Friday, December 12, 2008

Robert Lucero Gets An Early Christmas Present

Something to whine about. I'm sure he's been on all the TV stations by now with his B/M (not meaning bowel movement) constitutional, melodramatically bemoaning the striking down of the silly constitutional amendment that any 6th Grade Civics graduate could see was unconstitutional. That is, if 6th graders were still taught Civics.

As mentioned here before, he certainly seems to live for this stuff. Maybe this time he and his horribly mistreated Westsiders will follow through on their threat to break away from APS. Given the likelihood public schools will get zero additional dollars for anything in the upcoming Legislative session, I'm personally throwing in a dollar to help pay for the Westside split. I'm just that kind of guy.

Or maybe Board Member Lucero and the horribly mistreated could join in with Rio Rancho. That district has the kind of forward-thinking ideas that could get Lucero on television to say silly things all the time.

Meanwhile, no word on the constitutionality of my proposed amendment for the 2010 ballot calling for an end to the mistreatment of cute little puppies, and a brand new Lamborghini for all New Mexicans named Scot Key.

P.S.: As I eerily discovered via the internets some years ago, the 12th District Attorney of New Mexico is also named Scot Key. Even has only one "t" in the first name. No relation whatsoever unless some alien abduction I don't know about is involved.

Somebody also recently told me a guy with my name is working at KUNM. That's not me, either. Sounds like New Mexico might have to pony up for at least three Lamborghinis if my proposed amendment passes. Money well spent I say, and still cheaper than an APS breakup. I even promise to let other New Mexicans borrow the car every once in a while. Even Westsiders. Really. I promise.

P.P.S.: How much money did it cost to have the silly constitutional amendment put on the ballot? Was it more than the cost of a Lamborghini when all the time/effort/ink printing, etc. is added up?

3 comments:

ched macquigg said...

I am curious how a person, or people, so clueless about the process, that they don't know that you can't "log roll" amendments, find themselves in a position to put one on a ballot.

Do these people not have proof readers?

Poor, poor Robert.

Anonymous said...

I had the same thought as Ched. How do you claim to be a qualified elected representative when you can't even write legislation that passes constitutional muster? I really have to wonder what really happened here. It is clear the Board of Ed was against expanding the membership and the sponsor of the bill is an employee of APS. Is this a case of willful blindness? At a recent west side community meeting the sponsor claimed the mail-in provision was added by parties unknown. Either the sponsor is clueless, or is more loyal to fellow legislators than constituents. In the long run the issue may be moot. The Board managed to jerrymand the west side with a seven seat board, no reason they couldn't do the same with a nine seat board.

Gerald said...

Ai ai ai. Next thing you know, there will be a movement to only hire llamas for positions on the school board (or is that bored? As in holes bored through the heads of the members), but only if two fifths are from the westside. Actually, llamas would really cut out the BS that seems to pile up.