Louise Smith – Can We Be a Bigger Hypocrite?

August 13, 2008 by Cato  
Filed under Maryland, Salisbury Politics

Print This Post

We all know that Salisbury Councilwoman Louise Smith is a liar. Literally from the moment she was elected to her seat we have seen example after example of Smith telling members of the public one thing and doing another. From her promises of transparent government, to her pledge to make the city complete its audit on time, to giving her word to support Debbie Campbell for Council President, to her promises to place the taxpayers first, Smith has not only proven her willingness to prostitute herself and her office – she has chosen to do so at bargain basement prices.

In her Mike Dunn like zeal to attempt the silencing of a council minority who constantly draws attention to her incompetence we have again witnessed more examples of Smith’s hypocrisy. To add insult to injury, Smith compounded her sin by exhibiting complete disdain for the public.

On Monday evening public comment was moved to the beginning of the Salisbury Council’s meeting. While the rules call for public comment at the end, Smith almost handled this mild problem properly. It was during the public comment that Smith’s hypocrisy showed itself again.

The public witnessed a woman from the Johnson Lake neighborhood come before council and explain that she had been the recent victim of a home invasion. The woman refused (for perfectly sound reasons) to give her name and address. In most jurisdictions this would not be a problem. In the third world fascist state known as Barrieland this is a problem.

Council rules require that ALL public commenters provide their name and address. To compound the issue, we must remember that only two meeting prior to Monday’s Smith railroaded the latest of her farcical rule changes. This latest rule change, aimed at Councilwomen Debbie Campbell and Terry Cohen (as well as their supporters), limits debate and FORBIDS the introduction of material or comments from ANONYMOUS individuals.

Does this mean that I oppose allowing this woman to speak? Of course not. Of course I’m not the one who wrote the stupid, and wholly unnecessary, rule. That would be Louise Smith. Oddly, I stood before council when this rule was debated and noted that these rules would have to be ignored, or changed, in the near future because Smith’s dim attempts to gag her enemies only makes her look the more foolish.

It should also be noted that once the woman was allowed to speak, Smith interrupted her. This again shows what high regard Smith has for the public who put her in office.

As the evening wore on, Smith simply couldn’t help herself from showing yet more contempt for the public. As the meeting came to a close, a gentleman spoke up that he had signed for public comment. Smith explained that public comment had been moved to the beginning of the meeting.

Fair enough Louise, but this guy (who I couldn’t see on TV) told you that he had been waiting over two hours to speak. Why were sign-up sheets available if you weren’t going to allow further comment? Smith was correct. However, she’s also a hypocrite. The polite thing to do would have been to give the man his five minutes.

But no! Princess Louise wanted to go home. She’s already conned the voters into putting her into office. Why should she bother with little niceties now?

Sphere: Related Content

Enter Google AdSense Code Here

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.