Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 07:55:06 -0500 From: Tom West Subject: EXPOSED! The Intolerance of Mary Phyllis Horn and Pittsboro Matters Well everyone, we had an opportunity to see the Intolerance of Mary Phyllis and the gang at Pittsboro Matters with her simple little question in Chatham Chatlist #4823 AllContinue Reading
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:57:36 -0500 From: Taylor Kish Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Brad_Page_=96_You_should_know_better=2E?= “The ignorant mind, with its infinite afflictions, passions, and evils, is rooted in the three poisons. Greed, anger, and delusion.” Preston Development does not have to inform you of exactly what kind of nails they will use, 4”Continue Reading
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:44:01 -0500 From: Taylor Kish Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Maryphyllis_96_Merry_Christmas=21?= Someone should have told you. Your stream of thoughts in your posts to Randy, PBO Commissioners, and “people who favor Chatham Park” are incoherent and incongruous. You should seek help before you post. I write this in love.Continue Reading
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 08:05:25 -0500 From: Tritech – Jody Subject: A Chatham Park Q&A I’ll see if I can answer a few of the questions you raised. >• You say that you have a philosophy of “open, transparent >government.” You also say that you have been working withContinue Reading
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:06:04 -0500 (EST) From: Maryphyllis Subject: Questions for people who favor Chatham Park I have 4 questions for those of you who favor the Chatham Park development coming in: • Why aren’t you already moving to Cary? • Do you realize that this project willContinue Reading
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:45:13 -0500 From: samantha capitol Subject: Pittsboro matters to all of us. I apologize for my long winded presentation regarding Chatham Park. But the rezoning process and its implications are too complicated to reduce to haiku. Although heavy handed, my point is this: the leadershipContinue Reading
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 09:53:55 -0500 (EST) From: Brad Page Subject: Chatham Park: After PDD approval A reply to Samantha Capitol: “PittsboroMatters leadership: “neutral,” dishonest, or misguided?” Though her somewhat long post goes into considerable detail on the Chatham Park development she leaves one glaring point unaddressed: Why cannotContinue Reading
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 08:54:04 -0500 From: samantha capitol Subject: PittsboroMatters leadership: “neutral,” dishonest, or misguided? *According to the dictionary the definition of “neutral” is “neither helping or supporting either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.” Common synonyms are “impartial”, “unbiased” “unprejudiced”, “objective”, “equitable”, “open minded”, “non-partisan”, “disinterested”, “dispassionate”,Continue Reading
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 19:21:24 -0500 From: samantha capitol Subject: Starkweather for the 54th? Looks like the Democrats have rough seas ahead. Terrible situation for Rep. McManus and now they have to replace McManus and face a potential messy primary. I am sure they were happy to settle theContinue Reading
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 13:42:06 -0500 From: Joe Subject: Brain farts You don’t have to be so hard on yourself Mike. At our age we all have an occasional brain fart. It also seems to be running wild amongs the “Pittsboro Matters” crowd.Continue Reading
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 10:15:51 -0500 From: “John R Dykers” Subject: time of Pittsboro Matters Workshop Dear Mike Watkins, I reread 3 times Amanda Robertson’s initial post about the meeting on 12 Dec looking specifically for the time and it was not in the post anywhere. I almost emailedContinue Reading
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:11:03 -0500 From: Tom West Subject: Hate group members to protest at Courthouse on Monday at 6 pm Members of the former Chatham Coaltion hate group (rebranded now as Pittsboro Matters) will be protesting at the Couty Courthouse on Monday at 6 pm. They wantContinue Reading
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 22:08:43 -0500 From: Tom West Subject: Pittsboro Matters lied that they only learned about Chatham Park recently Stories about the planned Chatham Park started coming out in early 2006. If they can lie about this, what else are they lying about? Should we reward procrastinatorsContinue Reading
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 12:51:30 -0500 From: “John R Dykers” Subject: Property rights and Chatham Matters and Chatham Park Our property rights are constitutional but not God given. The framers of the constitution included several deists and even a religionist or two depending on interpretations, but all were declaringContinue Reading
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:15:57 -0500 From: Kachergis Subject: Re: not sure what the problem is In response to Tom West’s post on the November 4 Chatlist: I agree with my sister, Anne Kachergis, that here in northeast Chatham, the population is approaching a density that would require someContinue Reading
Chatham Chatlist ©2024