What's in a name (or a letter, even)?

1. Use of Real Names (Facebook) to silence the dissenter (and others) - why would someone choose to remain anonymous

Chris John Mallios hides behind the rules of Facebook (Rules, which, mind you, are being challenged by a seemingly bizarre alliance of businesses which don't want to tie their business page to an employee's personal account, but are essentially forced to do so, the ACLU which views the practice as discriminating against those who are persecuted for who they happen to be, and international groups that are attempting to provide a voice for the oppressed citizens of regimes which limit free speech - all things that Chris John Mallios, as the raging liberal he claims to be, should understand) when he silences opposition. He goes on to state "...if you do not want to use your real name stay off this page. While i do not actively seek those with false names when they do lift their head i will cut it off."  His friends on the League City Politics is a Full Contact Sport page then chime in with the atta-boys, praising Chris for "...keeping it real", or "It is his page..." - all of which are fine; except, his definition of the purpose of the group:  "This is a group where the politics of League City, Texas can be discussed WITHOUT profane language and cheap shots. Everyone has an opinion so respect it. Remember 3 Things 1. League City politics is a full contact sport 2. it’s nothing personal it’s only League City Politics 3. Politics is not life and death."  If it's not life and death, if it's nothing personal, and if you respect everyone's position - why do you need "real names".  Sure, technically, that's Facebook's requirement, and you can hide cowardly behind their policy if you like.  But why do y'all report pseudonymous accounts?  And why don't y'all report those who agree with you that aren't using their real names (Lowell's Travels, ps, sorry, got his account locked out, now how will he share photos with his friends and family of all his wonderful travels?)  Is it because you only want people to express opinions that agree with yours, and you'll punish those who dissent in every possible manner you can come up with?  If a business owners disagrees with your group of clowns, will you boycott their business and spread rumors about them?  If a city employee expressed a view y'all didn't like, would you fire that employee should your crowd seize control of the city council?   I don't doubt it for one minute.  If your neighbor expressed a view you didn't like, and was running for a position on the board of the HOA, would you work to see them defeated because of their views on the unrelated local politics?  If an employee at a company where you happen to know their superior or the business owner expressed a view you didn't like, would you have them fired for trumped up reasons?  Again, I don't doubt it.  There are so many legitimate reasons to remain anonymous when dealing with the likes of y'all, even if simply for to prevent your group from making the argumentum ad hominem fallacy, by attacking the person challenging your beliefs and positions instead of replying to the point which is made.  Y'all still haven't explained how you defend Pat Hallisey after I posted links to evidence of his crass behavior, deceits, and funding provided from developers.  Instead, you took a victory lap to celebrate getting a pseudonymous profile removed from Facebook, providing evidence that my decision to remain unknown was sound, as argumentum ad hominem is still your favorite fallacy to embrace. 

2. Sycophants, False Idols, and Red Herrings (LCPIAFCS, Pat Hallisey, and Elaine Kosty)

Sycophants, yes, this is what I'll label you.  Holly Shelden, with your "I believe the mayor 100%", and Karl Wankowicz with your tin-foil-hat conspiracies about everything ranging from Facebook comment re-ordering to assumptions that anyone who disagrees with you is a "puppet" for Elaine Kosty, to assumptions that parked vehicles with endorsement signs on the side are strategically placed to limit attendance of events at near-by facilities... this is what you are.  You blindly follow the Mayor.  And since y'all do, you embrace every member of the Green Team.  You then challenge anyone who disagrees with you to discuss the accomplishments of those they support, or to provide evidence of their level of love for League City by providing a resume of volunteerism.  All of this is because you are so blindly supportive of the team that has at it's core a smarmy career politician who has, at various times, claimed to support or oppose every single position, just to get elected. Which leads me to my next sub-topic, False Idols.

Byram Lass, you should pay attention to this one, I'd appreciate your thoughts (given that so much of the New Testament is devoted to warnings against false teachers and wolves in sheep's clothing, I'd think you would be FAR more cautious in embracing the Green Team seemingly so blindly).  Let's talk about False Idols - and yes, I'm talking about Hallisey/Gripon (although mostly Pat Hallisey, Gripon seems just to be his devoted lackey at this point).  Pat Hallisey's shady granting of favors to political donors while director of the Galveston County Parks Board (summarized here: http://www.leaguecityxfiles.) shows him to be less than honest.  Yet y'all never once responded to this bit of his history.  Please tell me how you can trust him not to be involved in quid pro quo as mayor of our city, given his history?  While we're on digging up the past, Karl Wankowicz, John Bowen, and Mick Phalen (aka, the Political Sign Policy Regulators), let's talk about Pat's history with signs - Pat Hallisey was fined by the Texas Ethics Commission for claiming to be a Mayor on political signs (http://www.leaguecityxfiles... and as you said, John Bowen, "If you can't follow the simple rules. What are you going to do with the tough ones."   Now personally, I think all this sign shenanigans is just useless noise.  It's a big old dose of couldn't care less; however, since y'all do, explain how you still support Pat Hallisey.  Perhaps you've simply forgotten how he operates?  

So now, let's talk about Red Herrings.  The LCPIAFCS forum likes to point to Elaine Kosty (aka, the Black Widow) as some evil manipulator of local government.  Outside of endorsing candidates, I've seen no involvement from her.  Feel free to provide me with evidence of positions she's supported that are bad for the city, actual wrong-doing from her, or something other than what amounts to childish whinings of those who've lost out because candidates she's supported were better funded and better prepared.  Until then, she's just a Red Herring for your own political shortcomings.

3. D, R, L, I you ain't got no alibi 

Non-partisan local elections are a myth, plain and simple.  You don't leave your party identity at home when you go vote, and the fact of the matter is - your views and thought processes on such concepts as state vs the individual, freedom vs control and a multitude of other issues are telling on how you'll handle many things that will come up even at a local level.  This site has a decent summary: https://jimaikin.com/election-.  So yes, Mr.Lass, you are correct, there are MANY who care more about whether a candidate is a republican or a democrat than "what they will bring to this city".  Furthermore, I've seen NO candidates, not those on the Green Team, nor those opposed to them, state what they're going to bring in concrete terms.  I've seen no "I'm going to work to get X built, to get Y solution for Z problem."  I've seen a lot of platitudes about being good listeners, representing everyone, hope, change, unity, family, apple pie and bald eagles.  However, that being said, I have a lot more respect for a Democrat like Chris John Mallios who proudly acknowledges what he is, than I do for a Democrat like Greg Gripon, who upon realizing the tide of public opinion in League City has swung solidly red, now claims he's a conservative Republican to pander to the public.  So, Mr. Gripon - My question remains - how are you different than your Proud Democrat dad (you know, the one you praised so many times with your 3-minute ramblings in front of the City Council meetings in the last couple months) (reference Lynn Gripon's views here: https://www.facebook.com/ do YOU hate the NRA, like your dad does?  Are you going to work to limit our ability to carry concealed or open in this city?  Are you going to create more gun-free zones?  Your dad was a "middle of the road" democrat who believed, "collectively we should help the less fortunate and that the working class deserves a larger piece of the pie."  Does this mean you're going to raise taxes in part of plan of redistributing wealth?  What other "collectivist" policies can we expect from you?  Keep in mind, the Democrat plans for helping your neighbor is not charity or volunteerism, but forced redistribution of wealth.  How are you going to provide a "larger piece of the pie" to the working class?  Are you going to tax it out of the rest of us?  And Brian Brown, as a self-professed Libertarian with the big L, that should concern you too!!  I haven't seen any evidence of flip-flopping or poll-following from the non-Green Team candidates yet, so that puts them ahead of the Green Team in my book.