Login | Contact Us | Feedback | Site Map | Archives | RSS | Subscribe to the paper

User profile: happy34145

Joined: Aug. 3, 2006
Comments posted: 175
Contact happy34145 (log-in required)

Comments by happy34145

Page 1 of 18 | Next

Posted on January 15 at 12:57 p.m.

great letter to the editor. and considering his experience he knows what he is talking about. my family will be right behind yours jimbo. vote:
HALL, NEYLON, BATTE, GUIDRY for truth and honesty to get our island back to where it used to be.

On Letter to the editor: The politics of threats and intimidation

Posted on January 8 at 3:38 p.m.

whenever i read the angry childlike name calling blogs posted by tarik, arceri, beauford, walduck and monte - the vision that quickly comes to mind are children fighting on a playground calling names, all red faced and frustrated, running away and hiding behind bushes (to be anonymous) too afraid to come out.

what, do they have their teenage grandkids writing their blogs for them??

On Letter to the editor: Misuse of data

Posted on January 8 at 8:18 a.m.

VOTE:
HALL, NEYLON, BATTE, GUIDRY

For Truth and Integrity

On Letter to the editor: Sewer update

Posted on January 7 at 11:08 p.m.

Is this the same craig woodward that stood before council and argued strongly in agreement with mr tucker at how the glon property at $10 mil was a steal. mr woodward who represented mr glon i am sure made alot of money off that transaction. i believe the property is now worth way less and was never actually even worth 10 mil - but i may be wrong. mr tucker and mr woodward were very passionate about this transaction and now it seems mr tucker could give a d--- about it.

my scenerio (if the walduck party gets elected) of why mr woodward is so concerned.
if the expansion goes through and the walduck party gets elected that mr woodwards old utility plant will be purchased by the city for alot more than its worth and mr tucker is the attorney that handles the transaction.

its always all about the money

On Letter to the editor: Misuse of data

Posted on January 7 at 9:47 a.m.

sounds like the truth is farmer owns a lot on Driftwood that is valueless without the sewers. farmer is doing nothing more than using his article to protect his own interest.

explains his myopia when it comes to his bland articles devoid of any facts.

On The Farmer File: Getting at the truth on Marco

Posted on January 5 at 9:28 a.m.

very good point dc5799. its scary how the pro sewer group only know how to call names - i'm guessing due to lack of intelligence or real knowledge about the subject.

On Letter to the editor: Nothing but the facts

Posted on January 5 at 9:09 a.m.

astyp
my septic tank does not stink but your beloved sewer plant sure does and so does don farmers lousy articles.

On The Farmer File: Getting at the truth on Marco

Posted on January 4 at 12:31 a.m.

don farmer is a political puppet for Arceri and nothing more. his articles are boring and do not contain one evidence of truth or interesting information.

he is an old man stuggling to cling onto and save the last thing he has to make him feel like he and chris are important.

i mostly feel sorry for him - his career ending on sewers. you would think he had more to offer.

On The Farmer File: Getting at the truth on Marco

1 of 1 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on November 29 at 1:41 p.m.

Roger Hall,
You make so much sense. Unfortunately like I have said before - the facts do not make any difference to the majority of our city councilors. They are out to protect and make as much money for the construction companies as possible and have the taxpayers foot the bill.

Terri and Rob are too weak or too confused to ever say no to a proposal put before them from Moss.

Minnozzi, Trotter and Tucker are in it for the contractors and others who stand to make alot of money.

Ted and Chuck are just outnumbered. This is why January's election is so important.
Vote: ROGER HALL, BUTCH NEYLON, JOE BATTE and KEN ALLEN or DR GUIDRY.

On Letter: Hell hath no furry like a council scorned

2 of 2 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on November 28 at 9:31 a.m.

Unfortunately - the majority of the current city council is either too inept to do anything about this or too concerned about protecting their special interest and support these contract changes.

They would rather stick it to the taxpayers and make sure that their friends (the contractors) make big bucks no matter what and the taxpayers are left paying the bill.

A yes vote from any councilor when these contracts come before them at the next meeting is proof positive that they could care less about the taxpayers.

On Letter: Open letter to the City Council

Page 1 of 18 | Next



newsletters
See special sections published by the Marco Eagle:
job picks