I’m not sure why there is a huge increased interest in the blog.  I don’t see where anyone referenced it in today’s paper.  Maybe people are just waiting for me to respond to the paper’s latest editorial.  I don’t think I’m going to do that.  It’s a sucker game.  The editor wants to be both a participant in the debate and the moderator.  I’ll let my criticisms stand unanswered and ignore the diversionary arguments.

There was a preview of the spin that we will get on the petition referendum questions.  In the letter titled “Surveys can mislead” one reader believes question D is ambiguous. (Do you favor rehabilitation of Brewster Memorial Hall with private funds).

As far as I’m concerned, the question is moot if people indicate in question A that they support restoration of BMH for use as town offices.  Otherwise, questions D and E (Sell it) are intended to get some sense of what other disposition voters might have in mind.

Anybody who believes there is some kind of potential for a “public/private partnership” just hasn’t been paying attention.  How long are they going to dangle that carrot on a stick and expect us to keep plodding along.