Anonymous wrote:This article by “Ryan” is a window into the ideology of CleanSlate:
“I’ve been studying the “woke” (critical social justice) movement since the Evergreen State riots in 2017. I have always identified as a classic liberal, and I still do. I am self-employed, and one could easily argue that I work in the progress business; I earn more when my clients do well, less and sometimes none when they don’t. My entire adult life, “live, and let live,” would have described my politics. Until 2020.
Living in Montgomery County it became very clear that there were some who were allowed to “live,” and some who weren’t, AND, if you were one of us that weren’t preoccupied with wiping down our fruit with Clorox wipes before removing our N95’s, it was VERY clear who was allowed to “live,” and who wasn’t. “Live the way we tell you to, you don’t need to know why,” was NOT something, growing up in a deep red military baptist household, I was fond of. I was confused, I felt abandoned by my fellow liberals, and I dug deeper into researching why I was confused. Why weren’t words seeming to mean what the book in my house with dictionary on the front says they mean?
Now here we are.
This is the first part of a social justice dictionary to help you understand what those who govern us, and those who teach our children mean when they use these words. These are NOT buzzwords. Sitting behind each word like, “equity,” or, “antiracist,” is a theory to better the behavior of humans in the eyes of humanity PhD’s loaded with academic language, and a plan to inject it into society. The words themselves sound good to most good-hearted people. However, when you see the theories in practice one can begin to see how the words have been misaligned and redefined. The Webster’s dictionary definition is how the ideas win support. You are sold the promise of restoration, and you receive the very opposite.
Woke: Is an adjective to describe a person who is aware of, and has a pathological like (resembling mental illness) sensitivity to systemic oppression that philosophers in social science claim to exist in regards to race, gender, ethnicity, disability, age, etc…”
Sounds like a Republican to me.
Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
Anonymous wrote:Founders and supporters. Listed right here: http://notmarcelrich.org/we-agree/
Not one name attached to clean slate MoCo. Shady AF.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
What exactly is misleading about the anti-Elrich site? Everything I read is true. Now, things they point out may not be particularly important in some circumstances, but it's all true as far as I can tell.
Some of the information is true. A lot of it is misleading. Sometimes the site lies by omission. That’s how disinformation works, and that site is a disinformation campaign.
For example: Would it change the perception of Elrich’s comments about renters if the site explained that Elrich made those statements during remarks on the importance of housing stability for renters? Elrich cares about people having stable housing, but that often involves renter protections that the developer crowd doesn’t like. Or would it change your perception of Elrich’s comments about people living closer to work if the site explained that Elrich was arguing against a second river crossing when he made them?
Also, as the PP said, the one lie that runs throughout the site is that the CE sets land use policy. That’s actually the council. If you don’t like land use or don’t think there’s enough housing, blame sitting councilmembers.
Now I think you're being a little misleading, or at best splitting hairs on a technicality. Both CE and council affect and set land use policy. CE can make recommendations as part of the budget, which council approves? CE can also certainly espouse his views publicly, which can affect the way the council votes because some members draw on the same vocal support base. One councilmember said it best at a recent council meeting (paraphrased): CE is like the dad that says yes we can do everything and it's up to the council to be the mom that says no we can't afford to do this or that, and we're not going to be able to go to disney this year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
What exactly is misleading about the anti-Elrich site? Everything I read is true. Now, things they point out may not be particularly important in some circumstances, but it's all true as far as I can tell.
Some of the information is true. A lot of it is misleading. Sometimes the site lies by omission. That’s how disinformation works, and that site is a disinformation campaign.
For example: Would it change the perception of Elrich’s comments about renters if the site explained that Elrich made those statements during remarks on the importance of housing stability for renters? Elrich cares about people having stable housing, but that often involves renter protections that the developer crowd doesn’t like. Or would it change your perception of Elrich’s comments about people living closer to work if the site explained that Elrich was arguing against a second river crossing when he made them?
Also, as the PP said, the one lie that runs throughout the site is that the CE sets land use policy. That’s actually the council. If you don’t like land use or don’t think there’s enough housing, blame sitting councilmembers.
Anonymous wrote:Founders and supporters. Listed right here: http://notmarcelrich.org/we-agree/
Not one name attached to clean slate MoCo. Shady AF.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
They at least sign their names! You can clearly see who is behind the anti-Elrich site.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
What exactly is misleading about the anti-Elrich site? Everything I read is true. Now, things they point out may not be particularly important in some circumstances, but it's all true as far as I can tell.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has anyone been following them? I can’t say I’m a fan of anyone who stays completely anonymous and fires shots into local races. How is this legal? Looks like they have funding. Don’t they have to register as a PAC?
How ironic that you're posting this anonymously. What's your PAC?
I'm not sure why you think they have "funding." It's a basic Wordpress site on a cheap web host. And a twitter account.
It doesn’t look like Wordpress to me. They’re sending questionnaires to candidates. They look organized to me.
https://cleanslatemoco.com/
Clean Slate claims to be run by a single person using their own money. If true, the site does not need to file disclosures. That’s unlike the anti-Elrich site run by a number of Riemer supporters who are close to the development lobby. That site, which puts out a lot of misleading info about the CE, should be disclosing.
What exactly is misleading about the anti-Elrich site? Everything I read is true. Now, things they point out may not be particularly important in some circumstances, but it's all true as far as I can tell.