Report Inappropriate Comments

You know, Cat, I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone who is so intent on exposing his own defective thinking like the two-time election reject has.

Let's take the statement that you justifiably call into question: "There are a lot of people... that would disagree with you."

First, this is ignoring the obvious fact that, on two occasions, more people rejected his candidacy -- meaning that, as many people as he claims disagree with Scal, many, many more agreed that the two-time election reject is unfit for office.

Second, even if there were "a lot of people" who believe that a failed candidate should call himself by a make-believe title, citing such unidentified [or, to use another term, anonymous] support is hypocritical for him to do, as he has so often engaged in name-calling and questioned the credibility of commenters on this website who use screen names.

And finally, none of these people have made any comments on this website in support of the two-time election reject and his made-up title. As we know, the two-time election reject is in the habit of claiming to have conversations that somehow support his statements -- and yet there has never been objective and verifiable information to prove that they actually occurred.

[Remember his claim about "every council member" saying he had an effect on their budget decisions, when not a single one of them was quoted or even heard in public saying such a thing?]

So, once again, the two-time election reject is demanding that other people simply take his word, when so often his word is proven to be false.