said show him 3 cases where the 8th circuit reversed a decesion. here is one recent.
link above
Sharon, stop spamming the board and explain what you're trying to say.
E-Democracy is a 501c3.
How is it in violation?
What does a Federal Judge has to do with it(since its the AG that has oversight)?
Bob,
It is over. Have you filed an appeal, yet? Has it been accepted? Let's start there. The Eight Circuit does not have to listen to anything.
A Fourth Amendment case is not exactly the same as RICO, the evidence was presented and the district court judge was not as direct in dismissal. Apples and oranges.
Why are you all talking about Council members? They're not up next year. Maybe you should learn how the system works again before you start claiming that its corrupt- like you're doing with the judicial system.
Eric
The plaintiffs have 30 days to file an appeal from the time the judgement was handed down.
Did they?
Are they in the process?
E-Democracy was an interesting experiment -15 years ago, when email forums were edgy stuff.
Today? Leaving aside the technology, it's fallen victim to the same thing that's affected all online forums since USENET. Online forums have two choices; turn into unregulated free for alls, or become overregulated gulags. E-D has pretty much taken option B - and for all their happy talk about being an intellectual free-for-all, it's pretty obvious that any opinion that isn't straight from the DFL or Green party is held to an absurd standard of enforcement.
Classic example; one of the "forum's" rules, (Rule #4) is "be civil". It's been used to toss pretty much every conservative/libertarian voice from the various forums over the years (including Bob and, on two occasions, me) because of "being uncivil", while standard-issue DFLers merrily post vastly worse with impunity (including you, Chuck!).
These forums have been a complete waste of time for most of the past decade - mindless echo chambers that actively squelch real debate.
Interesting that Eric would portray Bob's scenario like starting a blog is a step *down* from participating in an echo chamber. I lost whatever interest remained in E-D about the time that I started my blog - and I get more traffic by Tuesday than E-"democracy" gets all week. So does Bob, I'm fairly sure. Dumping E-D was a huge step up for both of us in terms of freedom, intellectual honesty AND exposure.
I don't know what organizations donate money to fund that potemkin echo chamber, but their boards should demand an explanation. It's a waste.
Just like the waste in time for anyone who goes there expecting anything but a DFL-friendly kaffee klatsch.
From the comments I've read, it appears as though the city will be targetting churches if they gain more strength.
Oh joy, Mitch is back.
So Mitch, you find it strange that in a city where 80% lean left of center that an online forum would be 80% to the left? Really?
Maybe because I'm a DFLer but, I don't see it as an echo chamber. I have certainly got into it with plenty of participants who weren't Bob Johnson, Mitch Berg, Tom Swift or Dennis. Lately I post here in two days more than I do in a month on SPIF.
Why is this blog a step down?
In my opinion, rather you like the politics or not, E-Democracy has expertise, research and facts in there discussion. Pulling something out of your ass will be called on.
In its heyday, the people who regularly participated on SPIF were some of our elected officials, a lot of commission members and activists. Usually when they got on a topic, there was a lot of substance to it. Yes it leans to the Left but, so does the city.
Look at it like someone like me would the Center for the American Experiment. I don't find it engaging, or anything but and echo chamber for conservative policies. However, the research is there and there is plenty of substance. Its just usually wrong.
On this blog, there is little substance, lots of entertainment, mass confusion and denial. Sort of like Rush Limbaugh on a bad day.
Eric
Well said Mitch.
Most the time it is a free fall here at A Dem. Over some very emotionally heated issues. A clash of extroverted personalities.
This blog is entertaining, educational, and we can't forget all the breaking news that comes out here first. All due to reader base participation.
Chuck and Eric are a big part of the success of this blog because most here do not agree with them on housing and crime issues. They represent themselves and the city very well and are familiar with how city government operates. I don't agree with most of what they say either, however, their input although not appreciated by some, is invaluable.
I have had many private discussions with folks who wanted me to ban Chuck and Eric from posting. No matter how much they piss me off I can not ban them. It wouldn't be right.
Bunch of Dick Tracy's at this blog.:-)You want somebody investigated throw the name out here and these wolves will be all over it if it peeks an interest.
SPIF has been a bore since they run us property rights advocates away. Our subject was to unruly for a civil discussion at a forum over burden with rules. Tim & Steve, I bet the stats for spif were at an all time high over the 14 E Jessamine issue.
It would of been very productive to of had the well educated folks of SPIF contributing to this controversial subject of housing & crime, I feel for those of you who have something to say and do not have the courage to step into this melting pot of opinion.
I remember those days at SPIF! While and Eric and Chuck want fact and substance, there was plenty of it when the Jessamine issue was current. The house was there for all to see and it was a good house. What more evidence and fact could there be? Just like today, the usual voices want to poo poo it and say it was nothing and attack anyone who thought the city was wrong.
Eric, there is plenty of well researched facts here. You just don't want new readers to believe it!
Eric,
I'll address a few non-sequiturs and strawmen before I move to...well, more of the same, I guess:
So Mitch, you find it strange that in a city where 80% lean left of center that an online forum would be 80% to the left? Really?
Read more carefully, Eric. I said that the forums' management has turned them into echo chambers. Any non-DFL voice is, through accident, design or underlying systemic bias, eventually squelched.
Maybe because I'm a DFLer but, I don't see it as an echo chamber.
You answered your own question, then.
I have certainly got into it with plenty of participants who weren't Bob Johnson, Mitch Berg, Tom Swift or Dennis.
Indeed, you have to get into it with people who aren't us. We've all been suspended; in most cases, we've found blogging much more rewarding.
Lately I post here in two days more than I do in a month on SPIF.
You keep making my points for me, Eric. You do know you're not getting paid for this, right?
Why is this blog a step down?
In my opinion, rather you like the politics or not, E-Democracy has expertise, research and facts in there discussion. Pulling something out of your ass will be called on.
Unless you're Andy Driscoll, or Grace Kelly, or Bill Kahn, or Andre Whine, or...
...who are you trying to kid, Eric? For starters, since all non-DFL opinion has been expunged from SPIF, there is no left-right balance at at all.
In its heyday, the people who regularly participated on SPIF were some of our elected officials, a lot of commission members and activists.
And that "heyday" was...when?
Three or four years ago?
SPIF is a joke.
Usually when they got on a topic, there was a lot of substance to it. Yes it leans to the Left but, so does the city.
Right. But again, that's not the point.
Any forum that boots Bob, Paul Friggin' Kuettel and yours truly for "civility", but allows Andy Driscoll, Andre Whine, Bill Kahn, Guy Western and Grace Kelly to post anything they want, without the faintest fear of repercussion, is absurd on its face.
Look at it like someone like me would the Center for the American Experiment. I don't find it engaging, or anything but and echo chamber for conservative policies.
BECAUSE THAT IS ITS MISSION. CAX is an unabashedly conservative think tank. It's not intended to engage DFL apparatchiks.
Read E-Democracy's various "mission statements". They're all full of high-sounding twaddle about dialogue across party lines.
It is, in every particular, utter bullshit.
However, the research is there and there is plenty of substance. Its just usually wrong.
Now you're sounding like most SPIF posts!
On this blog, there is little substance, lots of entertainment, mass confusion and denial. Sort of like Rush Limbaugh on a bad day.
Hey, did you see the Pew survey last summer on the occasion of Limbaugh's 20th anniversary?
Limbaugh's listeners scored better on news and current events awareness than NPR listeners, and vastly better-so than the public at large?
Like any big blog, things on Bob's comment section vary widely. But unlike SPIF, there is genuine freedom - not to mention thought and a reason to exist - here.
Look, Eric - I know part of your mission is to find excuses for all things DFL. But that's not *supposed* to be E-"Democracy"'s mission.
And I reciprocate your joy at my presence!
Anonymous said...
Did they?
Are they in the process?
10:52 AM
Yes the plaintiffs are working on an appeal.
12:51
You don't have to convince me. I'm nobody. You just have to convince a judge that...oh yeah. You didn't do that so, I guess that brings it back to trying to convince me.
Good Luck.
------------------------
Bob,
Bad comparison since you can only post twice in a 24 hour period on SPIF and as much as you want on here. Also, SPIF makes you sign your real name and stand by what you say, instead throwing cowardly insults from anonymous (although plenty of you left some real names on the Merry Christmas list)so people usually stick to the subject.
14 E Jessemine hardly generated the most discussion on SPIF. But, its yet another example of how you delude yourself. Before you respond or fight with me on this go and run a search of the archives and count.
By far the biggest generators of discussion on SPIF has been the Finney-Fletcher wars. Next would be the elections every other year. Kelley's endorsement of Bush generated a lot of discussion as well.
The difference mainly is that this blog has one focus, SPIF has several issues in discussion at once.
Eric
Eric,
When you cut through the bullshit, and look at the underlying facts, this blog has far more substance.
OK Mitch.
Look at it this way, I'm defending SPIF as much as I'm trying to keep your arguments against it honest.
Conservative Posters in the last couple of months that I recognize include:
Jamie Delton (who has his own conservative blog)
Bill Cullen (ADEM Participant
Neal Krasoff
John Krenik
Tom Memken
and
Dean Sheldon
That's not including the Highland Park Republicans (Pretty much the St Paul GOP)who post on specific issues.
I find that conservatives post on their 'pet' issues on SPIF. Folks like you who had an opinion across the board are not present anymore. I can say the same about the DFLers too, including myself. It explains the sporadic activity.
I do believe that Andy Driscoll and Guy Western were sanctioned. I think when I was suspended it was for something I said to Guy over the Police Federation- I don't remember.
Save the Limbaugh accolades. Dancing with the stars get three times the audience that Meet the Press got. Which is more important for our country and which is low-brow entertainment?
Welcome back Mitch.
Eric
Eric said;
14 E Jessemine hardly generated the most discussion on SPIF. But, its yet another example of how you delude yourself. Before you respond or fight with me on this go and run a search of the archives and count.
Eric,you are something else. Tim Erickson said it himself. Like you said Finney/Fletcher right behind that was 14 E. Jessamine and one other topic.
I can not research SPIF archives.
Bob said...
Chuck, Dawkins had some very shady friends like Sara Jane Olson and it has been proven he was a slumlord. I have the pictures to prove it. This being said, Dawkins didn't find any difficulty in kicking around citizens he deemed less than desirable. He looked down on others when his on shorts were full of shit.
-snip -
Andy was co-owner of a house converted to an office on University Avenue where people regularly dumped things in the backyard - it was in all the papers
And...
This PUNK Dawkins went after my friends Rita Rodriguez and Gary Tanzer who were guilty of having a messy yard.
Well Barb Benson got her wish. Thunes aide who lived next door to Rita & Gary.
- snip-
Bob, Bob, Bob... you guys sure are obsessed with Thune...HE WASN'T ON THE CITY COUNCIL WHEN RITA AND GARY WERE HAVING ISSUES!!!!!
Rita's case is a sad one, made even sadder by the slimey people that want to smear Barb Benson her neighbor with Rita's problems.
The facts are that Mayor Kelly, who was in the business of impressing George Bush ordered Dawkins to send inspectors along Sheppard Road, the route the president drives into Saint Paul from the airport.
The attorney for the law suit questioned the inspector that wrote Rita up and he said that he didn't believe Dawkins who had told him that and thought that the pressure was coming from Barb Benson (staff to councilmember Chris Coleman). The inspector offered no evidence, he just figured that Mayor Kelly wouldn't be worried about what Bush would see and knew that Barb lived in the area...
That's it. This guy doesn't believe Dawkins, who is telling him what the Mayor told him and figures its Barb and you have been going on about this for 4 years now Bob.
I know this, Barb didn't like Kelly, Barb had worked against his election, I can't believe that Mayor Kelly was putting the heat on for Barb.
But you just keep believing what you want to believe Bob.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Save the Limbaugh accolades. Dancing with the stars get three times the audience that Meet the Press got. Which is more important for our country and which is low-brow entertainment?
An entertaining diversion, but a strawman and a non-sequitur. Neither of them has the affect on politics that Limbaugh does.
Limbaugh is like a red flag in front of a bull; he provokes all sorts of unreasonable reactions; he brings out all sorts of unseemly bigotry, against him and his audience.
I'm not gonna convince you, of course - but please bear in mind, the accolades were not from me. They were from that noted conservative tool, Pew.
Oh yeah - yes, there are conservatives on SPIF, of course. Just very few that confront the majority that last any length of time.
I do believe that Andy Driscoll and Guy Western were sanctioned. I think when I was suspended it was for something I said to Guy over the Police Federation- I don't remember.
Yep, they've been "sanctioned"; they've gotten little token warnings, and then been allowed back with apparently no ongoing hassles.
When I got suspended last year (for not referring to *unnamed*, *generic* RNC protesters in a flattering enough light, amid a thread in which the actual delegates had been subject to scabrous defamation, I was told I could come back - provided my comments were "moderated" for a period of some months. Given Driscoll, Whine and Western's "contributions",it's clear none of them are even questioned, much less moderated. At any rate, Rick Mons will censor me when dogs fly - especially when my personal forum is vastly bigger and, yes, more useful than SPIF is.
Bob, I suspect, has a similar story.
There's really no comparison.
Chuck said;
Andy was co-owner of a house converted to an office on University Avenue where people regularly dumped things in the backyard - it was in all the papers
my response;
Chuck who do you think pushed this deal to the papers? Property rights advocates. We will read Dawkins deposition on this very subject soon. I have it. Then we will see the facts as I and others do.
Also Chuck, I posted information stating the facts on Kelly's ambition to clean up the presidential route in previous topics over the years. I posted the information you stated in much greater detail and we will see it again real soon word for word.
As for Dave, he sits on a city council that is STILL condemning women and children to the streets. Don't give me the shit he is a property rights advocate best hope.
Chuck, please ask Barb to come here and tell us she never complained about the mess at 785 Butternut and we will never mention her name here again. She has had plenty of opportunities to respond here. None of us are naive enough to believe she isn't aware of what has been being said here for over two and half years.
You are right though, Dave gets more attention here than he probably deserves. I will make a note of this and we will spread some of this attention around among all the council members and Mayor. :-)
Mitch, SPIF is what it is, everyone left and right knows it. The cat has been out of the bag for a long time.
If the city donates money to them it should be challenged in court.
The last straw for the eggheads of SPIF concerning me was a story I posted here at MY BLOG. I linked the story here over at SPIF.
The story was about a non profit exposing kids to asbestos. It was a respected organization of the dflers as far as Bob Spaulding was concerned.
The real deal is I was embarrassing these eggheads consistantly with the truth of members in their party. They were furious and they were sending private emails back and forth looking for anyway to get me off their forum. I came privy to an email between Bob Spaulding and Grace Kelly in which Bob Spaulding was attempting to get Grace to join him in an effort to suspend me from SPIF JUST for the information I was making public. Grace wasn't going along with it. Grace wanted to engage me in dialog.
Eric and I got into a heated disagreement over the DIVA's topic here at A Democracy. Eric took the opportunity to drag our private emails and fight from A Democracy over to SPIF. Without getting into great detail I was railroaded from spif and Eric played a role in it. You want to rehash this Eric? I'd be happy to show all what transpired.
What I think I'll do, is go back to answering direct questions about me from people with names.
Again you are wrong.
You took our exchange from SPIF and posted it to here.
http://ademocracy.blogspot.com/2006_11_19_archive.html
What I find funny is that looking through the archives of Bobs' posts, you can see how much he spends thinking about E-Democracy and SPIF, at SPIF, nobody mentions Bob or this blog.
Curious about the term 'egghead'. Its usually reserved for a very smart person who is out of there element (like a rave party). It says a lot about what you really think.
Let's see. You couldn't get anyone to buy your theories, you couldn't back it up so you started insulting people, you go to court for years and can't produce enough evidence to put a case together and you blame the judge, you couldn't even affect one city council race last time around, now you're talking about city wide change.
have at it.
Eric
Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia
In the slang of the United States, egghead was an anti-intellectual epithet, directed at people considered too out-of-touch with ordinary people and too lacking in realism, common sense, virility, etc. on account of their intellectual interests. The term egghead reached its peak currency during the 1950s, when vice-presidential candidate Richard Nixon used it against Democratic Presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson. It is now rarely used, having been replaced in U.S. politics by other anti-intellectual epithets and socially by terms such as nerd and geek.
Eric said;
Again you are wrong.
You took our exchange from SPIF and posted it to here.
http://ademocracy.blogspot.com/2006_11_19_archive.html
My response;
Eric, you are eluding the truth again! The argument we had started right here over DIVA'S Lounge and you know it. And so do all the old regulars here. our arguement went from the blog to private emails. You posted these private emails between us at SPIF in an attempt to embarrass me and have me removed from spif.
By the way you provided a link that has nothing to do with this subject we speak of
The Achilles Heel of the whole thing is that SPIF is totally dependent on Inspections interpreting for them what is going on. They are not getting the true story. With garbage coming in, their concepts are totally wack-o..
The story behind my censorship from SPIF. CLICK HERE
This is what I said months ago when I was censored from SPIF;
So I took Eric up on his offer and announced it at the Feedback Forum of SPIF since he took his non sense to SPIF. <---- SEE ERIC!
One more thing Eric. If Jay W. from spif hadn't opened his flap concerning the fair housing lawsuits we wouldn't be having this discussion about spif.
They better expect fire from this blog whenever they open their mouths on the subject of housing and crime.
Bob, (DISDAIN) is a good choice of words.
Can't we all just get along?
What I find funny is that looking through the archives of Bobs' posts, you can see how much he spends thinking about E-Democracy and SPIF, at SPIF, nobody mentions Bob or this blog.
So being mentioned on SPIF makes you matter? Nobody mentions Powerline or Hot Air there, either. They must be pretty lame, huh?
Nobody mentions SPIF anywhere, either, other than mocking references like this post.
This whole thread is nothing but 'penis envy'.
You got one side yelping about how insignificant the other is.
You've got the other side going on with their business.
I don't have to defend SPIF. The way a couple of you get so upset when YOU YOURSELVES mention it, is telling enough.
Eric
I know where Eric's HEAD is at on this one.
Penis envy? Eric, Eric, Eric, You know and I know SPIF is what I, Mitch, Swiftee and many others say it is. You just don't want folks reading here for the first time to believe it.
Maybe we should try an experiment.
Wouldn't it be nice to get some of the dirt we have here on the city out of the town hall and send it over to SPIF to sift through the details. Tidy up things here a bit.
I think Nancy Lazaryan is a member there. I wonder if she would do the honors? Just a thought. :-)
I am available to volunteer for the duty of informing SPIF of the info that has been provided to the the public here on A Democracy if needed, I believe I remain a member of SPIF and I am sure they would be happy to hear from me and may have even missed me over there too... ;)
Nancy O
Bob,
Don't ask me, just do what you want to do. I don't care but, don't pretend like you aren't bitter over SPIF.
Eric
Eric,
The difference between this blog and SPIF is that here, we are on a truth seeking mission.
For your edification, These are some of the quotes from Winston Churchill, who fought the Nazis of his day, but apply here as well:
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.
Penis Envy or PDF Envy, Eric and Chuck if you had clout these files must be posted at www.ci.stpaul.mn.us for Public Review
Mentors www.tulanelink.com Sharons Water Shut off to 8th Cir, You Betcha Water on, Damages here we come
http://sharon-mn-ecf.blogspot.com/2007/03/judges-greylord-libby-guilty.html
Hi Nancy. I miss you
Eric – I haven’t posted on SPIF in years – why would you claim I have?
I am surprised my previous post on this topic was never attacked by the protectors of big gov’t. As I said then, the summary judgment states the plaintiffs failed to articulate how laws were broken – it doesn’t endorse St. Paul's actions! I suspect most of us would agree that St. Paul’s implementation of code enforcement should not include behavior issues, should not have the disparate impact on people of color that it does and should not force a building to code compliance as quickly as it does. Lefties and righties should unite in their anger at these actions!
I worry the city will conclude the summary judgment victory is an affirmation they are “in the right." Just because the plaintiffs failed to show that these grievances are illegal doesn’t make the cities actions right.
Honestly Bob… Who cares about SPIF? They chased out diversity of ideas and now have little to discuss. Seems like an obvious result to me! Why would you send any topic to SPIF? Post the proof here where all views can respond.
Bill Cullen.
Bill you nut, Bob should post it over at SPIF !
5:28...
Obviously Bob can do what he wants!
But, why post information on a forum whose only purpose is to affirm the beliefs of the very left? What do you think it would achieve?
Bill Cullen.
Because Bill, encouraging Bob not to post over there is like asking citizens opposed to the war to just stay at home and do nothing
( not protest ) !
Those idiots over at SPIF have been trying to chase us so treated agitators over here at A-Democracy to another side of town.
Confront the bastards with the truth until they ban us all if they can.
I advise everyone over here to bombard SPIF with our commentary until their ears fall off and they call Bellview for straight jackets, for themselves.
Lets do it ?
You start first Bill !
Eric – I haven’t posted on SPIF in years – why would you claim I have?
Well because it hasn't been years. If I was you, I would check my own profile which has a list of your posts. Being who you are, I'm prepared for you NOT to let the facts get in the way.
Eric
7:42
The problem with your grand scheme is you have to sign up and use your real names and follow the rules. Which means no cowardly anonymous pot shots(like your post), or blatant personal insults. If you have the marbles to tear someone's argument apart- have at it.
Get this straight, the ONLY reason I'm here is because Bob took it upon himself to take my SPIF postings and post it here. Nobody sends no one anywhere.
You may want to just sit here and stay out the main show.
Eric
Eric, we over here will be posting over there and we will use a first and last name.
Now if you have the time to investigate the legitimaticy of our posted names, knock yourself out !
Eric,
I stand corrected; my last post on SPIF was 27-Dec-2007. Not "years" ago, but rather over one year ago. I misspoke, I erred.
I find the aggressiveness (and personal attack) in your response incredible. My response was solely to refute your claim that I had posted to SPIF in "the last couple of months". This is NOT TRUE. I am not active -- nor even a member of -- SPIF.
Bill Cullen.
Yo! 7:42 PM.
I appreciate your willingness to volunteer me as the first one to start posting on SPIF. Thanks, but no thanks.
I prefer forums that consider ideas outside their own.
Bill Cullen.
I prefer forums that consider ideas outside their own.
Consider ideas outside their own? Yet, you post here.
Ask Chuck and I how ideas outside of 'their own' are considered here at A-Democracy.
Bob lets us post here but, its doesn't matter if we're presenting you with facts or returning insults- none of it considered. All it does it generate offline email for Chuck and I to be banned. That's not being open to other ideas.
Can you continue to contradict yourself?
Eric
Bill, don't worry then, Nancy O has volunterred to be the first.
Thanks Nancy, I'am sure Eric and Chuck will be over there greeting you with much bashing and smashing about anything you have to say.
Wear plenty of armour, you are going to need it.
The posters over here are to gutless and uninteligible to post at SPIF !!
Belcher
Bob lets us post here but, its doesn't matter if we're presenting you with facts or returning insults- none of it considered. All it does it generate offline email for Chuck and I to be banned. That's not being open to other ideas.
Can you continue to contradict yourself?
Eric
My response;
Eric, does it really matter that a small minority here want you banned? Let's face some facts. Hypocrisy- You didn't like my opinion over at SPIF when I was a member there. You were willing and participated in having me removed from that list. This is the same attitude of those here who want you banned. This is where I get to explain why I have disdain for you and the folks in control over there at SPIF. I DO NOT FEAR ANY ONES OPINION! It's possible I could learn something. Over at SPIF they have their minds made up the CLIC there has an agenda, like many of the folks here, you included.
I ALWAYS admit when I have error-ed. In fact, morally I can not make a mistake and not claim responsibility for it. I do not live my life to impress others. I live my life to console my conscience.
Your difficulty with A Democracy is. You have been trying for years now to convince the victims of this city who post and read here that the city did absolutely nothing to offend them and that is like telling someone that recently had the flu they were never sick it was all in their head.
FACT is your voice is heard here Eric. You have the freedom here to tell me you can't stand my guts and I still wouldn't ban you, because I have PRINCIPLES. I am sure there is readers who side with you and do not have the courage to jump into the fire here. In all honesty, if this wasn't my blog I wouldn't post here using my name. There is to many vindictive Dick Tracy's on both sides of this issue.
Thank you Bill And Mitch for the support.
Both of you are great communicators.
Thank you Nancy for your support and volunteering to fight on the front lines of the liberal battlefield of SPIF.
I suspect the CLIC over at SPIF are hunkered down in their bomb shelters chewing their finger nails in anticipation of an assault on the bureaucracy they have taken so many years to build.
I guess I have to agree with Bill on this one. We will sift through all this dirt right here. :-)
SUPER POST
The difference between this blog and SPIF is that here, we are on a truth seeking mission.
For your edification, These are some of the quotes from Winston Churchill, who fought the Nazis of his day, but apply here as well:
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.
2:27 PM
This is "our" blog!
Thank you Bob
Belcher said...
The posters over here are to gutless and uninteligible to post at SPIF !!
Belcher
You are a fool Belcher
They banned us over ther at SPIF. We were a little to rough for them,
You have been trying for years now to convince the victims of this city who post and read here that the city did absolutely nothing to offend them and that is like telling someone that recently had the flu they were never sick it was all in their head.
If you are serious, you're either delusional or a delusional liar. You've got automatic archives, go back through 06 and 07 hell even 08 and try some honesty and report back on what I have said.
Let's see how honest you are Bob because what you wrote is not where I've been.
You got one thing I will not believe and apparently the courts don't either- there is NO RICO.
I've now said over a dozen times you can find bad players on the city payroll (does that sound familiar oh Righteous One?) and you need to document the incidents and report them. I said that even if nothing happens, you create a record and paper trial- in case you're ever in court and want to, you know, produce evidence of unfair or discriminatory practices. You geniuses didn't like that because you wanted to sue for money- not a change in policy.
A RICO suit, which is pretty easy to explain but tough to prove without specific evidence. Tough to prove when you have landlords like Cullen grouped with slumlords like Steinhauser. I know Cullen is part of the suit but, aside from his Johnny come lately politics, he is an example of a decent landlord.
You all thought Helgen was the devil when Nancy lost her house but, what did you do? Used it to self promote your paper and A-Democracy. Did you take the opportunity during the elections to do anything? It was the closest one in the city yet, nothing but the lawsuit. You didn't run a candidate, you didn't fund the opposition, you didn't host a public forum, you didn't send any mail in the district. You did nothing but pat Nancy on the back and use 14 Jessamine as a rally call for your own issue.
So, save the alligator tears about who's being thrown out on the streets and how unfair the city is, you all push aside opportunity to change policy and actually help people because the RICO suit would bring you millions.
I'm starting to get who really is benefiting from all of this. It sure isn't the people you propose to support.
Eric
Eric,
The problem with your grand scheme is you have to sign up and use your real names and follow the rules.
You got me, Eric. My real name is...
...oh, wait. Mitch Berg is my real name!
Which means no cowardly anonymous pot shots(like your post), or blatant personal insults. If you have the marbles to tear someone's argument apart- have at it.
Er, yeah, Eric, I did that. For seven years the first time,and close to two years the second go-around.
I got suspended both times for the sort of thing that liberal correspondents got away with for years, and still do, with gay impunity. Ditto every single non-DFL voice that gets too uppity with the majority train of "thought".
Get this straight, the ONLY reason I'm here is because Bob took it upon himself to take my SPIF postings and post it here. Nobody sends no one anywhere.
Er, Eric? Leaving aside the obvious question (you leave about 20 posts a day on this blog,most of them having nothing to do with that alleged "issue"), SPIF postings are available to the public. They come up in Google searches. Anyone can quote them, all they want to.
Why do you claim to have the vapors over that, of all things?
You may want to just sit here and stay out the main show.
SPIF, my friend, is not the "main show". Bob and I each get 3-4 times the traffic SPIF does. SPIF is a pathetic side show.
"Bitter"? Nope. Merely pointing out where this city's emperors have no clothes. Which prompts its' defenders to play psychoanalyst, which prompts us to say that the emperor's amateur psychoanalysts have no clothes...
...and the beat goes on.
Mitch,
This is not your fight.
Eric
Eric and Chuck, I also am kicked out of SPIF, Moved On Big Time
http://allianceminnesota.org/page/community/blog/sharonanderson
PS I do not want comments, and Thank Bobby Blog for current Issues of the Heinous Criminal Repugnant Abuses of the City of St. Paul, and SPIF
Eric said;
Let's see how honest you are Bob because what you wrote is not where I've been.
I've now said over a dozen times you can find bad players on the city payroll (does that sound familiar oh Righteous One?) and you need to document the incidents and report them. I said that even if nothing happens, you create a record and paper trial- in case you're ever in court and want to, you know, produce evidence of unfair or discriminatory practices. You geniuses didn't like that because you wanted to sue for money- not a change in policy.
My response;
From the beginning all I have sought is change. I will take change anyway it comes. Although I support the litigants in their efforts, I have never really believed the courts were the answer. I have always felt political pressure was the answer. And now many citizens are seeing it my way and thus the renewed interest in helping me fund a mass distribution effort to inform the citizens what dirty rotten scoundrels run this city and support it's tactics.
Eric, you told me to go to a neighborhood meeting with the story of the fair housing lawsuits and you said I would be laughed at. I took your advice and NOBODY was laughing. Just the usual shit from a entrenched dfler. City Councilman Helgen attempted to throw Bill Magauhey and I out of the meeting so the neighbors at the meeting wouldn't hear the bullshit this city is perpetrating on it's citizens. As I said, the citizens weren't laughing Eric. They were very concerned about the nature of things.
You talk out of both sides of your mouth. Sure you say file complaints and bla bla bla, then you turn right around in support of the tactics used on the citizens victimized.
When presented with a story of a renter or property investor being victimized by the city you attempt to side step the issue. (One example go to Lachaka Cousettes testimony) and read what you said. You have tried to discredit every victims story ever told here. From Nancy O on.
Question for the readers?
Do any of you here, renters or property investors feel Eric has given you any support what so ever?
I know Eric, you say file complaints, litigate in the district court, bla bla bla. Well Eric, victims of the city have done all of that and NOTHING came of it. They were treated with disdain and arrogance. So many folks here do not believe one bit in your dfl bureaucracy, from city hall to your local courts. It's all a bunch of HOG WASH.This is the outcome of a government who's arrogance and reach has become so over whelming citizens who do need some guidance in dealing with the system feel they have no place to turn. The trust is gone Eric.
Councilman MELVIN CARTER, you know Debbie Montgomery lost the seat you hold for the very same reasons you are going to lose it. YOU CAN NOT IGNORE CITIZENS WITH GRIEVENCES OVER THE ISSUS WE SPEAK OF HERE. I SUGGEST YOU START RESPONDING TO YOUR CONSTIUENTS YOU ARE ALREADY KNOWN AS A LIAR! You said you were concerned about gentrification of our neighborhoods, yeah sure! LIAR!!!
Melvin I know folks who know members of your family. The next election could be real dirty for you. It is going to be real nasty for a lot of you on the council.
There you go Chuck. Spreading some of that attention around. I will get to the rest of you morons who condemn women and children to the streets over time.
Now I was wondering Eric, why isn't this Mitch's fight Eric? The truth should be of interest to all of us. And like I said, SPIF is nothing more than an extension of the bureaucracy that is destroying this city. This fight should, and better concern EVERY citizen in this city, because it effects all of us. I know why you would like Mitch to bow out, his participation doesn't make your spin an easy job.
Mitch,
This is not your fight.
Since it seems to have been carried out entirely in public venues - SPIF and this blog - it's not really just yours, either.
You talk out of both sides of your mouth. Sure you say file complaints and bla bla bla, then you turn right around in support of the tactics used on the citizens victimized.
And I'm saying that's a lie. You got an example? I bet I have 500 to 1000 posts on here. I make it easy by signing my name, show a pattern of me doing the above. Pretend this is court, show your evidence this time.
You have tried to discredit every victims story ever told here. From Nancy O on.
Again, revisionist reporting there Bob. Nancy can chime in if she wants but, if you go back in YOUR own archives, you'll see that I ALWAYS reserved judgment on her situation. Always gave her the benefit of doubt even when my buddy Chuck was more confident because of what he knew, that the city did the right thing. This last victim, I'm suspect of and believe her testimony has more to do with having a place to stay than the mounds of evidence that Frank Steinhauser was indeed a slumlord.
You spent a lot of another post to whitewash the lie you posted in the previous that I ask you to back up.
Stop saying 'everybody knows' this and that. This is simple. Go in your own archives- right here and pull up and paste the pattern you say I'm guilty of. There has to be several posts out of hundreds of me doing this if its true.
Again, like the RICO suit, you have access to all the information. So when you accuse me of doing something or writing something, surely you present direct examples to your kangaroo court here.
C'mon Bob. Back it up, or admit that like I said, my problem is with the RICO case and not to give the city an excuse for every single infraction- because I don't and haven't.
Prove your case against me Bob or back off.
Eric
Eric, why don't you use your last name here.
What are you afraid of, someone finding you out ?
You lament those here that don't post their FULL names here so what gives chickenshit !
Mitch,
Again, this is not your fight.
You want to take a position on the RICO case that's fine with me. I'll warn you, some of these people are so nutty that they called Tom Swift a pacifist. Swiftee?!?!?
The bottom line here is the weak substance and irrationality SOME of the supporters of RICO come from makes it too easy for debate. Its basically, you're with them 100% or a communist DFL bureaucrat city employee lover. That's too easy to pick apart.
However, I have learned after ten years of debate with you, you may distract from the basic points here and tie me into an ideological battle, which I care not to get in.
I have posted about four times in the last couple of months on SPIF and completely skipped the RNC debate (the longest thread with the most comments on SPIF- and still counting). I'm too busy having fun on the political blogs. However, if I remember, you seemed to come back SPIF just to push it over the cliff. I thought you quit during the discussion of your suspension.
Bob certainly did quit and was not kicked off. He had to of the biggest progressives out there pushing for him to stay. I stayed out of that was suspended myself but found something else to do.
Anyway, this is not your fight.
Eric
Jeff,
What has that got to do with what we're talking about? Is that a form of intimidation? Two can play at that game and only one of us will be better.
Most people know my name as they have talked about me on the District Council, found out how much I was paid in consulting fees, and looked at my posts on SPIF.
What's with the chickenshit language? You don't know me. Don't be a punk.
Eric
Bob,
You get to replace facts with the opinion of the readers whom I disagree with several times a day. That's your definition of fair? Really?
Bob, you said:
You have been trying for years now to convince the victims of this city who post and read here that the city did absolutely nothing to offend them and that is like telling someone that recently had the flu they were never sick it was all in their head.
That is one hell of a statement. Either its fact and easily provable since there is only one source to go to- your blog. Or, its what you 'feel', and feelings are not facts.
Your court Bob. Show me where I have a pattern of what I'm accused of.
Like RICO was the wrong suit, this is the wrong accusation.
C'mon, you've got the entire record right here. I don't have time to delete and 'flush' responses. Show us. It shouldn't take long. I started commenting in September 2006. Start there and report back what you're read.
Eric
Eric, I do not have the time or desire to side track the real issues here like you want me to.
I will ask one more time. Do any of you victims reading here believe Eric has supported you in anyway?
Eric said;
C'mon Bob. Back it up, or admit that like I said, my problem is with the RICO case and not to give the city an excuse for every single infraction- because I don't and haven't.
my response;
I agree with what you say in this statement Eric. I also feel you have done a great deal to attempt to discredit this whole issue. ANd you do it to save face for your dfl friends.
Question Eric.
Do you believe the plaintiffs have been wronged in anyway by the city?
Jeff, we know Eric's last name. Eric is well known in political circles.
Bob,
I do not dismiss the possibility of unfair enforcement on some, not Frank Steinhauser. IMO, he should be in jail. Others, one that I mistakenly called out, seem to be running some decent property- which confuses me on why they would team up with some of the low lives.
I already know and have said in district council meetings that it appears that the enforcement may be uneven. However, I'm not on the side of less, I'm on the side of more. A building in violation in Merriam Park should be the same on the East side as in Mac-Groveland as on the West side. That's where the city can be more fair.
Don't accept lower standards in neighborhoods because the population may have less money, lower voter turnout or darker skin.
Another thing I learned while serving on the District Council is that some neighbors are bigots and attempt to use the cops and code enforcement to harass their targets. There people are quickly identified and their complaints trigger deeper investigation (like interviewing the people they're talking about and the other neighbors).
However, when you ask if I believe the Plantiffs, the answer is no. They are filing that there is a conspiracy within the ranks of the city and that's not true. They haven't been able to produce evidence that that's true.
Some of these plaintiffs would have had better success individually with a different case than RICO.
Eric
As a matter of fact, I don't know Erics last name so excuse me if I've missed something.
I just want to see him posting his last name to every post so that new comers here can really know who their responding to.
Bob you should be insisting that someone with Erics credintials and ties to the city post his first and last name.
Otherwise Eric, shut the hell up about people not posting with their names.
Eric said;
I already know and have said in district council meetings that it appears that the enforcement may be uneven. However, I'm not on the side of less, I'm on the side of more. A building in violation in Merriam Park should be the same on the East side as in Mac-Groveland as on the West side. That's where the city can be more fair.
Don't accept lower standards in neighborhoods because the population may have less money, lower voter turnout or darker skin.
My response;
Thank you for the being honest Eric. There is disparities and here is an example. I posted this on another thread.
Code enforcement officer Pat Fish and the GRIGGS building.
Pat Fish was aware multiple citizens were living in the basement of the Griggs building in storage units. Some of these units were rented out as ligitiment sound studios by a company named KOOLER Sounds. Some of you may of heard of the band Knight Rider. They got their start practicing out of a basement studio in the Griggs building.
Anyway, there was several tenants who lived in these storage units who had a pack rat phobia.
You reading Pat? Remember Danny?
Danny rented out 5 units in the Griggs basement and upper storage levels. Danny also lived in one of the storage units like many others there. Danny, wears the same cloths for months at a time. He bathed in a wringer washing machine in his storage unit once every 3 months. Danny lived in the Griggs building storage unit for over 8 years. His unit like others was stacked from floor to ceiling with odds and ends he bought at garage sales and thrift store. There was a very narrow pathway to get around the storage unit he resided in. Danny cooked on hot plates in the storage unit and so did others cook in their units. The roaches were so bad you could not walk without stepping on them. Of coarse there was a public rest room with no shower facilities and it was on the second floor so many residence of the storage units would piss on the floor or they would piss in litre pop bottles that seem to sit around and never get dumped.
There was several fires the homeless tenants put out before the fire department arrived. Burning matress . a garbage can. It would of been really tough to exit this basement storage area in the event of a fire that had gotten out of control.
After over 8 years the city finally got around to condemning Danny's storage unit. For months after the condemnation Danny lived in the unit up until the time the Griggs Building went under renovations.
While the city was turning basically a blind eye to this dangerous circumstance, they were out condemning rental properties and putting citizens on the street.
Jeff, I can't expect Eric to do something I wouldn't request of others. In fact in private emails to Eric I have suggested he occasionally post anonymously. He refused this suggestion.
I talked with a guy in 2006 that has been working elections since Kennedy in 1960 and he said Griggs is the same hole it was back then.
I don't remember the story about Danny too clearly. I worked there for a couple of campaigns in years past. I do know that there are a lot of social service non-profits that help immigrants and minorities located in that building in the front section. I assume that most of the people I ran into there were in one of those job training and placement programs or visiting one of the agencies. Now I know why most bathrooms were locked.
Anyway, I never went to the basement. Never. I left after or around midnight lots of nights and the place was a ghost town. I never had a clue that there were people living in the basement.
Who owns that building?
-----------------
Jeff,
I don't what your problem with me is dipshit- but now I could care less. I've given you three places to look if you really want to know. Follow the bread crumbs loser.
Let's see, why don't you speak up and tell me what credentials and 'ties' to the city you're talking about? I don't work for the city, never have. I don't contract with the city, never have. My wife and I drive out of the city to our jobs and to drop the kids off at school. We own a house here so, what ties are you talking about?
Eric
Mitch,
Again, this is not your fight.
The subject of the post is SPIF. It's my fight.
You want to take a position on the RICO case that's fine with me.
I believe I did.
The bottom line here is the weak substance and irrationality SOME of the supporters of RICO come from makes it too easy for debate. Its basically, you're with them 100% or a communist DFL bureaucrat city employee lover. That's too easy to pick apart.
And there, finally, you're close to having a point.
Putting all your eggs in the "court" basket is a mistake. Politics in St. Paul needs to change; one-party rule is always a bad idea (unless it's the GOP ruling - then it's an unalloyed good thing).
However, I have learned after ten years of debate with you, you may distract from the basic points here and tie me into an ideological battle, which I care not to get in.
Well, the fact that people like you and Repke tend to operate primarily from the party line - no offense - would seem to make that fully appropriate.
I'm too busy having fun on the political blogs. However, if I remember, you seemed to come back SPIF just to push it over the cliff.
Then you remember incorrectly - or at least you're buying the party's line about dissent (if a conservativce orders a pizza in the woods and no DFLer is there to hear it, is he still being hateful and divisive?). I came back to SPIF, I approached all issues with my usual savoir faire, aplomb and joie de vivre, and got duly suspended, like pretty much every conservative does.
I thought you quit during the discussion of your suspension.
Nope. I got suspended, sent Rick Mons a big FU, and never looked back.
Bob certainly did quit
Not as I recall, no.
Anyway, this is not your fight.
Then if I may be so bold I suggest you carry the "fight" on in a non public forum. I don't care about you and Bob's feud - but I did invest a fair amount of time in E-Democracy over the past 13 years, an investment that in retrospect was dumber and a bigger waste than buying in with Tom Petters.
Here is a Nazi fighting Churchill quote that seems to apply to Repke's positions:
"The candle in that great turnip has gone out."
So, the only difference with SPIF's treatment of me, you and Bob is that I came back after the suspension.
I remember your FU to Mons and that's what I was referring to.
Your point on me and Chuck always taking the party line is - well, just not true. I've given not only a different view but, a different set of tactics to address the underlying problems. Chuck and I, at different times on different issues have taken on our party publicly on some issues. Heck Chuck and I disagree on some issues right here.
You my friend however are a dyed in the wool conservative, and apologist for republicans who act as conservatives. I have debated with you 10 or 11 of those edemocracy years and know that you are well planted and well-versed in your ideology. I give you props for staying in the city and defending that decision against some of your MOB buddies, but you're still as much of an ideologue as you try to paint me to be.
I have worked with my party and sometimes done things that they wish I hadn't. Since we are a party of diverse ideas, no heads rolled.
Debbie Montgomery was not the darling of the DFL establishment. She won her first term without being endorsed by the DFL and never asked for the endorsement in her four years on the council. She was too close to the Chamber and business interest for some DFLers, she and my council-member Dan Bostrom often found them selves on the small end of the many 5-2 votes and she was not supportive of the smoking ban.
However, I went to her because she made a promise to bring 1000 jobs to an area the the rest of the city was OK with having a higher unemployment rate. In a little over three years there were over 1100 new jobs in her district. There were dozens of small businesses and many of them minority owned. She was genuinely concerned with the lives of the people over there. She lived through the Rondo construction and didn't want light rail to do that to the neighborhood and new businesses on University. Her history of being the youngest NAACP member at one time, active in the civil rights movement and the first woman patrol officer on the SPPD brought some experience that seems to be forgotten once in a while, I thought it was good enough to earn a second term. Many of the party faithful were behind Mel Carter, who has been (and is) a friend of mine and I was/am a big supporter of his, his mother and father. I just thought Debbie earned another term.
My politics, associations and values have all been called suspect on this blog because of one thing- I do not believe in the RICO case. Corrupt individuals, innocent people being hurt, dumb decisions, and other actions on the part of the city I have not and do not defend or even deny. However, RICO doesn't direct address any of that. The people on here aside from two, have not done anything to work against that except mouth off for years about this lawsuit.
Even its an ownership issue and property rights, why go the RICO route? You not only have the burden of proving discriminatory action BUT, the added burden of showing a conspired effort and desired benefit.
I can't believe that the case was ever filed in a real hope of winning.
I don't know for sure what the real reason was but, who needs evidence around here.
Eric
Eric,
Yep. I'm a conservative, which by definition makes me an "ideologue", although I'm a "conservative ideologue" who grew up liberal; I claim a certain amount of nuance, by your leave.
The why and wherefore of the RICO suit are certainly a subject worth discussing in this forum.
I recall some fairly interesting discussion in this blog a few weeks ago about the pros and cons and legalities of RICO and other points of law; while I'm too crunched for time to go look for them right now, the overarching point seemed to be that the law is what it says it is - and too many of the RICO suit's fans seem to ignore or not be aware of that - and that property rights proponents need to bone up on what the laws are, and on matching offenses to elements of those laws.
I'd add to that that running to the courts to redress your grievances is, at best, a stopgap; the real change needs to happen at a legislative level. Eric has made some good points about the need to transfer some of the energy, money and passion from the legal venue to the political one.
As long as the other guys can paint the other side as "slumlords" with ad-hominem impunity, no court decision will really win the battle.
I was suspened from SPIF for one year. That was over 2 years ago. I won't go back.
That forum is not what they claim to be.
So why should Steinhauser be in jail? Cause he's a landlord or because he sued the city?
I must admit Eric was one of the very few from SPIF that did give me the benifit of the doubt, unlike Chuck and many others that felt every word I spoke was either untrue or some illusional disfunction carry over from my drug addiction. To this day and until the day I die I will stand by every word I spoke as being the truth... I have nothing to gain or lose by lying and I was brought up under the morals that the truth always has better results, even some of the SPPD remarked that I was too honest. Erics statement is true there are definately SOME city officials that are (or might be guilty, must remember the good ole innocent til proven guilty) guilty of misconduct and could use a refresher course when it comes to the code of ethics.
I do thank those of you that do have faith in my statements, and also those of you that are working on change in the city to help those that are less fortunate.
Hope you all have a safe and Happy New Year! May 2009 be a great year for all...
Nancy O.
Thank you Nancy.
Eric, you said you and Chuck were going to push for a law to prevent innocent citizens from being condemned to the street without a placement. How bout some details. A time line
Bob, it would be pretty simple to establish a fund to assist people who were going to be forced to move because of condemnations of properties.
Like I said if you are interested in supporting it, I would draft it up and get it to the council.
I think the council would go for a small allocation of MHF monies being used to create the fund and then assessments against the condemned properties replenishing the fund.
So, if the City condemns property "A" and it has an occupied unit, the City would pay for up to 90 days of alternative housing and then assess the property owner of property "A" $5,000 for the costs incurred by the City. If you structure it that the building wouldn't be able to get a C of O or unplackered until the assessment was paid you would get pretty quick compliance and keep the fund whole.
Would make sure that your "victims" would be taken care of and make sure that there was always funds available.
So, again Bob you sign up for it and I will find a council member to sponsor it for you.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
...and Nancy...
We are travelers on the same road, so I wish you nothing but the best.
My issues on stories like Nancy's (since I don't know her personally and have no particular reason to doubt her) is always that I question people who are in (or have been in) trouble with the law that think that the police or judge was out to get them particularly.
I worked in corrections from 1974 until 1989. In fifteen years I must have worked with a thousand guys that thought that the police or the judge were out to get them, or in someway had a particular interest in their case. Planted evidence, falsified statements, whatever, because they wanted to get THEM. But, just about to a person if you asked the cop or the judge about this guy a year later they couldn't remember a thing about them. It was just one more case.
Where Nancy loses credibility with me is over the story of her arrest and how the cops "planted" her ex-boyfriend's drug pipe. They didn't just plant any old drug pipe; they went out and found a drug pipe that Nancy would recognize as her ex boyfriend's drug pipe! god, I love that part of the story.... Are you with me folks? There is no reason for them to plant a particular pipe that she would recognize now is there? They could throw any old pipe if they were planting evidence... But, no, they planted a pipe that Nancy would recognize as her boyfriends. Now, there is no way that our heroine MS Nancy in her drug induced fog might have forgotten that her boyfriend's drug pipe was still in her house...Nooo??? The cops planted it.
It is just such a great story, I never get tired of it.
Anyway, I am sorry. Fifteen years of hearing that stuff and the grandiosity of habitual users and habitual victims being totally convinced that the world revolves around them has made me a skeptic.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Fifteen years of hearing that stuff and the grandiosity of habitual users and habitual victims being totally convinced that the world revolves around them has made me a skeptic.
Except, of course, with the biggest "addict" of all, big government.
I am sorry you feel that way Chuck but with that incident you may have misunderstood something in my statement; The police had brought my ex's personal belongings into my temporary residence/apartment. ( The ex was outside working on my car and was being arrested on a warrant) The items brought in included items such as; his keys, billfold, money and yes included in these items was his crack pipe and set them down in one pile in the apartment giving the police according to the officers statement reason to search and find nothing else but the pipe that was amongst the personal property of my ex's so there WAS NOT any charges brought against me for the incident other then once again a mess from the search and a reason to call in child protection on the conditions and disarray the apartment was left in.
I am sure you did hear plenty of falsified stories from offenders, I am also pretty sure there are also plenty of falsified police reports officers make to get charges brought on in some cases when brought to the county attorneys... (We are all human and make mistakes including people that are officials)I am not saying the whole SPPD was out for me but I did have a few of them that wanted me to work as an informant and refusal does tend to upset them to the point where they can and will make a persons life difficult and yes I made that easy for them because at the time I was not what you would consider a law abidding citizen.
The truth is the truth and I cannot change that to fit your theory Chuck, I am sorry.
Nancy O.
Just charge the landlord more money and continue the illegal activity huh Chuck? You should find much opposition on the City Council for this
Mr. Repke said,
So, if the City condemns property "A" and it has an occupied unit, the City would pay for up to 90 days of alternative housing and then assess the property owner of property "A" $5,000 for the costs incurred by the City. If you structure it that the building wouldn't be able to get a C of O or unplackered until the assessment was paid you would get pretty quick compliance and keep the fund whole.
Would make sure that your "victims" would be taken care of and make sure that there was always funds available.
{wonderfully witty sarcasism}
Looks like a couple of new themes from the city's supporters.
The city has been extremely punitive to landlords in its enforcement (more so than anywhere else) - now Chuck wants it to be even more so - and I don't think his intent is to be constructive.
I've also noticed an effort to attack Frank Steinhauser and his attorney at separate times. Frank, thank you for all that you've put into this.
12:37 - come on we don't even have land lord licensing in Saint Paul and almost every other burb in the metro has that.
Saint Paul has been the easiest on landlords, that is the reason for the suit. The owners here were shocked that they had to be responsible for their property.
As to the proposal to fund emergency housing assistance for tenants that are evicted for condemned properties.
It was Bob's idea.
I just gave it structure.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
I just gave it structure.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
12:46 PM
Chuck, you and Eric must get you tail like for being such good political helper.
Why not be real, and just admit that there is some misuse of power going on at city hall.
You two must be walking, talking, dehorns for the city.
5:41 - look the only abuse I have ever seen in this is a bunch of owners who don't like being told what to do and don't like be held responsible for the conditions of their properties.
We have none, zero, nada cases of properties being written up that did not have code violations. We have none, zero, nada cases of property owners going to district court and showing that their buildings were condemned without cause.
What we have in these stories are examples of where we are splitting hairs to determine if the language in the order exactly met all of the conditions that were grounds for violations. Do we have a City employee that said she saw a rat, who wasn't sure if she saw a rat that did see rodent droppings, no working toilet, falling ceilings, no working appliances...and on and on... but we are going to split hairs over did she see a rat or not, or was it broken cabinetS or just one broken cabinet. Because if we can somehow find this one little error in what she said this will somehow prove that there was a international conspiracy to get these owners...
Its not EVIDENCE of ANYTHING. It is meaningless garbage designed to impress the client and keep the checks coming to the lawyers, but it proves nothing and in Federal Court it was shown to be what it was a joke.
And, as to my simple proposal to facilitate the relocation of displaced tenants, where else should the money come from except from the pocket of the guy that rents substandard property?
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Post a Comment
<< Home