Comments on: Lame Duck Quacks https://boiseguardian.com/2005/12/07/lame-duck-quacks/ A different slant on the news. Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:59:30 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Jack J https://boiseguardian.com/2005/12/07/lame-duck-quacks/#comment-523 Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:59:30 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=173#comment-523 Tom – one spurt of what may seem like logic by “Mr. Lame Duck” does not make up for all the damage he has done by hundreds of votes to gut our neighborhoods of their unique personalities.

We need more lame ducks before it will end.

]]> By: Tom Mort https://boiseguardian.com/2005/12/07/lame-duck-quacks/#comment-522 Fri, 09 Dec 2005 01:18:33 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=173#comment-522 I’m sorry, but I don’t agree with Jack’s response. Come on man, give credit where credit’s due.

I thought Mapps’ response was freakin’ awesome and my hat is off to him for making such an eloquent stand!!

]]> By: Jack https://boiseguardian.com/2005/12/07/lame-duck-quacks/#comment-521 Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:35:31 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=173#comment-521 A phony lame duck person. He is so full of himself. Who will he work for next? A developer or larger governmental entity, I am betting.

]]> By: Goofy Growth https://boiseguardian.com/2005/12/07/lame-duck-quacks/#comment-520 Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:15:29 +0000 https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=173#comment-520 If they really wanted to send a mesaage they would have barred the developer from receiving any permits to build anything, anywhere for at least 120 days!

Now that would have sent a message—ooops I forgot the developers are the Councils Friends! Maybe we can still dream.

]]>