Sunday, September 26, 2010

Mayoral Candidate: Andrew Lineker

I have been so arrogant lately. Recent events have opened my eyes to the reality that I should be letting the candidates speak for themselves. How could my words ever do them justice? So without further ado, I step aside to allow you to experience Mr. Andrew Lineker, in his own words, verbatim from his twitter feed:

"Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where they is no river."
A striking realist statement. Politicians really is no river, is they? (Ow.)

"i know post secondary is expensive however it has to be lowered by the province to make it economical"
He really demonstrates how dire the need for better schooling is. I'm convinced.

"Their is a huge gap in one of my competitors so called platforms, he wants to return $5000 back to post secondary students. Its impossible"  
Foolish Daryl Bonar! How can we hope to increase the average level of education in Edmonton? 

"Nothing is simple about politics and I am proud to say that I never simplify the issues.
Simply put, when tax dollars are collected from a civic level they are collected from just Edmonton"

Finally, a Candidate who will keep the politics complex while dumbing them down.  

"Free E-signs all for the environment available for I-Phone, Blackberry, and Cell phones exclusively at http://bit.ly/blpucK"
 Mr. Bonar can not possible hope to match this man; he is already giving us free stuff!

"furthermore if the media did their homework they would see that i would like to see plebiscite on all key issues not just the arena"
This makes sense if you assume "plebiscite" is his word for butter, and "key issues" is toast, because otherwise he would be suggesting that he wants to hold votes on all key issues, but that would be ridiculous. 

"We'd all like to vote for the best man, but he's never a candidate "
That's very...humble...of him.

Enough of this, let us find his platform.
The first thing one reads on his homepage, at the top of his letter to the citizens, is how to pronounce his name. If we, the peons, are going to beg for his ineffable mercy, we'd better pronounce his name right. 

Anyone want to guess what his first major campaign point is? Two guesses?
You knew it was either the airport or...
Democratic process- He wants to encourage voter turnout by pitting us like roosters against Calgary, and open up the avenues to allow taxpayers (ooh!) to know when, why, and where municipal monies are issued out. No word on how this will be done. Possibly carrier pigeon. I'm having difficulty understanding how he can be for the citizens  letting their will be known, but anti-lobbyist. (At the end of this tirade, he uses four exclamation marks.) He does have a very open website, allowing for numerous comments and the like, and I was pleased to see some of the spelling errors were pointed out to him by a self-professed nit-picking English teacher; Mr. Lineker's response is to say that running for office is time consuming and adventurous, and that between that and his mother who is sick with Parkinson's disease he has no time to spellcheck. Although he has my sympathy for his mother, if he cannot run a proper website, how in the hell is he going to run a city?

The arena- He is not in favour, since he believes the escalating costs to be too high, and the whole affair to be about Mr. Katz wanting his own arena. He is, however, for the revitalization of downtown. He believes the crime rate is too high, and that scares people away from the downtown area, the parking is expensive, it is boring because if you are short, you "can't see anything", and we're such a loser city that it's unlikely people will travel to our city to see "a hockey rink". Oh, and it's hot. 
He suggests that we should accept the River Cree resort and casino's proposal to build a new arena on their land at no cost to taxpayers, but this notion was abandoned. He goes on to say he believes that this is because "Mr.Katz knows full well that he won't get away with anything shady when it comes to the Enoch Reserve as he is in the City of Edmonton". Is this not libel?

LRT expansion- Back when the LRT was first created and expanded, Mr. Lineker believes that people were evicted from their homes, and businesses were shut down, and he feels that if we continue to expand it, this will reoccur, so the LRT should move outside the city to travel along the Anthony Henday. It would be inexpensive to run it there, and also faster since it can take advantage of the overpasses, but it would be more out of the way, few buses run there, and the main users of ETS don't have vehicles so are likely loathe to walk all the way out of town.

Water quality- At last an issue that hasn't been done to death. This is a vital issue since Mr. Lineker believes our bodies are made of 91% water and we are the "Cancer Capital of the world" (Suck it, Chernobyl!). "Cancer cannot survive in an alkaline environment, but we don't have enough alkaline in our water supply to kill cancer." He is motivated to prevent cancer by increasing the alkalinity of our water. Finally someone looking after our alkalinities levels, which are, you know, low.


Media ethics- Mr. Lineker's campaign manager wrote in to a newspaper to complain about city council and the letter was never published nor his phone calls returned. Now, the media may or may not be biased, but don't people stop whining about this kind of thing by grade six?


Taxes- First he lists off a bunch of taxes, and follows it up with this:
 "Not one of these taxes existed 60 years ago, & our nation was one of the most  prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had a large middle class, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids..
What  happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'"
I try to write this blog with fair-minded and detached amusement. But even the suggestion that things were better when women stayed at home with the children causes me to sit back before attempting to type again. I have emailed him a very polite letter enquiring about what he means by this statement.

Traffic flow-In order to make everyone better drivers, we need to fix the potholes and deplorable roads, fine construction companies who go over budget (how does that work?) or overtime, remove snow, and institute better light patterns, which are all good ideas. For photo radar, however, he believes we should 1. leave it 2. increase it or 3. get rid of it altogether. Good job, Mr. Lineker. Those are indeed all our options. Did you want to pick one, maybe?

He has a quotes page. I'll just let you all marinate in the arrogance.

His link "Facts on the election" lead to a website where one fact is displayed: Mr. Mandel spent $500,000 on the last election, and Mr. Bonar has spent $150,000 so far this election. A disappointing set of facts. 


There you have him, folks. Mr. Andrew Lineker. I should get a medal for slogging through all that.
See what I do for you, Dear Reader? 

UPDATE 27/09/10
Good afternoon, Mr. Lineker;
Hope this finds you well.
I am confused by what you mean by this statement,would you mind explaining your plans with regards to this issue?

"Not one of these taxes existed 60 years ago, & our nation was one of the most  prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had a large middle class, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.."
Thank you for your time.
Regards
Michelle E


Dear Michelle:

I would like to address your comment, because it was at my suggestion for this to be posted. It actually came through on my email & thought it would be interesting for someone who did not receive this to read it.
 
I felt after reading this email, that it should be shared with others to see just how many taxes were out there. Not sure why you made the comment about mom raising the kids & therefore our taxes 60 yrs ago was most prosperous. That statement came along with the email.  It appears that you seem to losing sleep on such a small matter,  There is no underlining agenda, just an email I received & I posted it.   

I thank you for your comments, but I don't think I'll post anymore emails I receive.

Best regards,
Joanne 

Good afternoon, Joanne;
Are you, and the website in question, actually affiliated with Mr. Andrew Lineker?
I am losing sleep over this matter, since it seems a candidate that wants to be in a position of power in Edmonton likes the idea of women staying at home to raise children. Although I believe women should have the option (as should men) the tone of the comment suggests he feels life was better when women did. Why would you, or Mr. Lineker, post such a controversial email, unless you supported the issue?
Again, thank you for your time.
Michelle E

Good Grief, that is totally NOT what I said. This was an email that was sent to me & thought it was interesting & that Andrew should post it.  That's it!
I myself was a single mom who raised kids by herself & worked 3 jobs to do this. Am I stating that women should stay home??? My son Andrew grew up in a one parent house & it was very difficult for me& my children, as I was the only parent - no help from anyone.  He understood what I went through & has the utmost respect for me - that's probably why he asked me to be his campaign manger.  He knows I won't lie, I don't slander anyone (including opponents he is running against - unfortunately, this has not been the same from others) & he knows I have his best interests at heart.  I really don't understand where you are getting this from, and losing sleep?  Hopefully you will understand that this was just a comment that came from somewhere else & that's it.
Hopefully you should sleep better now!!!!!!!

Joanne - Campaign Manager 

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I find with great interest & disappointment in your blog. I do appreciate your comments, But arrogance I hardly think so. I find that Andrew is one of the few candidates that don't scream & yell & state empty promises. Blowing smoke!!
Yes, it is true that "most politicians" are the same all over. Everyone knows that. In fact I also follow him & I was present at the last forum. A forum is a presentation of the running candidates - to get to know them better & understand their platforms. While Andrew was up there he did in fact try to state his platform, which wasn't really elaborated on, but he did direct people to his website. Andrew was out there campaigning for the rights of University students to lower tuition & costs. However, & as I heard it - that falls under a provincial jurisdiction. So, he also stated that he would like to work with the province to enable students to keep our high standard of education & at the same time to lower the costs behind it. It is virtually impossible for that other candidate to promise money to students. Perhaps we will see!
I noticed that on Andrews site, that he does a lot of homework & checks things out, he goes on tours, talks to tons of people to see their views, he wants people to know the issues & personally I am grateful for his hard work. At least now I know the issues, and know that what he is talking about isn't "just smoke" unlike Bonar. I personally see him as just another Bill Smith with his own personal photographer by his side., Not to mention the t-shirts = man, he has shirts with his face all over - what's up with that. Talk about arrogance. He pays the media to interview him (& again take more pictures) he's going he to need bigger albums! He screams & condemns everybody, he doesn't appear to have any favorites - just himself. Perhaps if you ask nicely, you too can have a Bonar shirt! And while we're at it, It's funny that you only take certain excerpts out Andrews material & elaborate, perhaps if you took the time to read it thoroughly, you wouldn't have to slander him. However, you probably don't have time for that - you seem to be thoroughly into yourself & Bonar! If Bonar does get in & posts his face all over the city vehicle like Smith did, perhaps he'll let you go for a ride! In my opinion, your opinions are uneducated, perhaps post secondary school is the place for you....Should I go on & on about bits & pieces of irrelevant material? No, not my style, I just want to see the facts.

Thanks Debbie

Anonymous said...

page 1
I find with great interest & disappointment in your blog. I do appreciate your comments, But arrogance I hardly think so. I find that Andrew is one of the few candidates that don't scream & yell & state empty promises. Blowing smoke!!
Yes, it is true that "most politicians" are the same all over. Everyone knows that. In fact I also follow him & I was present at the last forum. A forum is a presentation of the running candidates - to get to know them better & understand their platforms. While Andrew was up there he did in fact try to state his platform, which wasn't really elaborated on, but he did direct people to his website. Andrew was out there campaigning for the rights of University students to lower tuition & costs. However, & as I heard it - that falls under a provincial jurisdiction. So, he also stated that he would like to work with the province to enable students to keep our high standard of education & at the same time to lower the costs behind it. It is virtually impossible for that other candidate to promise money to students. Perhaps we will see!
I noticed that on Andrews site, that he does a lot of homework & checks things out, he goes on tours, talks to tons of people to see their views, he wants people to know the issues & personally I am grateful for his hard work.

Michelle Ernst said...

Good job on finding Altavista's babelfish, first off, and second, thanks for visting my blog!

Although it may be the case that tuition is a provincial concern, Mr. Bonar is within his rights to offer tuition reimbursment (meaning he will pay off part of student's debts) in exchange for working in the city, and given that I've spent five years in post-secondary now, I'm in favor.

When someone says "the human body is 91% water", they are failing their homework.

When I began this endeavour, I had not considered myself Pro-Bonar, and when I read his statements, I felt myself less supportive, but since I have seen the other candidates, I think he is the least of most evils.

I do read very thoroughly. Slander is a serious charge; Perhaps you should reevaluate that statement.

I think you would be better served if you wanted to see the true facts.

Thank you for reading my site;
Michelle