Pin It

I’m not buying what Arnold’s selling 

San Luis Obispo

This Arnold/Patterson debate is really starting to grate. I mean, Debbie Arnold is. First she accused Patterson of being abusive, and then she got abusive herself (“Smoking the vote,” May 15). She said, “He’s stooped to name calling—like a schoolyard bully who thinks he can intimidate anyone who opposes him.” Later, she said, “I’ll never stoop to bullying or name-calling.” Hello! Reading both of the candidates’ comments, I saw not one rude comment from Patterson, while Arnold’s were thick with negative tone. What’s more, she makes clear that she has tried to find anything negative she can on him to post on her website and encourages others to do so. What a hypocrite.

Next, we have Kate Loftus who, in a letter (“Lay off Debbie,” May 15), takes exception to the depictions of Debbie in the New Times editorial cartoons. “Both of their depictions of Debbie Arnold were dirty politics at its worst,” she says.

You may think they were unflattering, but, um, Kate, have you seen the picture she herself put on the cover of her own otherwise slick brochure? The one paid for by the “Committee to Elect Debbie Arnold ID#1302630”?

Let’s be honest and take a look at who is bankrolling her campaign. Why? Because with a 4-1 developer-friendly majority on the Board of Supervisors, they could effectively put an end to the environmental protections the citizens demand. Debbie Arnold uses every opportunity to tout her experience running a Sunday school (or pre-school or whatever), as if that should automatically make us all believe that she’s as pure as the driven snow. Sorry, I’m not buying it.


Pin It


Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Readers also liked…

Search, Find, Enjoy

Submit an event

Trending Now