Josh Feit: Not a Voter, not a Taxpayer, will Never be Before a Court
Sharkansky thinks it’s wrong wrong wrong for Susan Owens not to have shown up at a “debate” by the Republican party where one of the other moderators was kicked off at the other candidate’s request. He’s incapable of mentioning that Josh Feit’s not being there was the a part of the that she didn’t attend. Instead of a fair fight, it was a wishy washy middle of the road guy (I love you Joel) and an attack dog. So I’m just going to repeat his work but with a few changes. See if you can spot them.
Justice Susan Owens has a new excuse for chickening out of last Monday’s debate with challenger Stephen Johnson that I co-moderated. (An earlier excuse was exposed as disingenuous, here). In this weekend’s online chat at The Olympian, Owens said:
Candidate Stephen Johnson has a new excuse for being the first one to chicken out on last Monday’s debate when he and Justice Susan Owens had agreed to the rules already in this weekend’s online chat at The Olympian, that I’m also incapable of using the correct name of.
I don’t answer questions from bloggers, and that was apparently the moderator’s only credentials … I don’t take questions from bloggers. I just don’t blog and don’t read them.
Sorry for a break from format, but I’m going to be the blockquote police here; Sharkansky is clearly trying to mislead you. What’s between the ellipses are half of her answer, and a paragraph by Johnson. You miss that she was trying to talk to every county in the state. You miss that she said that she wanted to have the forum moderated by actual journalists, not some fuckwad who can’t get the pertinent facts about this simple story that he plays a part in right. I don’t agree, but if you want to ridicule her position, you could at least offer it.
Since when does a voter need credentials to ask an elected official a question? My taxes help pay her salary. My rights are impacted by her decisions. I might have a case before the Court someday. And she refuses to answer my questions?
Ok, back to format:
Since when does a voter need credentials to ask a candidate a question? Josh’s taxes help pay his salary. His rights are impacted by his decisions. He might have a case before the Court someday. And he refuses to answer his questions?
Read the chat transcript, and watch the video of Monday’s debate and, er, judge the two candidates for yourself.
Read the transcripts (but ignore what’s between the ellipses), and watch the video of Monday’s debate and, er, I’m a retarded of the two candidates yourself.
That was less satisfying than I’d hoped it would be at the outset of this post.