Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

D.C. United Stadium Opponents Denied Chance to Speak

Chaos erupted in the Prince George's County Council chambers this afternoon after Chairperson Marilynn Bland (D-Clinton) recessed the session without allowing members of the public to speak in opposition to the deal to build a soccer stadium for D.C. United in Prince George's County. About a dozen people had signed up to testify.

They wanted to applaud members of the council for their vote last week to oppose state legislation that would launch planning for the stadium, and to encourage the council members not to rescind their votes if another tally was taken.

Bland, a stadium supporter, had given assurances to state lawmakers over the weekend that the council would take a vote to reverse its earlier position.

The residents who attended today's meeting worried that some council members would be swayed to change their votes. But the actions taken by Bland today indicated that she lacked the votes to bring the issue back up again.

Bland and Council member Samuel H. Dean (D-Mitchellville), who abstained from last week's vote, walked out of the room after the meeting ended. The other members of the council looked puzzled. Staffers said they didn't know what was happening.

"We elected these people, this is disrespectful," yelled Ruth Wright, a soccer stadium opponent. "They are going to get up and leave the room. It's not going down like that."

The cameras and microphones were turned off.

"I want the cameras on," Wright said. "We pay for the cameras. It's not Marilynn Bland's dollars."

Council member Thomas E. Dernoga (D-Laurel) told the members of the audience that if they wanted to talk, he would stay to listen. Council members Eric Olson (D-
College Park), Ingrid Turner (D-Bowie), Andrea Harrison (D-Springdale), Tony Knotts (D-Temple Hills) and Will Campos (D-Hyattsville) also stayed.

Judy Robinson, who also opposes the stadium plan and has attended council meetings since the 1980s, said: "I have never seen this happen."

-- Ovetta Wiggins

By Anne Bartlett  |  March 31, 2009; 5:52 PM ET
Categories:  Prince George's County  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: MoCo Firefighters To Appeal Labor Ruling on Raises
Next: GOP Candidates in MoCo Boycott Election Debate

Comments

Ha! Ha! Ha! Hee! Hee! Hee!

Posted by: blackandred777 | March 31, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

The United have clearly paid this Bland woman good money to push the stadium through and she's under enormous pressure to deliver.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | March 31, 2009 6:44 PM | Report abuse

It sure sounds like there are unlawful payoffs changing hands.

Posted by: Bitter_Bill | March 31, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

This potential stadium could (and certainly will if completed) bring new revenue to Maryland in the relatively short term. It will spark economic development in Prince George's County and bring new tax revenue to the state. The state would be reimbursed by tax revenue generated by the stadium for their investment that is sure to be less than $150 million. Proposed plans for a stadium are responsible.

I do not understand the rabid objection to this stadium from some people. Is there a stigma attached to "stadium"? DC United is a good thing for Maryland and Prince George's County (in so many different ways).

Posted by: davethelad | March 31, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

@PB69: ONE MORE TIME! READ THE BOTTOM OF THIS PRESS RELEASE. IT IS ON EVERY PRESS RELEASE THE CLUB ISSUES.
WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BE SUCH A D-BAG DUDE?
http://www.dcunited.com/press-release/dc-united-issues-statement-0

Posted by: DadRyan | March 31, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

D.C. United? Doesn't seem like they can get Prince George County united.

It appears that because the there was oppositioni to a particular view, the woman holding the mic has the logic that if the mic is shut off, there's no opposition. Somehow it kinda defeats the idea of government representation and, bite my tongue, democracy.

Posted by: Dungarees | March 31, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

The United issuing a press release has nothing to do with me, I'm not a member of the press. Why did you think that? No need to be rude.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | March 31, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

A question for PG County againsters: is there a history of behind the scenes payoffs to politicians in PG county related to development projects?

If so, how much is that past history at play in the accusations against DC United and in the anti-stadium feelings?

I'd really like to understand this. It would give me a much better idea of what assumptions underlie the current turmoil.

Posted by: seahawkdad | March 31, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

The United issuing a press release has nothing to do with me, I'm not a member of the press. Why did you think that? No need to be rude.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | March 31, 2009 7:31 PM

I think DadRyan is talking about you referring to D.C. United as "The United" and not "United" or "D.C. United" etc.

Posted by: davethelad | March 31, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

DC United isn't the problem here. PG county's "leadership" is the problem. These are the idiots that support a police department that shoots pet dogs; why would you expect them to act in a just manner?

Get a grip. PJ County government is a corrupt joke.

Posted by: hacksaw | March 31, 2009 7:47 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I am for a stadium for United. I'd prefer DC, but am eager to show PG that United will help the County and State if we build a stadium there.

Having said that, the action taken by the chairwoman is beyond belief. Let people speak! Forcing the opponents out is only going to encourage them more and recruit more opponents. Silencing the opposition is akin to fascism.

Posted by: delantero | March 31, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse

, myself is tried of the people we put in these position, always trying to cram these decision down our thoat. Just like the Redskins Stadium. Le the people vote on these ideas, not the high ups. We the tax payers are the ones paying. If it is so important for DC United to come to Prince Georges, they should pay for they own field and the tax payers of MD.

Posted by: lolliep | March 31, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse

lolliep, do you understand that they were to vote on allowing a study? That study would look into the the potential economic pros and cons of a stadium as well as financing plans. As it is, Prince George's County taxpayers would not pay for the stadium. Attendants of events at the stadium would be repaying the bonds not Joe and Jane Resident who don't attend events at the stadium.

Posted by: sitruc | March 31, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

I would like to delete the prior comment, due to some of the letters didn't print out in the words. It should have read: I, Myself am tried of the officials we elect in office make decisions and cram the results down the people throats. Just like the Redskins Stadium. Let the people have a say so on these ideas, not just the high-ups.If DC United want to come to PG, let them pay for the building of the field, not we the tax payers.

Posted by: lolliep | March 31, 2009 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Marily Bland confrimed she is corrupt, since her days on the PGCPS board and to this very day when she ignores the opposition and adjourns the meeting. NOw, if my fellow Negroes, uh BLACKS, do not see these 2 council members,including Sam Dean as corrupt then we will be shafted some more and again by others like them.

Did somebody say recall and rewrite the charter of the county council for nitwit/corrupt croooks. GLAD, I was not there to see this mutiny in PGC Council hearings I would still be puking from the stench of Bland's disrespect to the citizens.

Posted by: truthbeebold | March 31, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

A) Did PG County residents really need a vote before Cooke built the stadium? He bought the land and paid for the stadium. The county helped with some infrastructure - but FedEx is actually worse for the county because Prince George's and the Redskins are not vested in it together.

B) Do you expect every budget item to be voted on by the public? Because then you should expect the world to come to a screeching halt. Maybe if this was a tax initiative, sure. But governments sell bonds to spur growth everyday. Yes, everyone should be heard on the issue. But there has to be some trust given to the people that have been elected to make decisions.

Posted by: Kev29 | March 31, 2009 8:49 PM | Report abuse

For future reference, a comment or two from Bland (or a statement saying that she couldn't be reached) would add a lot of credibility to the story.

Posted by: notafembot | March 31, 2009 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I am a diehard DC United fan and a huge backer of the stadium bill. I think Councilwoman Bland's move has not helped our side (which she purportedly supports) at all. The citizens at this meeting, if their quotes to the press are any indication, are against any public/private stadium deal at all as a matter of principal. Judy Robinson, for example, went on a massively inaccurate ramble of a phone call to United president Kevin Payne on WTOP last week.

As a supporter of the bill (and not just so my favorite team has a place to play), I say let these people air whatever view they have. They don't appear to have a firm understanding of the bill, so they're more than likely to embarrass themselves with misguided, baseless opinions. There's no harm in them saying their piece; there's plenty of harm in shutting them up preemptively (for example, people posting accusations of bribery on this comment page).

If Councilwoman Bland was to read this, I would advise her to keep Machiavelli out of public forums. His philosophy doesn't play well.

Posted by: Chest_Rockwell | March 31, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

FROM THE DC UNITED BLOG:

Riz - BigSoccer Moderator
People need to get in that comment section, and start speaking some sane truth from our side.
__________________
~ Moderator - DC United forum & Chelsea FC forum ~

-------------------
sitruc
BigSoccer Member+
It's a ********ing study.

Anyone know anything about the opposition?


I'M WONDERING IF ANYONE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT THE PROPONENTS? THE ONES WHOM LIVE IN NOVA OR MONT WHERE THE STADIUM BELONGS... BUT WHOM THINK THAT PG RESIDENTS ARE TOO STUPID TO GRASP ECONOMICS OR HIGH FINANCE.

THERE ARE 2 TYPES OF STADIUM ECON ANALYSES - THE ONES BY STADIUM CONSULTANTS THAT FIND GLOWING RESULTS AND THE ONES BY ECONOMICS PROFESSORS THAT FIND NO VALUE. THE NOVAS WANT A STADIUM ANYWHERE - OTHER THAN ST.LOUIS - SO THEY TOUT THE FORMER.

THE PG RESIDENTS SEE NO REASON TO BE BOTHERED BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THE PROFESSORS AND HAVE NO NEED FOR A STADIUM.

YOUR OPPONENTS - IF YOU MET THEM - ARE MIDDLE CLASS HOMEOWNERS WHO FEAR THAT THEIR GOVT IS CORRUPT AND MORE CONCERNED WITH MONUMENTS THAN REAL DEVELOPMENT. THE CONDESCENDING NOVA/MONT ATTITUDE IS HARDENING VIEWS, NOT BRINGING "SENSE" TO THE ISSUE.

SIMPLY, PG RESIDENTS DISAGREE WITH YOUR VIEW. STUDY? YOU HAD A STUDY. MSA & DCU COOKED IT AND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND RESIDENTS SHREDDED IT. TIME FOR ANOTHER STUDY? TIME FOR MORE CORRUPTION? SORRY, PG RESIDENTS HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO.

Posted by: erimaren | March 31, 2009 9:14 PM | Report abuse

It's becoming clear to me. Some residents of PG County (maybe most?) feel that they have continually been had by the politicians they elected (that were elected...who is responsible here?) and DC United has walked into this unfortunate situation.

Additionally, some of those county council members feel railroaded by more powerful political interests in the county. Probably a long history of this. This too is working against DC United.

All I can say to PG residents is that DC United isn't that kind of organization. Please listen to them and judge based upon their history of working with the District. Don't paint them with the same brush used on your political 'leaders'. Also carefully consider United's ownership. You may be missing an opportunity here. United's owners, MacFarlane and Chang, has a history of taking risks in urban development that do pay off for areas that need it.

Don't kill opportunity because of past political shenanigans.

Posted by: seahawkdad | March 31, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Chest_Rockwell wrote"PGC residents might oppose any stadium" well Madam Chest_Rockwell you are now right. It's comments like yours and the actions like M. BLand's that have cemented by opposition to a stadium of any kinf in our county.

Please stay where you live and ask your government to force this stupid risk on your fellow taxpayer, you are an idiot-chest rockSwell for sure and we do not desire your kind in PG County, madam.

Posted by: truthbeebold | March 31, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

OMG, keep the Big Soccer cr*p & all caps entries off here, please! Hysterics will get us nowhere. You know who you are.

I'm a democrat, little 'd'. Shutting down legitimate discussion on the subject only enlivens the opposition. All those who support the stadium should contact MD representatives and voice their support. Get off your keisters, if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Its as simple as that- not to say it's a guarantee, but that is the way to go!

Vamos United!!

Posted by: KireDCU | March 31, 2009 9:46 PM | Report abuse

erimaren,

Nice of you to visit Big Soccer. Your thoughts are welcome over there so please join the discussion. I would take the CAPS LOCK off and stop yelling though.

You make it sound as though you are from Prince George's County in your comment. I'm sorry you think others think you are "too stupid to grasp economics or high finance." It's not healthy to have that type of outlook. Where do you find faults with the studies or potential studies? If you believe there are two types of studies and United has already done one with the MSA, why not let the other study take place? That way you may actually have something to back some of your opinions. Right now, myself and others are able to bring facts to the discussion because research has been done. As fans of the team, we realize a stadium must be in a location that is accesible and people want to go to. United believes in smart, transit-oriented-development and they believe people will want to go to Prince George's County. That type of dense development also maximizes the tax base that Prince George's County and Maryland have. Do you understand what the plans currently are for the locations United is looking at? How do you feel about those? What would you do there? Do you have any other ideas for where United should re-locate?
Instead of attempting to generalize people based on their location in the same metroplitan region, you should welcome them into your county to spend money and grow and strengthen the economy. We're the same middle-class homeowners as you and we want to be part of your county.

Posted by: sitruc | March 31, 2009 9:48 PM | Report abuse

SHDAD

Good try. and you do seem sincere.

Most of your opposition does not oppose a stadium - they oppose financing it. Please don't try the "its not your taxes" argument. It is. Sure, subsidize some types of development? Done that - National Harbor, Greenbelt Metro, West Hyattsville, etc.

But first, DCU screwed up (and i know you know this) by participating in a cooked study with MSA, asking for the RBA $200+ million cadillac while many of its competitors understood that they could only afford the Ford. Asking for 75% financing and no money down, with inflated economic multipliers and flawed tax revenue calculations with bond payments exceeding the direct tax revenue (read the study carefully) so that there would be no tax benefit, suggests that McFarlane is a charlatain. Admit it, McF is not original DCU - he's a developer/investor, not a soccer guy. You lost PG residents on this slick attempt.

All other TIF properties or tax credit properties kick off real tax revenues. having 100+% go to pay the bonds insults the intelligence of PG residents.

You may mean well - you want to avoid having to buy Budweiser to see a game (but think of the road trip) - but your DCU leaders were too slick by half. Now, they ARE caught up with the regular mistrust of officials - hardened today by your girl.

In terms of who elected these leaders. Well, try having a one-party system full of incumbents. Good luck getting rid of long-standing pols. Only the Council is term limited.

Think Silver Line.

Posted by: erimaren | March 31, 2009 9:50 PM | Report abuse

erimaren, thanks for the reply. I do understand your point of view.

Posted by: seahawkdad | March 31, 2009 10:01 PM | Report abuse

SIMPLY, PG RESIDENTS DISAGREE WITH YOUR VIEW. STUDY? YOU HAD A STUDY. MSA & DCU COOKED IT AND COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND RESIDENTS SHREDDED IT. TIME FOR ANOTHER STUDY? TIME FOR MORE CORRUPTION? SORRY, PG RESIDENTS HAVE OTHER THINGS TO DO.

Posted by: erimaren | March 31, 2009 9:14 PM

WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

And seriously, if you have other things to do than to worry about expendible dollar$ coming into your community (more than 8 times a year), then go do them. I, for one, will add Prince Georges to the list of places I won't spend my money and your county can go on not spending it's money at such illustrious places as The BLVD.

Thx,

Jay!

Posted by: jayrockers | March 31, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

How tiresome. Exhausting listening to the NIMBYs. Can't see the forest through the trees. New stadiums are being built as we speak and have been built for their soccer teams in, New Jersey, Utah, PA, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois. They have just been approved in Houston, St. Louis and Kansas City. Whose left? The team that averages almost 20k paying fans per contest. Instead of crying why dont you ask the others if it was/is a worthwhile investment.

Posted by: ATPDC | March 31, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

How tiresome. Exhausting listening to the NIMBYs. Can't see the forest through the trees. New stadiums are being built as we speak and have been built for their soccer teams in, New Jersey, Utah, PA, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois. They have just been approved in Houston, St. Louis and Kansas City. Whose left? The team that averages almost 20k paying fans per contest. Instead of crying why dont you ask the others if it was/is a worthwhile investment.

Posted by: ATPDC | March 31, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

I just took my family of 3 to DC this past weekend from Frederick for a game. Lets see. I actually bought four tickets = 98 dollars + TAX Bought a kids jersey, a stuffed animal, and a shirt for my lady = 85 dollars + TAX. Bought 4 beers for me 28 dollars and I am sure there was TAX. Popcorn and a effing pretzel. Don't know about tax for them but who cares. In this time I saw at least 100+ employees working for the stadium, the concessions, security, cleaners and so on.

Lets suppose for a minute that this stadium does not get built. DCU will not stay at RFK. Many people are talking already of this team moving to St. Louis. Bye jobs. Bye tax money. Bye to my only sport that I actually love and want to see. Bye family fun. Bye community development.

DCU has a good record of involvement in the District. To actually accuse someone on your council of taking bribes is a serious offence, indeed slander.

I fear that this will not work and I hope that Prince George's residents will not be so one sided on this issue and try to see the benefits along with the negatives that have clouded their vision.

Posted by: rockus521 | March 31, 2009 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Anyone against a stadium does not deserve the tax benefits.

Take your Jack Johnson and his chauffeur/concubine and SHOVE IT.

We'll go to NoVa next.

Yeagh!

Posted by: bs2004 | March 31, 2009 10:49 PM | Report abuse

It sounds like Judy Robinson needs a job if she has so much free time she can attend all of the county council meetings.

Posted by: roadkit | March 31, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

There's one simple rule that these "opponents" have forgotten: Think before you speak. All they want to do is cry about Public Tax dollars being used for the stadium. If you actually took 15 seconds to see the general plan, you'd see that money for the stadium would only be coming from money spent at the stadium. How difficult is that to grasp?

You have 2 ears and 1 mouth, it only makes sense to listen twice as much as you speak.

Posted by: alecw81 | March 31, 2009 11:16 PM | Report abuse

One thing that those opposed to this who live in PG seem to forget, is that building the stadium there will encourage people to consider moving to PG next time they are looking for a new home. I used to live near College Park then moved to DC about 15 years ago. I love going to the games at RFK. But if a new stadium is built in PG, I will consider making my next home in PG. And that's good for tax revenue, home sales, etc. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Posted by: dsheon1 | March 31, 2009 11:31 PM | Report abuse

These folks only know what the Post writers tell them, and the Post certainly isn't delivering all the information. The Post was all 'rah-rah' about the baseball stadium -- which was a bad deal, and now they are trying to correct 'wrongs' and will oppose anything. Meanwhile, jurisdictions like PG County and DC are offering subsidies to private developers of strip malls, neighborhoods, and hotels left and right.

Do you people really think the National Harbor Hotel was built without any subsidies? The Post certainly doesn't want to admit it, but it's true.

Posted by: mbyrd28 | March 31, 2009 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Chest_Rockwell wrote"PGC residents might oppose any stadium" well Madam Chest_Rockwell you are now right. It's comments like yours and the actions like M. BLand's that have cemented by opposition to a stadium of any kinf in our county.

Please stay where you live and ask your government to force this stupid risk on your fellow taxpayer, you are an idiot-chest rockSwell for sure and we do not desire your kind in PG County, madam.

Posted by: truthbeebold | March 31, 2009 9:44 PM

truthbeebold,

I am bothered and offended by your comment. I am a life long Maryland resident who pays state taxes (some of the highest taxes in the country I may add). I genuinely believe building a soccer stadium in Prince George's County is a solid investment for our state. Those who live in Prince George's County are not the only ones shouldering the costs of state investments, just as all citizens of Maryland (even the ones outside of Prince George's) share in our liabilities and problems.

I am not an idiot for supporting the stadium, and I can assure you that most of the others who support the stadium are not idiots either (especially Chest_Rockwell). Madam, What are your reasons for your strong feelings against Prince George's County and the state looking into this project?

Posted by: davethelad | April 1, 2009 1:09 AM | Report abuse

As a resident in (D-Dist.9) my family and quite a few neighbors are glad we have a chance to spend our money in P.G. and not D.C. to see United games. We support the stadium and know the benefits it will bring to our "always in the news for bad things" County. :)

I wish my rep Bland didnt walk out like that on 12 folks, but hey them's the Breaks!!

~worm~

Posted by: urwormfood | April 1, 2009 2:51 AM | Report abuse

Opponents,

There is nothing slick going on here. The stadium proponents are not trying to pull one over on you. The previous study had nothing to do with DC United. The MD Stadium Authority had it done because they were trying to lure DC United away from DC and they (the MD Stadium Authority) in turn used it to do exactly that. Every study that is done is not cooked just because it disagrees with your opinion. That is a tired old cliche that has led to the continuation of many thing's that don't make sense (global warming, handgun ownership, the nuclear arms fiasco, etc). Have you not heard the opponents of the global warming debate claim that the facts are cooked or not convincing in spite of a mountain of evidence to the contrary? There is nothing harmful about another study being done. If you (the opponents) are right then it will simply validate your beliefs. If you are wrong then it becomes a good thing for everybody involved.

If your against the stadium and you could care less if it will generate revenue, create jobs, and revitalize the area then please say so. I would respect that a lot more then simply ignoring every courteous or eloquent comment because the content doesn't suit your agenda.

Posted by: croftonpost | April 1, 2009 7:03 AM | Report abuse

"To actually accuse someone on your council of taking bribes is a serious offense, indeed slander."

"Bought 4 beers for me..."

The United fan who posted those items above should know that drinking four 18 ounce beers in under two hours and then driving home with your kid in the car is quite a serious offense as well.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | April 1, 2009 8:48 AM | Report abuse

PB69,

Your point is very well taken and I agree if he drove. However, his wife may have driven home.

Posted by: croftonpost | April 1, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

>>>"Bought 4 beers for me..."

The United fan who posted those items above should know that drinking four 18 ounce beers in under two hours and then driving home with your kid in the car is quite a serious offense as well.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | April 1, 2009 8:48 AM <<<<

Hey moron this is not Saudi Arabia...His wife can drive the family home.

~worm~

Posted by: urwormfood | April 1, 2009 9:21 AM | Report abuse

hahahahahaaha. OMG. These opponent comments are COMEDY GOLD!!!!!!!!!!!11111

Posted by: jleppig | April 1, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

I agree that it is becoming incresingly clear that staidum opponents, including those on the council, are simply opposing the plans out of principle without taking the team to understand them. First, the current vote simply authorizes a study to see if this is a good deal for the state and county. Second, the plan does not draw on the existing tax base and is paid for by bonds which are repaid through stadium revenues (paid by the fans! income that the county would not otherwise receive.) Opponents continue to spread misinformation, including councilman Dernoga who in email exchanges with me continued to stand by completely false statements (such as suggesting that the surround counties, including VA, have already rejected this plan). As long as the council continues to spread politically favorable lies to their constituents it will be a difficult road for United. PG county deserves better representation and is ignoring a tremendous opportunity for economic development in exchange for political showmanship.

Posted by: unitedunitedunited | April 1, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

The United fan who posted those items above should know that drinking four 18 ounce beers in under two hours and then driving home with your kid in the car is quite a serious offense as well.

Posted by: PowerBoater69 | April 1, 2009 8:48 AM

Your comments before this had indicated that you actually came onto this forum to debate the merits of United's position. It seemed that you were advocated a position about fiscal responsibility, and you seemed to be skeptical of using state funding for anything related to the stadium.

The comment you made about the alcohol, kids, and driving was is so blatantly offensive and out of place that I really must question your motivation. The comment your referenced: the guy who posted it was clearly talking about tax revenue and the money he was spending. You turn into a spot to pass moral judgment on people. You don't know who he purchased the beers for or who drank the beers. You don't know what his blood alcohol content was. You don't know if he was driving on the way home either. Yet you make that stab. For this discussion it was insignificant. Your point is not well-taken and is not rooted in any form of formal logic.

Posted by: davethelad | April 1, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

davethelad from truthbeebold:
Know I was trying to offend because I am and thousands more like me are offended by the ramming and scamming our politicians are doing the the citizens. Frankly, madam (pimp) you are just collateral damage and should stay out of our county and I promise to stay out of yours.

Soccer patrons we do not want a stadium that is stealing even a dime from our coffers, we need the liability to be of benefit to all citizens not a black millionaire from California. ANd we do not want to subsidize the illegals playing soccer here and please take them with you when you stay away from PEE GEE CEE.

Posted by: truthbeebold | April 1, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company