Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed

  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!



    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    It's time to nut up or shut up!

    By KG One, Section News
    Posted on Fri Aug 03, 2012 at 02:55:00 PM EST
    Tags: Stand up for Democracy, Public Act 4, Benton Harbor, Flint, Detroit...you are next, Detroit Public Schools, Highland Park Public Schools, Michigan Supreme Court, Michigan State Board of Canvassers, Democrats, Unions, Okay...so what's YOUR plan? (all tags)

    Let's see if the democrats have what it takes.

    {Continued after the fold}.

    This afternoon, the Michigan Supreme Court finally issued a ruling in the Stand up for Democracy v. Michigan State Board of Canvassers case.

    In a 4-3 decision (Justices Kelly, Kelly, Cavanaugh & Hathaway supporting), the Michigan Supreme Court directed the Board of Canvassers to place this issue on the November Ballot.

    The main issue had nothing to do with whether or not Lansing had the power to broom out inept politicians, but rather an issue of the size font used on the ballots.

    The justices ruled that there was "substantial compliance" to rule the font size legal, and the matter can go forward for a vote.

    Personally speaking, I think that this is a great!

    No, I didn't join Nolan Finley, L. Brooks Patterson and rest of the kakistocracy going off of the reservation.

    I'm in favor of this going on the ballot for one simple reason; the democrats, unions and their supporters of this initiative will need to come up with an alternative.

    So, what will it be?

    Do you continue to let people who have clearly demonstrated a consistent history of gross incompetence back in the driver's seat while crossing your fingers and hoping for the best?

    Sending those mismanaged areas more money is not an option.

    No, you will need to come up with a clear, concise and easily communicable plan for the voters in November.

    Demagoging is no longer an option.

    Well, are they up to it?

    Pull up a chair and grab a drink.

    November just got more interesting.

    < MDOT Eschews Responsibility For Roads To Promote "Walkability" | God Help Us >

    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

    Display: Sort:
    Feh (none / 0) (#1)
    by Corinthian Scales on Fri Aug 03, 2012 at 08:45:32 PM EST

    Gov. Snydholm just 'Partnerships' our tax dollars to be wasted in all those liberal dung piles passed off as being called cities anyway.

    Bonus: Snydholm finding a new spot along the gummint paycheck wall for his newly created "Placemaking" Czar, Affirmative Action meets the Peter Principle DNR guy Stokes, gets to go stare at it in Detoilet.

    Frilliant!  Obviously, we've seen that the Republicans don't have what it takes.

    Just how the DRIC issue was shat upon alone from the OTR debate tells me that any one of the 3 Senate candidates is heads and shoulders better than the Nerd.

    Agema best have something up his sleeve for 2014...

    You may find this interesting . . . (none / 0) (#3)
    by Kevin Rex Heine on Sun Aug 05, 2012 at 12:35:31 PM EST
    . . . if I remember correctly, the ballot wording is such that a "yes" vote actually preserves PA-4!  The unions are relying on the uninformed to reflexively vote "no" and thereby toss PA-4 out the window.

    Not accurate (none / 0) (#5)
    by PTurner on Tue Aug 28, 2012 at 02:39:18 AM EST
    Mary Beth Kelly did not vote for "substantial compliance" with the three D-nominated justices.  In fact, she authored the lead opinion providing for the precise OPPOSITE, which was signed in relevant part by the three other R-nominated justices (Young, Markman, Zahra) and will do away with any questions of substantial compliance for election controversies in the future.  

    In fact, the vote was 6-1 against the governor's position.  MB Kelly found actual compliance with the statutory requirements (and thus joined the D's who otherwise believed the referendum should be on the ballot in ordering that it go on the ballot); Young and Zahra thought that there were open fact questions and would have remanded for more evidence to answer them.  Only Markman would have kept the referendum off the ballot entirely as failing to comply with the statute.  

    Display: Sort:


    Make a new account

    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!
    create account | faq | search