But now Summers is distancing himself from his actions. In a letter to the editor of the News-Leader, Summer says he's "concerned" that people think he was against a crime lab:
I speak as a leader of the opposition against the Community Safety Initiative. We did not vote down the crime lab.
I made my position clear through three newspaper articles, two radio interviews and a TV interview that I never opposed the crime lab. Those who stood with me voted down the early childhood development center. The crime lab was, unfortunately, attached.
Back in the 1990s, Summers led a drive to repeal a bias-crimes ordinance in Springfield. In an interview, he railed against homosexuals and claimed that oral sex among heterosexuals was very rare. We realized the root of his issues.
Paul Summers really needs to get over himself. Most folks in Springfield these days don't have a clue who he is, and probably couldn't care less. And what, exactly, does he have against early childhood education? Is he afraid all those preschoolers will turn into liberals if they learn their ABCs before kindergarten?
“We realized the root of his issues.” It seems to be contagious…
Flashback to 1989, SMSU, ‘The Normal Heart,’ and Jean Dixon’s “We are adamantly opposed to the homosexual act of sodomy.”
Give him news coverage with the aim of exposing him for who he really is, and you effectively end up handing him at least some degree of profile/status that he doesn't even remotely deserve.
Ignore him, and the stupid sumbitch just doesn't go away on his own.
It comes down to this:
Much like herpes, there ain't no cure for the Summerstime blues...
Summers is only confused because deep down he's what you call a "hobosexual."
That's a bum f**k.
I am not making this up: Paul Summers once referred to himself as "God's tool in the Ozarks." It was in the early 90's, during the anti-bias crimes ordinance campain.
anyone else notice how all those who profess their righteousness and xtianity to all are the first to screw you?
Students of boolean algebra might be able to better explain this: The vote was for money to go to two places (that is probably a simplification), a crime lab (A) and an early childhood dev center (B).
The combined group A & B didn't pass, so A & B = false. That's logically equivalent to "(not A) or (not b)" which means the negative of B (the child dev center) would have made the whole equation coume out to false (the entire initiative "crime lab (A) and dev center (B)" failed).
The only true way to know if both A and B are false (which also leads to the whole equation being false) or just one of the elements is to test them on their own.
Translation: put the crime lab on the ballot on it's own.
I heard some comedian say something about asking questions that are odly worded... his example "yes or no, do you like sugar or PCP?"
Post a Comment