What's Left of Maplewood (MN)

We can't draw, so we are left with verbal cartoons about Maplewood city politics.

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Cave Not Running?

A reader comment on the last post mentioned that the Wikipedia entry for Maplewood has been updated to include mention of the Banick firing, sorry, "reorganization."

Besides providing a thumbnail sketch of the current state of chaos in Maplewood government, the entry also includes this line: "Cave recently announced that she would not seek re-election in 2007."

I had not heard this before, and wonder if anyone can verify it?

posted by Frostbrand @ 11:18 PM  

12 Comments:

  • At 3:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I have heard nothing. Not surprising though. I never took Cave as being some sort of career politician.

     

  • At 7:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    This makes it perfectly clear. They came in to start the place on fire, and now burning, running out before the walls fall in on them.
    Somebody out there has to hold these jerks to task. They've been in less than 1 year, and already know they won't seek reelection?
    Come on!!! Someone kick some butt!!!

     

  • At 10:42 AM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    Anonymous a 3:27 AM (our regular wee-hours Longrista poster) said, "Not surprising though. I never took Cave as being some sort of career politician."

    This coming from this particular commenter sounds to me like confirmation of my earlier wondering if Diana & her posse have decided to throw Rebecca under a train. Rebecca's lack of a will of her own seemed like such an asset at first, but her naivete comes with a price (such as occasional bouts of honesty, an affliction Diana has learned to overcome).

     

  • At 11:19 AM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    Heh, it's funny how after I posted the link here that wiki article suddenly got much longer with a whole lot of pro-Longrista spin... :)

     

  • At 12:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Copeland is now called a habitual masturbator in the Wiki entry

     

  • At 1:07 PM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    Hmm. It does have the ring of truth to it, at least on a metaphorical level...

     

  • At 1:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    You don't throw people under the train when the majority is close. Where do people come up with this stuff? Obviously people who don't know much about politics.

    I don't see Cave as being naive or lacking willpower. She has called Rossbach on the carpet more than once, if that is what you call willpower. Her decision to sit back and say less could be mistaken by some as naivete. For those who claim that she lacks willpower because she sometimes votes with Longrie and Hjelle, look again. She has voted with and against everyone on the council. Maybe, just maybe she happens to agree with Longrie and Hjelle on issues.

    The sexual comments in the previous posting is what gives the anti Longrie, Cave, Hjelle group low credibility. Keep up the good work.

     

  • At 1:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Who cares if Cave is not running again at the end of her term. Same with Hjelle at the end of his. No worries! We still have recourse. It's called write-in.

    If we can get enough people together, we can get both of them re-elected so that their names will appear as members of the council for as long as it takes us to clean up the mess...

     

  • At 1:44 PM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    The anonymous posting above at 1:32 PM was made by our beloved troll at IP 64.131.7.123.

     

  • At 5:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I would be willing to guess that most of the pro-threesome comments have been made by the same person.

     

  • At 5:26 PM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    Yep.

    I've been saving the IP logs for a while now, and matching them up with the comments posted. As you suspect, it's just one single Longrista, at least as long as I've been tracking it.

    I've refrained from saying anything while gathering data, but the wikipedia post put the user's current IP assignment out there in public.

    More on this topic in a posting of its own later this evening, I hope... ;)

     

  • At 5:44 PM, Blogger Frostbrand said…

    Our dear troll wrote:

    > The sexual comments in the previous
    > posting is what gives the anti
    > Longrie, Cave, Hjelle group low
    > credibility. Keep up the good work.

    Actually, I think that the point was that such comments are what give Wikipedia low credibility. Did you read that hilarious Onion piece? Or ever see the Colbert Report bit about elephants?

    The fact that any old person can (at least for a limited period of time, before another editor comes along) change the entries to say whatever they like (such as the pro-Gang of Three baloney you put up there last night) means that you have to take anything you read there -- for example, if we were to find a long article discussing your well known carnal affections toward barnyard animals -- with a very large grain of salt.

    And anyone can read the changelogs, so you can see who made the edits and what agenda unifies the changes they make. :)

    Thus, the original blog entry that began this thread was asking for corroboration of what Wikipedia said about Rebecca Cave. Because, you see, I'm not going to believe it just because I read it there.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home