Cow Ard, You There?

I got another anonymous message today. It follows. I wish people would post under their own name. So I could directly reply back.

My name is Clark Johnson. Yours is..... ...Cow Ard ?

Anyway, this is Cow's post.

"You keep posting that chart, but it does not say what you think it does. There is a big difference in "resident's interest by activity type" and "we want these specific things in this specific park in this proportion of land area". Perhaps your other "5 facts" are similarly flawed?"

==========

That post has such flawed, stupid, 80 IQ logic, that I will reply very slowly. Funny thing, it took more than a month to come up with even that fantasy of logic, the truth being so strong against any rational rebuttal. No one has even tried before.

Here goes...

======

Tom,

There are 2 good answers. Let's start with the easy one.

1. The question, and answers, came directly from the Centennial Park Master Plan. This issue has always been about this piece of land, this new park, at this time. Read the Centennial Master Plan, if you can. It's all there.

I don't think any Parks Board member has ever read the Centennial Park Master Plan, except me. I cannot prove that, but since they all were so adverse to facts from it, well, you know...

2. The more global, more philosophical answer, more difficult for you, Tom, oh, Cow, to understand is that ALL 90% of Billings people want Family Areas, toilets, benches, good people stuff.

WHERE EVER. NOW.

Centennial is the only possibility now. First major park in 35 years.

And all 10% of Billings residents want Lacrosse, now I guess. They could be happy with one field; they are getting two fields.

But 90% of commoners get the Shaft.

Use that shaft for a toilet, commoners !! Eat cake, you commoners!

Did I type too fast, T.. , er Cow? Read it again. If you do reply back, please use your name, and some intelligence.

Yes, I am a sarcastic SOB. But I tell the TRUTH.

Clark Johnson