Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Update: MoCo Mailer Citation Finally Accurate

When a mailer opposing Question B, a tax limitation measure on Tuesday's ballot in Montgomery County, arrived in mailboxes on Saturday, its claim that The Washington Post had editorialized against the proposal was not yet true. It became true today: the Post editoral page is recommending that voters reject Question B.

By Anne Bartlett  |  November 2, 2008; 7:52 AM ET
Categories:  2008 Elections , Montgomery County  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: MoCo Mailer Still Ahead of the Facts
Next: MoCo's Absentees Swell to 50,000 and Counting


The Post does little more than rubber stamp the wishes of the democratic party Elite in Maryland. It clearly cannot be relied upon to provide an objective analysis of local issues or to serve as a watchdog over local government officials. Looks like those of us who are concerned about the insatiable, bloated leviathan the Montgomery County govt has become are on our own.


Posted by: afpre42 | November 2, 2008 9:09 AM | Report abuse

the info that went out ahead of the post endorsement wasn't wrong just stated what the obvious is. WASHPOST is a rubber stamp for higher taxes and the Dems in MOCO.

Posted by: gwilson2 | November 2, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Who really cares what a biased media outlet says anyway? Vote your own mind on Nov 4th. That's the problem these days. People aren't informed enough to make decisions on their own and take credence in the empty words of snake oil salesmen like Barrack Obama.

Posted by: Digitalman08 | November 2, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Just wanted to let you know there's a new political Web site called

First exclusive interview this past Friday with Maryland State Delegate Kirill Reznik:


Posted by: pramit_mohapatra | November 2, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Snake oil? Robin Ficker has tried for years to sell all sorts of snake oil in MoCo. Fortunately the voters are smart enough to realize that a vote for "B" places too much power in one individual on the County Council. No one person should have that much power. The current law requiring seven affirmative votes by the 9-member Council to override the Charter Limit is sufficiently restrictive. Vote no on "B".

Posted by: mococivic | November 2, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Thw executive and council wouldn't have mailed out the postcard on Friday unless the post editorial staff told them their editorial would be coming out Sunday. The Post is an active player on the Post-Leggett-Knapp tax increase team. Look for a 15% to 20% property tax increase next year because of "deficit" in ever-larger budgets. They have thrown the homeowners under the bus, using them as an ATM. They believe they can get all the votes they need from the 10% of voters who vote in the Democratic Primary by paying them directly or indirectly.

Posted by: robinficker | November 2, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Vote Against B!

Look at the shambles TRIM restraints has left Prince George's County. You certainly don't need Robin Ficker schemes turning your communities into Prince George's North.

What's next Robin? Outlawing deciduous trees so you don't have to rake your neighbor's leaves?

Vote Against B!

Posted by: PrinceGeorgian | November 3, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

This is nothing like TRIM. This allows a tax increase up to the rate of inflation and for an emergency override. Read it before you give a legal opinion. Vote FOR B. Save Our Homes!

Posted by: robinficker | November 4, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what Robin Ficker means by "Save Our Homes". If the charter limit initiative doesn't pass, will we all lose them?

Posted by: ThePragmatist | November 4, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company