It appears to me that the QT issue brought a lot of visitors to Keller City Limits who hadn’t seen it before.  Visitors who are absolutely seething over the SUP’s approval at the last council meeting.  A subset of whom are still so angry that they aren’t capable of coherent comments other than name calling.

Jim Carson wrote a short post explaining his rationale for voting for the proposal.  The commenter who stood out the most, however, was someone going by the name Jennifer, who left this in reponse to Jim’s post:

BLAH BLAH BLAH

You had your biased mind made up before you ever stepped foot into City Hall that evening.

Ok…  whatever…

But what really had me scratching my head was this exchange, posted in response to a comment from Doug:

#  Jennifer Says:
August 22nd, 2006 at 2:14 pm CST

Gee Doug, nice job giving Jim his obligatory pat on the back. I’m surprised Monty and Aubrey haven’t chimed in yet. I would have expected all of Jim’s sidekicks to have responded by now.

# Doug Says:
August 22nd, 2006 at 3:09 pm CST

Jennifer, should I chastise him for a vote that I agree with?

# Jennifer Says:
August 22nd, 2006 at 4:43 pm CST

I haven’t known about this website for very long but my guess is that I would be hardpressed to find anything in the archives that you disagree on with Jim.

Just curious, is there anything? I’m hopeful to learn that maybe only Monty and Aubrey are the bigger asses.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I hardly ever comment at Keller City Limits, and I only wrote one post on the QT issue.  I was only being mildly sarcastic in tone, and completely serious in content, so I’m not quite sure what has earned me this enmity.  Perhaps it was something from earlier?  Maybe the library?

I suppose I’ll never know, because Jennifer’s anger over whatever sin she thinks I’ve committed makes it completely impossible to hold a conversation with her.

I’ve noticed several other commenters with similar problems.  QTDS (Quick Trip Derangement Syndrome), perhaps?  Or maybe it’s TCLDS (Town Center Library Derangement Syndrome).

Don’t worry Jennifer, I won’t bite you should we meet in real life.  I’ll be polite, shake your hand, and make quickly for the door like I do with most people who’ve gone off the deep end… 

[That’s humor. Laugh, damn it!]

In all seriousness, should you wish to have a reasoned conversation on whatever issue it is that is bothering you, feel free to frequent the comments.  But my patience is wearing thin with the personal insults.

It seems that animal rights terrorists have succeeded in getting a researcher to abandon his work.

Colleagues suggested that Ringach, who did not return e-mails seeking comment, was spooked by an attack on a colleague. In June, the Animal Liberation Front took credit for trying to put a Molotov cocktail on the doorstep of Lynn Fairbanks, another UCLA researcher who does experimentation on animals. The explosive was accidentally placed on the doorstep of Fairbanks’s elderly neighbor’s house, and did not detonate.

I can’t help but note that this is in California.  I wonder if these idiots have tried this in Texas?  If they ever get the idea to try, I’d suggest they (as well as their potential victims) keep section 9.42 of the Texas Penal Code in mind:

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.  A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
      (1)  if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41;  and
      (2)  when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
            (A)  to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  …  (emphasis mine)

I wouldn’t weep for these idiots should one get his or her just deserts at the hands of a potential victim.

Via Instapundit.

I think I may have an idea for how the people who are up in arms about the proposed QuickTrip in front of Hidden Lakes can resolve the issue.

Hidden Lakes HOA should just go ahead and buy the land.  That way, instead of depriving the rightful owner of the land’s value, they can exercise the control over that parcel that they so desperately seem to want.

I bet they could get it for a good bargain, too, since I hear that the neighbors make a big fuss if you try to build anything there…

J.R. Labbe’s recent post about Chris Bell’s silly campaign ads reminded me to write about the other thing about them that bothers me.  He seems to be one of those people who bellyache about “standardized tests” in public schools.  He says something to the effect of how Texas should be preparing children for college, rather than teaching them to take a standardized test. 

Oh?  You mean the same colleges that require standardized tests for admission?

I’m not a fan of public education, but as long as a) it’s compulsory, and b) I have to pay for it, then I’m going to demand accountability.  This means that there has to be a way to measure whether students are learning the required subjects.  The only objective way to do this is through some kind of standardized test, administered by an outside agency. 

Opposition to testing, especially from people in the education field, always gets my antennae twitching.  I can’t help but wonder what they have to hide, or why they’re so afraid of being held accountable for the results of their work.  Out here in the real world, we’re always held accountable for the results of our work, so I have absolutely zero sympathy for teachers and educrats in this regard.

I also hear complaints about “teaching to the test.”  This also gets my attention, albeit in a negative fashion.  Here’s why:  If the teachers are teaching the material, and the students are learning it, then the test should be a simple matter.  If students have to be extensively coached on the specific test questions or topics, then that actually says to me that the test is doing part of its job.  Namely, it’s ferreting out bad teaching practices (and/or bad students).  Any coaching situation is one where we’ve identified a failure in the learning process.  If the education establishment was really interested in learning (instead of extorting more and more money out of us), it would use the test to do continuous process improvement.  But perhaps that’s too much like the private sector for them.  We wouldn’t want to pollute the art of teaching with hard-nosed real-world processes.

Standardized testing is NOT going away.  Not as long as people like me are dragged into the situation by having to pay for public education.  As an underwriter of this enterprise, I’m going to demand accountability.  So, teachers and educrats, it’s time for you to make your peace with testing and get back to the business of teaching.  I’m tired of listening to the bellyaching.

There’s been a stink recently about the problems with garbage collection in Keller.  It seems that some areas weren’t getting their garbage picked up until the next day.  There were some angry people who complained about all the garbage that was collecting on the street.  It spawned an article in the paper and several letters to the editor.  Some of which were from enviro-nuts who berated the residents who complained for generating too much garbage and not recycling.  It must be nice to be omniscient enough to know the exact habits and activities of all the people in that neighborhood in order to determine that people were above their “garbage quota.”  I certainly know that there are a lot of people who recycle quite a bit of stuff, as some of it always manages to end up in my yard on Fridays¹. 

It’s happened in my neighborhood a couple of times now, with yesterday being just the latest example (they finally came at about 8:30 this morning).  I don’t get too bothered by it, since I usually put my garbage in a well-sealed rolling can.  The only thing about it that bothers me is that if I can manage to drag my zombie ass out there early in the morning to put out the garbage, then they should hold up their end of the bargain and come pick the crap up (it’s not like they have a contract or anything</sarcasm> ).  But that’s only a minor annoyance.  What really annoys me is that the garbage collectors have a habit of throwing my garbage can willy-nilly halfway across the street, where it becomes a hazard to vehicular navigation. 

¹  I’m just about fed up with the recycling program and I’m leaning towards just throwing it all in the regular trash collection.  The program costs extra each month and while they give you two bins for free, the lids are “optional” for a cost of $6.00 each.  I’m careful now to make sure my bins are well-packed to make sure nothing blows away.  But I think we’d all be better served if the lids were included. 

And on that note, I’d like to say something to last Friday’s good samaritan who left the “Zep” hair clog remover bottle on my mailbox post:  I’m sure you thought it a great way to point out my negligence in leaving trash out, but I’m sorry to have to tell you that it wasn’t mine.  Like many other things that I get the joy of throwing away for others, my yard seems to be the place where this crap lands.  Someone down the street has a problem with securing their garbage and recycling and I end up with their stuff about every other Friday.

One of these days I’m going to have to take the time to walk down the block to see where this crap is coming from.

Jim Carson has discovered that there’s a new anonymous Keller political blog.  And they don’t seem to like him or the people who voted against the library proposal. 

I have to say I’m grimly amused by their take on things.  The “CAVE Men” bit (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) is hilarious in an over-the-top kind of way.

I linked them in my sidebar, although I almost reconsidered when I read the full blurb in their header.  The last sentence struck me as just a little beyond the pale:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

Wow.  I didn’t realize having concerns about spending priorities, tax rates, and city politics made me “evil.”  Still, it should make for “interesting” reading from time to time.

I don’t recall where I saw this last, but I’m always grimly amused when I see someone state baldly that because the right to “X” isn’t guaranteed in the Constitution that it doesn’t exist.  This tells me that this person might have read the Constitution but that he didn’t understand it. 

If we were limited to the rights enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights we’d be pretty well screwed.  The Founders understood this and even argued about it during the debates over the Bill of Rights.  It was the fear of some that enumerating a set of rights would send the incorrect message that only those rights existed.

But you don’t have to believe me.  Just read Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 84:

It has been several times truly remarked, that bills of rights are in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince. Such was Magna Carta, obtained by the Barons, sword in hand, from king John….It is evident, therefore, that according to their primitive signification, they have no application to constitutions professedly founded upon the power of the people, and executed by their immediate representatives and servants. Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing, and as they retain every thing, they have no need of particular reservations. “We the people of the United States, to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.” Here is a better recognition of popular rights than volumes of those aphorisms which make the principal figure in several of our state bills of rights, and which would sound much better in a treatise of ethics than in a constitution of government….

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.

If I wasn’t still suffering from whatever the hell this is (it’s way too damn strong to be just a cold), I might be inclined to play along with the it’s not amnesty immigration drinking game during tonight’s speech.

But I fear I’d need a whole hell of a lot of beer and tequila.  And I don’t even want to contemplate how it would feel to be stopped up, coughing, and have a hangover at the same time… 

A resounding NO!

The results are in from yesterday’s local elections:

Voters resoundingly shot down a proposed $7.6 million library in Town Center and booted out three City Council members who had supported financing the library without public approval.

In record turnout, residents defeated the library bond, 61.5 percent to 38.5 percent, according to unofficial results.

Those who supported the new library need to understand that those 61.5 percent of the voters are not regressive knuckle-dragging thugs who hate the children.  We want Keller to have a good library that meets the needs of the community, but we want to make sure that our priorities are in order.  Anyhow, I don’t want to rehash that whole thing here.  My reasons for being against the proposal that was put before the voters can be seen here.

Maybe I’m still a bit grumpy today, since I’ve been sick, but I couldn’t help but comment on the rest of the article.  I can’t help but think that certain elements of city government are being a bit obtuse.  As an example, consider this:

“The voters have spoken, and there will be no new library,” Mayor Julie Tandy said, adding that she hadn’t analyzed the numbers and didn’t know why it failed.

First, this doesn’t mean that there will not ever be a new library.  Just that there won’t be one in Town Center any time soon.  Further, it’s not hard to understand why it failed.  We’ve only been talking about this for the last five months.  Is it really possible that she hasn’t heard one single argument against the Town Center proposal?

And then we have the same-old-same-old:

Despite their defeats, Lake and Roberts said they didn’t regret voting for the certificates of obligation.

“I still think it’s the right thing to do,” Lake said, adding that there was a lot of misinformation about the library.

Roberts said the council is charged with making such decisions. “A lot of what happens is basically a total misunderstanding by certain voters out there who didn’t understand why we did what we did.”

I still haven’t heard any specifics on this “misinformation.”  Further, we didn’t misunderstand what the council did and why.  I completely understand that the council had the statutory power to issue the bonds.  What I contest is that they had the authority to do so.  The voters spoke loudly in 1999 on this issue in such a way that it should seem obvious that the voters had revoked their delegation of authority to the council.  Don’t insult the voters by claiming that we don’t understand.  I submit that it’s you who doesn’t understand. 

Further, I’d like to see the law (or at least city policy) changed such that the council never issues bonds or certificates of obligation above a certain amount (perhaps $1,000,000) without approval of the voters.  But then I’m “gridlock is good” kind of guy.  I don’t trust government and I think it needs to be constrained at every level.

Early voting for the Keller and Tarrant County elections ends today at 7:00 p.m.  Otherwise, you’ll have to wait for Saturday to cast your ballot.

I went yesterday and there were people camped out just beyond the no-campaigning DMZ line.  The “Vote YES Committee” had staked out the right side and the “No Meant No” folks were on the left.  Later in the day, while walking the dog, I went by there and ran into Jim Carson and also met Monty Snow in person for the first time.

Ultimately, after considering all the issues, I decided to vote against the library proposal.  I did so because of the following concerns:

• I was not convinced that we were hearing the whole story on financing.

  Interest-only payments are a red flag to me that indicates that we really can’t afford the library.

• I think the library proposal was a case of “wrong time, wrong priority.”

  Let’s get the critical infrastructure items (firestation, roads, etc) funded before we start considering anything else.  I get the impression that the proposal was put forward ahead of those items so a tax increase could be sold as being for critical items, instead of for the library.

• I am not convinced that all the options were considered.

  So far I’ve only heard two options:  Expand the existing one -or- Town Center.  Why weren’t other sites considered?

• Parking logistics.

  Parking at Town Center already sucks.  And it is my considered opinion that whoever designed the traffic circle should be dragged off and shot.  Adding library patrons to the mix won’t help things.  Oh?  And nose-in spots on Bear Creek Raceway?  Does the designer who proposed this have stock in Service King?  And how long will it be until some speeding a**hole kills someone trying to cross Bear Creek to get to the library from Town Center?

• I’m not convinced that the library design is properly optimized.

  The L-shape would appear to increase the overall perimeter footprint without buying internal volume.  Also, the choice of a two-story building adds cost for stairs and elevators.  It is my understanding that library experts recommend that a library should not be multi-story until it passes 50,000-sq.ft. in area.

I’m not unalterably opposed to a new library.  I like libraries and I absorbed countless books from my local library when I was growing up.  But I will not allow that to override logic for a bad proposal.  Let’s get our priorities straight, get the necessary infrastructure items in place, and then we can consider all the options for a new library.