Very interesting that on all the No on 695 sites I have visited, there is a conspicuous lack of a forum such as this one where people can air their views and the hard questions can be asked and issues can be discussed. Instead, I find propoganda and no way to even e-mail the webmasters to ask them why they don't have a discussion section. Obviously, discussion of the pertinent issues in not part of the No on 695 agenda. Their views and budget assumptions are presented and a method of challenging or questioning those views or assumtions is conveniently left out.

These people don't want to be held responsible by the people who pay the taxes. They don't want to be forced to be fiscally responsible and prioritize. They just want us to pay up and shut up. How perfectly childish!!! I for one am sick of such behavior.

Dave

-- Dave Dupree (dcm@flashcom.net), October 13, 1999

Answers

Dave,

I was just about to write the same messege. I too just got done looking at all the "no on I-695" sites. How week are they? Its obvious by looking at some of our own messeges on this site that the opponents wish to be heard. They have no problem crossing to our site, but they are to scared to open their own discussion forum. I too believe that most of the writtings on their website are not only fictous and lame, but supported wholly by publicly paid jobs or related in someway to the government. Most others fully support 695. Its is definetly a fight people vs government. Thanks for your comment, its definetly true.

-- Mr. Bill (bspencer@kalama.com), October 13, 1999.

So, you wouldn't find a forum on every web site to be a little bit redundant? I mean you can air your views and ask hard questions here can't you? I suppose that I could complain about how no where in the Yes site can you find information as to what the MVET funds now. Or I could go to one of the other sites and look it up there.

Besides that, I have counted four official anti-695 web sites. One of which has pretty much been turned into a link page only, two have e-mail addresses clearly listed, and the fourth (the official campaign site) has both a phone number and mailing address in which you can contact them. Which site was it that you couldn't find a way to contact them?

And actually, who are you talking about when you say "these people"? As far as I know, none of these sites are run by the politicians who "don't want to be forced to be fiscally responsible and prioritize."

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), October 13, 1999.

Hardly solid political debate when you comment on a campaign's lack of technology instead of the issues.

We are going to win and its not going to be because we complained about what the other side did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lets be better people and not whine.

-- Sonia (sonia_900@yahoo.com), October 13, 1999.

I look at it this way, the Yes people have the thread already going, why should the No people put up something as well. They already live off of our tax money, why not live off our bandwidth as well?

Sugar and spice, and I-695 is nice. Vote Yes on I-695. Why shouldn't the government ask you first for more of your money?

-- Sandy D (sandy_d1@yahoo.com), October 13, 1999.

"Why shouldn't the government ask you first for more of your money? " Why is it that when private corporations get bigger they find economies of scale, while when governments get bigger, they find more ratholes in which to stuff the money?

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 13, 1999.

I don't work for the government. I have absolutely no connection with the government whatsoever. Yet I still think 695 is a stupid idea.

So, just a little reality check: All generalizations are wrong! ;-)

-- Peter Hartikka (hartikka@aol.com), October 13, 1999.

You have no connection to Government whatsoever? I'm not saying that it's impossible, however it sounds incredibly improbable.

-- Ken (klemay@amouse.net), October 14, 1999.

Not that my statement has anything to do with I-695. It's just that I'm assuming (with all that the word implies) you live in the Puget Sound area, If thats true, then again I stand by my statement.

-- Ken (klemay@amouse.net), October 14, 1999.

Dave, You are correct. I find it amazing that more people don't seem to want to take control of their own funds. The government has screwed us into the ground for so long and yet there are those that still want to let them use our funds as usual. If we get this passed, we truly are gaining in the return of at least SOME control. It is totally out of hand. We are capable of making intelligent decisions about what should be spent, but more important, we can't continue funding projects that constantly raise taxes. WHEN the economy turns to the downside (And it eventually will) we are in serious trouble. I am pleased that this initiative was presented and hope there are enough folks that are willing to take control and slow down the spending spree we have been on for so many years.

Jim

-- Jim Latshaw (latshawj1@juno.com), October 15, 1999.