Evan Queitsch’s Bizarro World

Filed in National by on September 26, 2012

Q: How do you tickle Christine O’Donnell’s security guard?

A: Queitschy-queitschy-koo.

I’d heard of Plan 9 From Outer Space:


Up until two days ago, I’d never heard of the impending disaster known as (cue foreboding music) Agenda 21.

Until, of course, the person who no less an authority than Rick Jensen claims to be a serious and credible candidate unveiled Agenda 21 to his starstruck readers. You all know Evan Queitsch as Christine O’Donnell’s hired muscle and current candidate for State Senate in the 11th District. He is opposing Bryan Townsend who,  if Evan Queitsch is to be believed (insert joke here), is some sort of stealth double agent sent to Newark to impose the horrors of Agenda 21 upon an unsuspecting populace. Assuming that the clips from Plan 9 From Outer Space did not provide you with your daily does of amusement, kindly skip over here to sate that urge. Or read some of the excerpts:

Agenda 21 is nothing short of a disaster for everything from family farms to private property rights and even business ownership. It allows massive government central planners to control the most basic of individual rights. While my opponent believes that the results are not being achieved fast enough, I believe that the very results it seeks to achieve conflict with America’s core values of freedom and individual liberty. I do not believe that America should cede its sovereignty to a global body of central planners whose stated goals are to destroy private property rights as a means to redistribute wealth. As to the question of the UN and whether we should pull out of the group of nations. My answer is an unequivocal YES. The UN’s basic philosophy conflicts with America’s own basic fundamental values. While our Declaration of Independence proclaims the “self-evident” truth that individuals “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”, the UN’s Covenant on Civil and Political Rights implies that it grants rights and claims the power “as provided by law” to restrict rights as fundamental as the freedom of speech, religion, the right to bear arms, freedom of the press and even the freedom of movement. Next, the credibility of the entire organization is at best in question and at worst completely gone when you consider that the U.S. was voted out of the Human Rights Commission while Libya and Sudan were voted in. The usefulness of the UN is in serious doubt as it has been surprisingly unsuccessful at adhering to its grand commitment to end threats to human security, such as interstate war, genocide, famine, internal war, disease and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The UN seeks to become the authority in the world, forsaking the sovereignty of all other nations and resides in New York practically for free. In fact, a new UN building is being built and the U.S. taxpayers are footing 22% of the costs! Not to mention the fact that the U.S. is the largest donor to UN causes by far. Why should U.S. taxpayers be forced to pay for buildings, contribute to causes and support agendas that harm American sovereignty?

This issue illustrates the differences and the importance of the 11th District Senate race. On the one side you have Bryan Townsend, a progressive Democrat who supports central planning, global control and Agenda 21. He is a young man who has spent the bulk of his life in various educational pursuits and still resides at home with his parents and who is shaped by the agenda of the liberal progressive professors that have surrounded him for the last decade. On the other hand I am a former Marine who served in the Iraq War, a tireless advocate of America’s founding principles and an opponent of those big government schemes promoted by the UN and ICLEI through Agenda 21. I’m a father of 4 children who has spent the last 12 years serving my country, raising a family and making a living in the private sector. If you want to stop Agenda 21, you want to make sure that Bryan Townsend does not make it into the Delaware General Assembly. Help put me in Dover so that I can make sure that Delaware doesn’t cow to the whims of global planners.

Evan Queitsch

Candidate for Delaware State Senate 11th District

That’s right, folks. His campaign has nothing to do with education, jobs, the economy, the environment, you know, stuff that most voters worry about. No. It’s all about Bryan Townsend’s ee-vil plan to ensnare Delaware in the sinister machinations of ‘billionaire and atheist’ George Soros and the like to do away with America’s sovereignty and to give our freedoms over to ‘central planners’.

Thank God (not like that atheist George Soros) that we have patriots like Evan Queitsch to save us from the demented worldwide clutches of Agenda 21. Or to serve as warnings against the dangers of hallucinogens. (Yes, moonshine is a hallucinogen.)

Tags: , , , , ,

About the Author ()

Comments (108)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. hmm says:

    Who is Rachael? His alternate personality?

  2. Jason330 says:

    “agenda 21” panic is all the rage among teabags. We got a tip that Delaware 9-12 Patriots (who proudly disrupted a meeting of invited residents for a Cape Regional planning last month and made headlines at the Cape Gazette doing so) are planning to overtake/interrupt a meeting that UD planners are doing for the Lewes Library TONIGHT!

    9-12 patriots and Agenda 21’ers are flat out nuts, and bent on preventing a dialogue they feel is part of an “Agenda 21” plan.

    Is anyone around Lewes able to peek in on this craziness?

  3. Dave says:

    Agenda 21 has been a favorite boogeyman of Don Ayotte, 9-12 Patriots and other er… intellectuals of Sussex County. If there ever is an opportunity, I would love to ask Don to express his views regarding Agenda 21.

    It’s not that they just have different ideas about the world, they really are truly crazy. It’s an indictment of our mental health care system. Unfortunately we have no licencing requirements for reproduction and now Evan has four children who probably will grow up so diconnected from reality that they may be unable to cope in our society.

  4. Geezer says:

    What’s the motto of the 9/12 Patriots? “Wetting our pants over non-existent threats since 2009”?

  5. jason330 says:

    That sounds about right.

  6. puck says:

    *whew* … For a minute I was afraid they had found out about Agenda 22.

  7. John Kowalko says:

    I am very anxious to have the opportunity to serve in the General Assembly with Evan should he be elected. I think our first order of business would be to contrive a plan to have Delaware secede from the U.S. so that we can develop the autonomy of a separate country and seek membership in the U.N. We could then infiltrate this insidiously intended organization to cause its ultimate downfall and preserve the right of all humankind to annihilate others and themselves. Of course this plan we construct will have to be insidious itself (don’t you just love that word?) and “stealth” will be of paramount importance, like those “stealth” U.N. helicopters Evan has probably noticed hovering above, (I think they’re presence is obvious by their silence and visual undetectability), you doubters should consider that you can’t see or hear those zillions of constantly moving and colliding atoms that are everywhere either. Anyhow let me raise a toast to the “New World Order” where the sick will be able to die peacefully without those invasive/intrusive medical procedures that they can’t afford and therefore shouldn’t have, where the hungry ones could adapt a taste for those sickly who succumb, where those peoples existing under threatening and oppressive regimes can craft treaties agreeable to all (or a majority) of all who are firmly committed to a similar religion with a consistent portrait of a God we can all identify as presented on you-tube. I look forward to crafting the appropriate legislation and with the help of a communications genius (such as Jensen) working the dialogue (AKA propaganda). We could ultimately make the U.N. headquarters a mobile/transient operation, (present day location would perhaps be Syria or Afghanistan). Welcome aboard the “delusional express” bound for the town of “Oversimplification of a Complex Problem”

  8. Jason330 says:

    “stealth” will be of paramount importance, like those “stealth” U.N. helicopters Evan has probably noticed hovering above, (I think they’re presence is obvious by their silence and visual undetectability),

    Thats a pretty good mastery of wingnut logic from JK.

  9. Geezer says:

    Laugh now. You won’t be laughing when the steely glare of Evan Queitsch turns away those UN savages just as they attempt to destroy our precious golf courses. Well, you won’t be laughing a lot.

  10. Mike Matthews says:

    Bizarro World is right. Evan wrote one of the most offensive and ridiculous screeds on the Red Clay school board race earlier this year that could make anyone believe he’s not working with a full deck. It’s probably still on his pathetic blog. This is one man whose intelligence is virtually non-existent and his mental faculties are likely just as non-existent. I relish the chance to see Townsend crush him in a debate.

  11. cassandra_m says:

    Wow. Both Kowalko and Matthews are tied for Post of the Day.

  12. John Kowalko says:

    Well Jason after 37 years as a machinist I eventually learned that you have “right” hand or “left” hand threads in nuts and on screws and that some you loosen by turning clockwise and some counter clockwise. But one incontrovertible truth emerges “everyone with a screw loose can be helped with the appropriate wingnut”

  13. puck says:

    When I think of wingnuts debating I think of Christine O’Donnell triumphantly informing Chris Coons that separation of church and state isn’t in the Constitution. It’s hard to debate someone arguing from misplaced zeal. Honestly, if that question hadn’t been asked at a law school audience (who promptly gasped and tittered), I think it would have devolved into a nit-picky debate about the literal language and ended up a draw.

  14. heragain says:

    Well, puck, unless we all try to fix the educational system in this country, we won’t have to worry none about people like those liberal elite law students and their picky interest in “fact.”

  15. Joe Cass says:

    Deluca screwed the pooch. And agenda 21 was created in Room 222. Everybody knows that.

  16. Agenda 21 is a very real issue at the local level. I encourage those of you like Mr. Somnombulo, who are ill informed on the matter, to see the bipartisan objections to it for yourselves (posted in my piece of course). Furthermore, “sustainable development” is just another of those cute terms that progressive globalists come up with that seek to hide the real agendas. Sort of like when liberals became progressives because the American people caught on to their game.

    I just want to point out that I think a debate between myself and Mr. Townsend is an excellent idea. One that I have in fact proposed, several times and one that has thus far gone unanswered. In fact, I’ll even offer to make sure that the hall is rented and advertising gets out. Mr. Townsend is free to select the moderator(s) should he choose to do so. I’d suggest we engage WDEL and ask Mr. Jensen and Mr. Mascitti to moderate. I’m SURE that there is an interested non-profit who would chomp at the bit to host such a debate. So, let’s name the time and we’ll work on that. I’m prepared, how about Bryan?

  17. Jason330 says:

    Did Quidich get dismembered and drop out of this race?

  18. Q-Tip wrote:

    “Furthermore, “sustainable development” is just another of those cute terms that progressive globalists come up with that seek to hide the real agendas.

    As opposed to, say, ‘unsustainable development’?

    And, of course, who better than you, Q-Tip, to tell us what their REAL agenda is?

  19. Lee Brill says:

    You shouldn’t be using sarcasm because wingnuts will interpret it as declarative prose.

  20. AQC says:

    Evan, will they give you a day pass from the psyche hospital to be at that debate?

  21. LNCC says:

    “Even Quiche”,,, Might not be a Dish, well serve Cold.

  22. Dana Garrett says:

    EQ, they have excellent medications for paranoid schizophrenia these days. You should consider them. You’ll stop being so laughable.

  23. Jason330 says:

    I want to do a post on all the “cute terms that progressive globalists come up with that seek to hide the real agendas.”

    miles per gallon
    greenwich mean time
    Justin Timberlake

  24. Jason330 says:

    prenatal health
    early childhood vaccination

  25. equal opportunity
    reducing the carbon footprint.

    Plus, what’s more Evil Overlordish/International Conspiracyish than:

    save the whales.

  26. Of course, the motto for our secret agenda (don’t tell Evan):

    “Think globally, act locally”.

  27. Even the bleeping Unitarians are in on it:


    Or should I make that, ‘especially’ the bleeping Unitarians…

    Say-y-y-y, doesn’t ‘Unitarian’ mean ‘One World’ in Esperanto?

  28. Uh oh, Bob Dylan’s part of the conspiracy:

    “Abe said “God, how ya want this evil plan done?”

    And God said “Use Agenda 21.”

    (“El Somnambulo, you have been very helpful to our cause today. We, the global planners, beseech you to move away from your keyboard lest you slip and give away any more of our secret plan. Our plot to plant Dylan as a double-agent within the Church of Scientology has already been compromised due to your carelessness. Go to bed, or face our wrath.”)

    Suddenly, I feel a little sleepy…

  29. Joe Cass says:

    Sustainable Development. That’s what the Venutians call their Martians hatchlings. Everybody has to eat. I saw food in Room 222 as well.

  30. Room 222 says:

    I have just ONE question for Mr Evan…..

    Did you get the “DESTRUCTION OF INDICIA OF ARREST” you filed for yet??

    in layman’s terms, that would be an expungement (of his criiminal record)

    Evan had a criminal record as well as a civil one – he is unfit for public office

    Evan here just paid off his outstanding judgement’s he had pending against him in JP and CCP court THIS YEAR! these debts had been outstanding for several years – and now he wants to go to Leg Hall and make rules for the rest of us? when he cannot abide by the rules society already has?

    but see, he cannot get an expungement of his criminal record because he accepted a plea deal from the AG’s office on the criminal charges and when you do that – well expungements are off the table….

    So Evan – are you going to come clean on these issues before you start sputing crap on Agenda 21??

    and I will continue to let everyone know about your checkered past until you either grow up and fly right or sink into irrelevancy – you pick.

  31. JTF says:

    Honestly, if the guy starts claiming that the Royal Family and the Bush family are are actually reptilian like aliens guided by the Illuminati, I may vote for him just for the lolz.

    See: David Icke.

  32. Dave says:

    It is serious that the DE GOP has degenerated (devolved?) to this. Let’s face it, one party rule is really a recipe for excess. It is only moderation and balance that keeps us from falling off the deep end.

    I wish the DE D party would host a symposium on the topic of how to resurrect the DE GOP as a party of responsibility and away from their mad dash into oblivion. Ernie Lopez seems to a responsible individual and might be an able legislator, but he’s a Sussex County Republican and I can’t help wondering if he is infected. How could I vote for him, wondering that?

  33. jason330 says:

    “I wish the DE D party would host a symposium on the topic of how to resurrect the DE GOP as a party of responsibility and away from their mad dash into oblivion.”

    That would be hilarious.

  34. That’s why I’ve argued for the past couple of years that it’s up to us to prevent those excesses. We succeeded this year in getting rid of Tony DeLuca and Paul Clark (though some would argue that Gordon is no improvement), we failed on KWS.

    Dave, your premise is one of the main reasons why I blog.

  35. pandora says:

    I have blogged about this as well, Dave. In November 2009, I wrote a post called “I Blame The RINOs

    RINOs (a term created by real Conservatives) invited the fringe into the party because they needed their votes. They also relied on the fringe’s single issue mentality, and, quite honestly, thought they were not too bright and, therefore, easily controlled. So they tossed them the “I’m pro-life” bone, patted them on the head and sent them into the voting booth. RINOs viewed their wingnuts as good little soldiers – who followed orders.

    The order following stopped when Obama beat McCain. And, strangely enough, I think the political coup within the Republican Party didn’t have much to do with Obama. He was just the symbol they pointed to. McCain was the problem, and to this day Conservatives believe the election would have turned out differently had Palin been at the top of the ticket.

    Palin was the game changer, and the RINOs fatal mistake. And you’d think a party so obsessed with the evils of appeasement would have known better than to appease its fringe. It’s worth noting that moderate Republicans (those that are left) are still appeasing. Which isn’t helping since Conservatives are getting crazier by the day.

    But I am ready to declare victory for the Conservatives. They have taken over the party – what’s left of it. A classic example of their victory can be seen over at Delaware Politics. Dave Burris, Smitty, and Maria are gone – people I didn’t agree with, but respected. David “everyone who disagrees with me is a commie lib” Anderson is in charge, and he’s just brought the intellectual prowess of Frank “I don’t believe in global warming because I had to wear a sweater today” Knotts back on board. Ooh, and Frank’s first post is a call to join his new group RACE (Republicans Against Castle’s Election).

    And you know what? I still blame the “Moderate” Republicans. Most of you guys (not all, Smitty!) didn’t say a word when the Tea Party was wielding their crazy on Democrats – that generated RINO silence. It was only when the wingnuts went after Republicans that Moderate Rs suddenly found their voice. Too little, too late.

    I would love two viable, sane parties. We don’t have that because Moderate Republicans were silent when it mattered. So while I pity the country for having to deal with this insanity, I don’t have a drop of sympathy for Republicans who damn well knew better but gave the Tea Party free reign and power in the name of politics. Yeah, I’m still angry about this.

  36. Andy says:

    The sad thing is that when these poor slugs talk about “Central Planning” and income redistribution all they have to do is look at their own central planners. The Kochs, Rove, Limbaugh, Beck, the Walton Family etc. The are played like puppets on a string

  37. puck says:

    When the baggers say redistribution, they think they are talking about the government taxing the well off and giving it to the less well-off. Which I personally don’t have a problem with for the most part.

    But really, redistribution is funnelled upward from wage earners to the Mitt Romneys of the world. Before even one tax dollar is assessed, the wealthy are now claiming an ever-larger share of worker output. There are now a myriad of cheap-labor, high pricing policies that accelerate this upward wealth transfer, all of them voraciously pulling money upward and sucking on the teat of wage earners – earnings that used to end up in the pockets of the working class.

    How come wingnuts never talk about redistribution upward?

    Change the upward transfer policies, and restore the middle class without one dollar of tax money redistributed (although that would help too).

  38. Roland D. Lebay says:


    Agenda 21 is a very real issue at the local level. I encourage those of you like Mr. Somnombulo, who are ill informed on the matter, to see the bipartisan objections to it for yourselves (posted in my piece of course). Furthermore, “sustainable development” is just another of those cute terms that progressive globalists come up with that seek to hide the real agendas. Sort of like when liberals became progressives because the American people caught on to their game.

    Lots wrong w/ your post.

    1. Tanzer’s nom de plume (look it up) is “El Somnambulo”. It shouldn’t be too hard to copy & paste that if you wish to respond to him.

    2. Agenda 21 is a joke. The USA has always decided which U.N. resolutions we uphold & which we ignore. Who is going to invade us & enforce the “draconian” measures spelled out under Agenda 21? China might have the wherewithal to do that, but they surely don’t have the desire–we’re their biggest customer.

    3. “Bipartisan objections” are largely meaningless. There are always at least 2 wingnuts on each side of the aisle. Take former Congressman James Traficant for an example of a nut-job Democrat. Maxine Waters would be a close second.

    4.”Sustainable Development” is just that. There is no hidden agenda. Unbridled growth is NOT good for anyone other than developers who live far away from the area(s) they’re developing. We must have the infrastructure (water, sewer, electric, heating fuels, roads, bridges, schools, etc.) paid for and either in place or ready for construction when a new development is proposed. New property taxes do not come close to covering the costs that increased population imposes on the State and County governments.

    5. You toss the terms “liberal” and “progressive” about as if they are pejoratives. Please consider our Founding Fathers for a moment. Were they “conservative” or “liberal”?

    Hint–“conservatives” of the day were loyal to the Crown…

  39. Dave says:


    I agree, the GOP moderates are very culpable. Perhaps they even share the greatest blame. Still, I’m a big believer in personal responsiblity and I blame those extremists whose bastardized interpretation of the Constitution and fantasies of black helicopters seizing their guns to facilitate a takeover by George Soros’ One World Government in order to vaccinate God fearing Americans into submission have resulted in them becoming so separated from reality that they really do live in Bizzarro World indeed.

    They view the world through a lens so distorted with paranoia that I am surprised when they actually appear to function in normal society and are able to tie their shoelaces. It is easy to lay some of this at the doorstep of folks like Beck, Levine, and Limbaugh; the doom and gloomers. But as entertainers they simply deliver a product that is so eagerly lapped up by these people that they would be silly not to keep making the kool aid that these people want to drink.

    In a real world, Evan Q might even be a fairly nice and responsible person, but when paranoia becomes Evan’s operative paradigm, do you want to be around when his fuse gets lit? The problem is, there is no cure. Who knows what sent them around the bend? Perhaps they have always been insane, but in the past folks such as they were subject to ridicule and even the craziest of them learned to keep a low profile. Now, they have been mainstreamed, standing for election, wearing their insanity proudly.

    Make no mistake, I consider them unstable and generally without constraint. They have the courage of their insane convictions and I am convinced that there many among them who when sufficiently frustrated in their ends, would (will) resort to violence and terrorism. They take such phrases as “2nd Ammendment Remedies” seriously. While I join with the many to ridicule them, at the same time I believe that they are a hair’s width from going off the deep end. They are America’s Taliban and their fantasy and faith gives them kinship to the worst of those who we have seen are more than willing to become martyrs for a cause whose righteousness exists only in their own mind.

    In summary, if I lived next door to someone like Evan Q, I would keep my doors locked, my alarm set and a watchful eye out.

  40. DEvoter302 says:

    Just look at your childish posts ganging up on a person like a group of catty high school girls. Intelligent voters laugh at you, as I do whenever I visit this board. Go read, you need it.

  41. Uh, DEVoter, does that mean that you subscribe to these delusional fantasies?

    Is it inappropriate to suggest that someone harboring said delusional fantasies is not fit to be an elected official?

    Do most intelligent people agree with you that pointing out Queitch’s, uh, eccentricities is ‘catty’? Or are you the exception?

  42. DEvoter302 says:

    I purposely did not say that I do or do not subscribe to the same concerns about Agenda 21. My post addressed the childish name calling that replaced thoughtful debate on this board. Your response was meant to classify me so you could attack me based on what category I fall under. It demonstrates the same point I made; that this board lacks intelligent debate.

    Also Kowalko is an elected official. A person serving in that capacity shouldn’t demonstrate a lack of integrity by lowering himself to name calling. That disappointed me.

  43. Uh, wrong. Was just intended to smoke you out.

    Evan Queitsch brought up Agenda 21. Wrote about it extensively, including right here in this thread.

    Perhaps you’re right in one respect, though. There can be no intelligent debate on the issue of Agenda 21.

    If this article and thread demonstrate why Evan Queitsch is unsuited for public office, then I consider my job done here.

    Except for the jokes. Which I hope keep coming…

  44. DEvoter302 says:

    “Uh, wrong. Was just intended to smoke you out.”

    So then I was right. Thanks.

  45. Uh, DEVoter, could you get a little closer to the screen? Don’t want to betray any confidences:

    (If you’re looking for intelligence, and you can’t seem to find it here, bring something to the table.)

    (Or go over to DEPolitics, or whatever it’s called, and discuss semiotics and/or post-constructionalism to your heart’s content. And please let us know how that works out for you.)

  46. John Kowalko says:

    Devoter 302
    As an elected official I take very seriously my obligation and responsibility to challenge conspiratorial imaginings when they are posited by individuals aspiring to elected office. This is especially the case when these theories/imaginings are obviously intended to provoke an abnormal and unjustified fear reflex that is intended to demonize the opposition views or policies which are crafted to address and rectify “REAL” problems. The fact that I used a subtle sarcastic approach to challenging a very seriously delusional position/theory shows a significant restraint on my part (in my opinion). Thank you for the opportunity to defend my integrity to you.

  47. Dave says:

    I reviewed my comment. I did not call them names. I am convinced they are delusional, paranoid, and dangerous. I did not call them douche bags or idiots. I do not make fun of those who are ill. I believe they are unfit for public office. I have no objection to them being a danger to themselves, after all it’s a free country. It is the rest of the citizens I am concerned about. Contrary to what some may think, these folks are not people who hold slightly off centered, quirky views. They are firmly gripped in the hold of delusions of their own making.

  48. DEvoter302 says:

    Thanks for responding Kowalko, I appreciate the opportunity. However, labeling one a fear mongerer instead of presenting reasons why he is wrong isn’t indicative of a man who has integrity. Rather it is the sign of a true politician. As an elected official don’t you have the responsibility to be unbiased and research both sides in order to find the truth? I ask because I saw nothing that supported your point that EQ’s argument has no merit. As outrageous as it may seem, it would be negligent to assume he is wrong without researching the history of sustainable development and the relation to the UN. After all that is why people elected you; they don’t have the time or resources to research every issue and manage the state.

  49. DEvoter302 says:

    Dave, I see your point. But like I said to Kowalko, have you researched it yourself before you came to that conclusion? And if so, isn’t it more productive to demonstrate how much he isn’t fit for office by proving him wrong? I’ll catch heat for it, but I think the average voter feels the same way; that politics has become more of a marketing game than an intellectual game and we have all suffered for it.

  50. cassandra m says:

    It doesn’t take much research to know not only what Sustainable Development is or what the UN’s initiative is OR that this Agenda 21 bullshit has become one more manufactured wingnut outrage. The wingnut Agenda 21 BS is so far removed from either the business of Sustainable Development or the UN’s initiative, that the most rational reaction of a typical well-informed person (or one who went off to get that information) would be to point and laugh at the people perpetrating this new UN outrage.

    And make no mistake — there is nothing intellectual in the wingnut Agenda 21 business. It is just a new bit of the manufacture outrage that gets inflicted upon those wingnuts who refuse to do their own research, rather than just tune their tin foil into the radio. If we are here pointing and laughing at it, that means that it doesn’t deserve any respect. Because if these people were concerned about something real, they might be able to *earn* some respect for their views. But that isn’t the way that wingnut world works, is it? You just want to stamp your feet and demand respect for ideas that simply don’t deserve them.

    If you are unhappy about how Agenda 21 gets treated here, then go away and present a case for it that might earn it some respect. If you won’t do that basic bit of work, then you deserve every bit of pointing and laughing you get.

  51. DEvoter302 says:

    I was here to make a point that has been proven by you and every person that responded with the exception of Dave: members here hurl insults too often and take debates personally. I wouldn’t present an argument supporting those views because 1) I don’t hold those views, and 2) I would be called a teabagger and told to go visit delawarepolitics, further supporting my point that, overall, the posters here are overly aggressive.

    I actually read the comments to understand the opposing views, thereby increasing my understanding of the issue. I’ve heard the Agenda 21 argument, I was just interested in hearing the other side.

  52. cassandra m says:

    I was just interested in hearing the other side.

    Then this is your problem then. Because the only possible other side to something that has been manufactured out of whole cloth in order to motivate a group of people who are *only* motivated by fear really is laughter and derision. There is no onus on the people working with some connection to reality to present any *other side*. All that does is to treat that manufactured outrage alot with more legitimacy than it deserves. You want a “fair and balanced” look at this BS? For that you need The Media.

  53. Geezer says:

    Anyone familiar with local governments has heard about sustainable development for decades. Wingnuts don’t know anything about it because they think involvement with politics boils down to wearing funny costumes, carrying signs and calling everyone who doesn’t un-American.

    While you jokers parade your ignorance like a flag, the rest of us have been grappling with or covering development issues since before you were born. Many of the goals of Agenda 21 came about from years of debating the competing interests of private property and quality of life for others.

    Property-rights conservatives have been railing against zoning laws for generations. All your forbears managed to do it without shitting their pants over the UN. Grow up.

  54. John Kowalko says:

    The people elected me to pursue and formulate legitimate policies that benefit the citizens of Delaware. They may range from economic policies that help businesses to social policies that help families survive in these often desperate times. My obligation and responsibility is to ensure that I’ve studied these policies thoroughly and have considered all the pros and cons as to their legitimacy. I certainly reject your desperate attempt to prolong any discussion on this latest “the earth is flat” type theory by wasting any of my time or my constituents time debunking or disproving an intellectual fantasy with no basis whatsoever in fact or evidence to support it. Please allow me to clarify one subtle bit of sarcasm that you seem to have missed. With all due/earned respect and in straightforward terms “I never felt the need to have “YOU” approve my level of integrity”, the people who have elected me to serve them will be the judges of that.

  55. Geezer says:

    “supporting my point that, overall, the posters here are overly aggressive.”

    I’m sorry. If I had realized that was your goal, I would have told you to go screw yourself right out of the box.

    I also would have said bullshit. If you really wanted to research Agenda 21, you could turn to your friend Mr. Google. It produces 136 million results.

    So I don’t actually think that was your goal. I think you’re an Evan Q partisan who wants to pout because other people won’t respond the way Evan wants them to.

    So I suppose “overly aggressive” might be translated as “highly skeptical towards your bullshit.”

  56. DEvoter302 says:

    Kowalko, spoken like a true trained politician. The dip dodge and discredit tactic. I like that.

  57. Geezer says:

    Nobody is going to debate you about this, at least not here. I doubt anyone sees the need to explain to an hysteric that the sky is, in fact, not falling.

    And all the phony politeness in the world won’t make up for the fact that you’re an Agenda 21 pants-pisser, and therefore incapable of logical debate on anything.

  58. DEvoter302 says:

    If Geezer speaks and nobody listens, does it still make a sound?

  59. Geezer says:

    Ah, now your urge for “serious debate” comes to the fore. You fooled exactly nobody. Well played. You’re precisely as clever as Evan Q. This smells exactly like one of his “witty” online exercises.

  60. Anon says:

    No surprise that the person leading the charge in Delaware against sustainable growth is a developer, Christian Hudson and his extension, the Positive Growth Alliance. He’s using the “Agenda 21” boogey man to rally Tea Partiers into stopping any public discussion in Delaware that could result in his not being able to rape the land to it’s fullest extent.

    I feel sorry for the people buying in to this, they are being used to make money for a handful of developers and it will only result in their own properties being de-valued.

    DEVoter I suggest you provide proof that “Agenda 21” is being implemented anywhere in the United States, and no, public meetings and projects with the word “sustainable” in them is not proof.

  61. DEvoter302 says:

    Haha Geezer that was my attempt at humor. I am not EQ or a supporter. You’ve seen me post before and know I don’t subscribe to Party lines or beliefs.

  62. DEvoter302 says:

    @Anon: You asked me to provide proof. I don’t have it because I don’t subscribe to that belief. I’m not sure why you assumed I did. I wanted to hear the other side which you have started to provide me, so thank you for that. Google search only leads to progressives preaching or conservatives outlining the conspiracy.

  63. Dave says:

    “But like I said to Kowalko, have you researched it yourself before you came to that conclusion?”

    Yea. I have read all the documentation that has been published by the UN on Agenda 21. There is a wide difference between sustainable development goals, plans, and implementation. Additionally, United States is not bound by anything that the UN says or does, except as we choose to be, just as any other nation is not bound by those things. Here is a link for you to research and find out what scares you: http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/

    In the meantime here is a sample of an Agenda 21 goal/resolution:

    We acknowledge that democracy, good governance and the rule of law, at the national and international levels, as well as an enabling environment, are essential for sustainable development, including sustained and inclusive economic growth, social development, environmental protection and the eradication of poverty and hunger. We reaffirm that to achieve our sustainable development goals we need institutions at all levels that are effective, transparent, accountable and democratic.

    Now, are ya scared? Have this need to go out in your backyard build a bunker, stock up on food and ammo? No? Well you passed the test and probably are not delusional. The same cannot be said for others.

    And really, can you imagine the US being invaded by blue cap soldiers led from Manhattan NY? No? Neither can I. Neither can any other sane person. But wanna guess who worries about such things?

    Their antics have gone past amusing. Want to elect these kinds of folks to represent you? I sure don’t. Don’t get me wrong I’m not a bleeding heart liberal (well except for animals) but I’ll be damned if I am throwing my lot in with folks who have gone off the deep end.

    I want sane responsible governance and I don’t care what party provides it.

  64. Geezer says:

    “Google search only leads to progressives preaching or conservatives outlining the conspiracy.”

    Uh….what exactly were you expecting? You can read the document yourself; it reads like the wish list of good-government community organizations everywhere. The ginned-up paranoia is a result of conservatives pretending that all of a sudden the UN will go from being a laughingstock to the unconquerable One World Government — and that once it achieves such world domination, its top priority will be imposing zoning restrictions.

    In short, the specifics are irrelevant. An individual’s response to Agenda 21 has far more to do with the individual than the agenda.

  65. DEvoter302 says:

    Thanks Dave. Everybody has an agenda so it’s difficult to find the truth, even on the Internet. You should check out a documentary called “Surviving Progress”, based off of what you said I think you would enjoy it.

    IMO sustainable growth has to come from a voluntary change in the people. Laws and a beurocracy are subject to diminishing returns and don’t dictate morals, which are essential for any real change. Basically, different means to achieve the same end.

  66. Sussex Transplant says:

    You know, people are allowed to believe in all the sane and crazy stuff they want. It’s a free country. But what I resent, is when they organize, like the Delaware 9-12 Patriots do, and carefully plan an attack of local meetings about local issues, and steer it to their own expressed cause with their declared purpose to disrupt a meeting – particularly if it is facilitated or moderated by particular UD personnel who are often asked to moderate forums in matters outside UD arenas. The “What do you Geek”” event at the Lewes Library this past Wednesday was one such occasion. I was at the meeting. I live in Lewes. I counted about nine, perhaps ten individuals. There was a big semi-circle of chairs and they intentionally did not sit next to one another. The purpose of the forum was to ask locals what kind of programs should the library continue or offer. What do you geek. What is your passion? As in hobby. The onslaught began immediately. They were ultra, ultra polite. I am passionate about freedom, the constitution, US Sovereignty, Property Rights, The Founding Fathers. We want workshops in history. Round and round they went. They nodded enthusiastically when a member of their cadre (I use that term intentionally) said something. They yearned for the good old days when we could burn bonfires on the beach, fish in the waters, without paying. They pitted the state of Delaware as a “collective” vs the individual.
    Banners that were up about “I geek art” and “I geek composting” were ridiculed as being “superficial.” I was dumfounded. So much so that I thought of all my good retorts at 2 a.m., tossing and turning thinking about the meeting.

    I had one of their emails shared with me. Anyone from UD who is trying to encourage open dialogue – getting people to become engaged, are viewed as Agenda 21 proponents. They told their members to watch out for the Delphi technique and how they can subvert it with polite interruptions. In other words, steer the conversation to their specific patriotic goals and waste everyone else’s time. When I left, I saw their DP bumper stickers and how they all “collected” out in the parking lot, no doubt, gloating over how they successfully hijacked yet another meeting. I would be surprised if a single one was from Lewes.

    It was analogous to a local restaurant or vendor, say, Dogfish head, asking their customers what kind of beer they’d like to see in the future. If DFH happens to use UD talent as a facilitator, you can bet that D912P will be there in full force, making suggestions like Sovereignty Pale Ale, Property Rights Lager, etc.

    When the question was put about our hopes for Lewes, one person said Lewes needs to be returned to people from Lewes. You know, keep these “outsiders” out. My 2 a.m. delayed response would have been to ask them if they meant to restrict someone from NJ, NY, PA, OH to move down here and buy a house and become a Delawarean. Are they open to that kind of freedom and property right? Because their expressed sentiment is clearly against all these “newcomers.”

    Make no mistake, they are highly organized. They are not a majority – not in the least – but they are squeaky wheels. Very motivated squeaky wheels. Agenda 21 is very much on their radar. You know, if you scrutinize anything with a particular prejudice, you can find “evidence.” There are forums to express their fear and their outrage. I don’t deny them that right. But they are intrusive, invasive and very, very clever. Their agenda is far worse than any UN one.

  67. Geezer says:

    Clearly they are direct descendants of the Sons of Liberty. Genetically deficient descendants, but still.

  68. DEvoter302 says:

    Alinsky tactics.

  69. http://www.delawarepolitics.net/evan-queisch-has-them-worried/

    I guess the idea of major policy getting debated instead of pushed through by backroom bureaucrats has you worried.

  70. Dave says:

    @Sussex Transplant,

    And my response is to continue to refer to them as delusional, bordeline schizophrenic individuals who are a hair’s breadth from acting on their delusions by any means they have at their disposal. I wish they were harmless crackpots but that’s not the case. Once I know who they support for specific election, I know how to mark my ballot. Any candidate that meets with them for the purpose of gaining their support is automatically deselected on my ballot.

  71. Dave says:


    “Everybody has an agenda so it’s difficult to find the truth, even on the Internet.”

    Actually, it’s not difficult at all to find the truth. I could teach a class on the subject, but suffice to say, the first step is to want to know the truth. The second step is never accept second hand information as the truth. The third step is to find and rely almost wholly on source material. The last step is to believe none of what you hear and only half of what you read (well, I stole that one).

    If you want to know what Agenda 21 is, go to the source. Research it yourself and make up your own mind what it means. Finally, learn to recognize the crazy ones. I don’t mean the obvious crazy ones. The sneaky crazies that walk around here everyday pretending to be not crazy.

  72. Sussex Transplant says:

    Oh I forgot to add, out of approximately 18 total in attendance, including the two librarians and the moderator, 9-10 were the Delaware Patriot group, so for this meeting, they were clearly the majority voice. (sigh).

  73. pandora says:

    Sussex Transplant,

    First, welcome.

    I’m sorry you had to go through that.

    These guys don’t believe in free speech. They travel in packs and attend meetings with the sole purpose of taking it over. They will monopolize the discussion, support each others identical views and mock, or in some cases shout down, a differing point of view. They aren’t looking for a discussion.

    I agree with Dave. These people are delusional and looking for a fight.

    Also, I will never understand the appeal in saying, “I’m a lifelong resident of Sussex County.” 🙂

  74. DEvoter302 says:

    Interesting you say that Pandora because I’ve seen you engage in those same tactics on this board.

  75. Conscious In The GOP says:

    I wonder if Protack and Evan will do some door knocking together? The Stash and the Trash!

  76. Paula says:

    Geezer at 2:13 pm for the win:
    . . . and that once it [the UN] achieves such world domination, its top priority will be imposing zoning restrictions.

  77. geezer says:

    “Interesting you say that Pandora because I’ve seen you engage in those same tactics on this board.”

    And when you see people engage in those tactics, it means they’re not interested in discussing something with you.

    The incident Pandora addressed occurred at a public forum. You apparently misunderstand this blog to be the same thing. But you’ll notice it’s not called “Discussion Corner” or “Debating with Conservatives.” I’ve seen your tactic ad nauseum: The plaintive call for polite discussion or debate. Sorry, but nobody is obligated to waste time that way. As noted earlier, there are 136 million hits on Google for Agenda 21. It should be easy for you to find a site where you can argue to your heart’s content.

    If you don’t like how they run the place, start your own.

  78. Dave says:


    “. . . and that once it [the UN] achieves such world domination, its top priority will be imposing zoning restrictions.”

    Yeah, I have to agree Geezer for the win, nothing but net. I wish I had said that. But I fully intend to liberally reuse it at every opportunity.

  79. For those of you with zero information and tons of attitude I suggest you go and check out Democrats Against UN Agenda 21. This issue is far from a ‘right wing’ thing. It’s non-partisan.

    This is not Area 51 or Catch 22, it’s a real plan, signed onto by G H W Bush in 1992, brought back to the US to be implemented in 1993 via the President’s (Clinton) Council on Sustainable Development, all federal agencies changed their policies to conform to it. From the federal level it was implemented through comprehensive plans all across the US, and through Sustainable Communities Strategy/Initiative Grants for regional planning. Regional boards and commissions are established and empowered that are unelected and do not answer to you, the electorate. They may be made up of elected officials but the boards are so large that no city or county can have a significant impact–this breaks jurisdictional boundaries.

    What’s unsustainable? Single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, meat-eating, dams, reservoirs.

    Why should you care? UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. Inventory and control.

    Opposing domestic surveillance? Against NDAA and the PATRIOT Act? Don’t want smart meters? This is all part of UN Agenda 21.

    Sit there at your computer and read about it, Delaware liberals. It’s unpleasant to find out that you’re wrong but you can handle it.
    Democrats Against UN Agenda 21

  80. nemski says:

    LOL all websites run by Democrats have supporting quotes by Glenn Beck and videos from the Tea Party.

  81. cassandra_m says:

    We’re not wrong. We can read the UN’s efforts for ourselves.

    Which, really, is the biggest difference between us. You are happy to take on someone else’s scary conspiracy theory as some organizing principle. We are not.

    And just because you say these are Democrats doesn’t mean they are. So your audience is not here. Go find some other place where people are ready to be scared because of some story you’ve made up.

  82. Dave says:

    And just because they are Democrats doesn’t mean they are sane. There are probably Democrats just as friggin nuts as the Republicans are. Independents too for that matter.

    The Republicans do not have a monopoly on insanity, it just seems like most of the insane ones seem to register as Republicans. A causality study would be interesting and is necessary to determine the extent of correlation.

    And why is it people want to pawn off their and others websites as an authoritative source rather than from the horses mouth by reading source material? The Agenda 21 “Cabal” has a perfectly readable and searchable website where you can find any of the documents and material on Agenda 21, that is except for the secret documents written in mystical code which can only be translated by those who have drunk from the Holy Grail.

  83. cassandra_m says:

    There are probably Democrats just as friggin nuts as the Republicans are.

    Oh yes. There were an embarrassing number involved in the 9/11 trutherism BS. The key difference is that we aren’t as uncomfortable calling out our nutters, and certainly don’t adopt their nutterism as some New Truth.

  84. reis says:

    We seem to have the Libertarians.

  85. anonymous says:

    Comment – Part 1 of 2

    Republicans Have Been Denying and Lying about Climate Change for Decades – now they don’t like the results of their own stupidity. Will republicans demand oceanfront ‘renurishment,’ help with extreme storm losses, business, crop losses, etc caused by climate change? Of course they will.

    Now the world must face the results and solve fossil fuel caused anthropogenic CO2 climate change.

    A very fewer are actually in ‘real’ denial, unable to believe or understand, how climate change could happen. And there are those (corporate CEOs, politicians, fossil fuel interests) who promote, hide behind denial, but know the truth – that our energy system needs a permanent fix. (Not yet they say, we want more profits by pollution.)

    Our corporate leaders, our government, have been maximizing short term profits, on the backs of childrens’ futures, in order to create an illusion of present, future stability. There is none.

    The 1%ers will repeat, “Americas need jobs,” pretending to befriend middle America, when they will fight against every clean energy job they perceive to be a threat to fossil fuel profits by pollution.

    Instead we are seeing, that our form of democracy, isn’t working.

    We’re a country, a government, that’s dragging its’ knuckles in the blood of future generations.

    We can only survive as a country, stand upright as people – with a strong unified government stepping up, bringing our own country up to and above par, if we expect to be world leaders.

    We need to tax climate offenders, rewards alternative clean energy, and pay citizens to work at reducing their own energy foot print. Sure, jobs will continue as usual. No one wants to bring the economy to a halt, but we need to work quickly, to eliminate the hazardous by-product of fossil fuels, other greenhouse gases.

    What jobs in addition to clean energy, could change the outcome of climate change? Clean transportation. reforestation, weatherization, community planning are a few.There will be no moving forward without solutions to fossil fuel emissions. (It means, a CO2 pollution rate must drop down to minus 350ppm CO2,) CO2 is presently at 392.41ppm and that’s not including other greenhouse gases, or the higher levels at the polar regions. CO2 lasts up to 200 years in the atmosphere, other greenhouses gases such as methane are more powerful. And don’t forget, the melting polar regions are melting permafrost which has the feedback effect of free releasing methane in huge and uncontrollable amounts, which will also heat the planet, etc., etc.

    Sure tax the ultra rich – they should pay their fair percentage. But put a rising tax on anthropogenic CO2, every ton of it. Turn some of the money over to the government for clean energy advancement projects; turn the rest of the CO2 tax money directly over to adult citizens; put it equally in their debit cards, to spend on clean energy solutions – reducing CO2. It’s a democratic and it’s a republican solution. Jobs, clean energy, public sector, small business, energy business re structuring, family oriented, pollution controlling, CO2 reducing, homeland security protecting, life respecting – American solution,

    How to do it. It’s unconstitutional to deny Americans their rights to a balanced atmosphere, clean air, lands, waters. It’s unconstitutional to deny Americans their futures, to harm their property, health and lives; pollute their environment beyond livable. It is unconstitutional to deny children and future generations their rights as citizens. If fossil fuel politicians won’t look out for the rights of the people, the courts can.

    But what’s Rmoney up to instead?



  86. anonymous says:

    Comment – Part 2 of 2

    Republicans Have Been Denying and Lying about Climate Change for Decades.

    It’s a lack of will by the corporate entities, shareholders. Now we have a planet that is being changed in ways that will not, in the relatively near future, support future generations. It isn’t a lack of means, money, knowledge or manpower enough to overcome; it’s the lack of will of the people behind polluting industries and the lack of will of our politicians to protect the people and the air, lands, waters, that belong to the people. It needs to be a crime for corporate owners, CEOs, politicians, their donors, to promote polluting business, that harms all citizens and their future generations.

    Leaders of Industry, leaders of government need to listen, hire and consult, work with the best legitimate climate scientists, mechanical, nuclear, chemical, electrical engineers, environmental professionals, economists, planners, contractors, etc. There are so many jobs to be done. So many jobs and there is carbon tax money enough to do them.

    Obama tried working with republicans – that didn’t work. Democrats need to work unobstructed, to get energy in place, that will restore an atmospheric balance of a livable planet, minus 350ppm CO2.

    James Hansen, the world renown climate scientist offers a ‘conservative plan,” but republicans aren’t interested.



  87. geezer says:

    “What’s unsustainable? Single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, meat-eating, dams, reservoirs.”

    “signed onto by G H W Bush in 1992,”

    Golly. So that’s why nobody in the past 20 years has built any single-family homes or private vehicles, why nobody is migrating to the sun belt anymore, why everyone is now a vegan and why all our dams and reservoirs have gone missing. How could I have been so blind as to miss all that?

    Pants-Pissing: Not Just for Republicans Anymore.

  88. John Kowalko says:

    This Halloween I’m going to dress as “Agenda 21”. Could I get some help here for costume design. Does anyone have a photo/picture of a “figment of the imagination” that I might reference.

  89. Dana Garrett says:

    “UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. Inventory and control.”

    Wow, what a herculean task. ALL land, water, plants, animals…. Even microbes, no doubt.

    Conspiracy theories appeal to the intellectual lazy, not lazy in the sense of engaging in intellectual activity. Conspiracy theorists are quite active in researching “evidence” that “confirms” their theory. No, they are lazy in the sense that they intellectually cannot abide complexity. Social and political phenomena often have their explanation in complex webs of events, interests, institutional arrangements and practices, alliances, cultural practices, etc. Understanding those webs can be daunting and their complexity can be compounded because the factors and their interrelations can change. That complexity is what the conspiracy theorist cannot abide. So they posit a single explanation (usually a plot of some sort) to eliminate the complexity and to make the social and/or political phenomenon intellectually manageable.

  90. WWB says:

    I checked out Democrats against Agenda 21 and then I Googled “Rosa Koire.” Interesting. She’s a Democrat? Really? But then Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson are “Democrats” too.


  91. X Stryker says:

    It’s always easier to believe in myth than reality because myth conforms to (and confirms) your expectations. When reality tells us to change, those unable to cope with it retreat into fantasy. The facts can then be disregarded, because if they don’t fit the narrative you believe in, then you simply paint the sources as biased. Fantasy is easier than change.

    The definition of a Progressive is someone who wants to change the world for the better. The definition of a conservative is someone who wishes to prevent the world from changing.

  92. Scritchy says:

    queitsch is a teabagging fascist, and fascism is about nothing but death. Under a fascist’s boot, death is the only thing that can hope to be produced. Not the procreation of life, not the music and magic of diversity in all its’ forms, not prosperity, not discovery, learning, adventure. Simply death. Death of the environment, death of all animal life, death of the human population … and afterwards, silence, the copper stench of blood on the wind, and the mud, sand, and black bitumen of barrenness and aridity. The Bible has a phrase for what the queitsch ilk represent. It is referred to as, “the abomination which causes desolation”.

    queitsch is the epitome, the very essence of what America will have as her future unless she begins, very rapidly and urgently, to act to prevent it. The Reaper’s blade is being sharpened as we speak.

  93. John Kowalko says:


    See Scritchy’s post? Now that’s impressive “name-calling” by any stretch. It’s all relative you know?

  94. I have to laugh at the incredible efforts you all make to remain ignorant. Why don’t you go and take a look at your regional plans? Are you just loving the idea of being part of a region where you don’t have any input as a voter? You don’t vote for a regional board. Are you so thrilled about that Vision 2025 plan that calls for high density housing downtown? That plan that’s going to funnel your tax dollars to crony developers while indebting you for 30-45 years through a redevelopment project? I just don’t get it. We are Democrats. We are liberals. What is your investment in remaining ignorant and defending a plan that is literally instating NDAA, USA PATRIOT Act, restrictions on land use and ownership, globalization, QE3—? Are you such suckers that if you’re told you’re saving the planet you’ll go along with anything? You’re sitting there looking at this glowing box while a bunch of toadies and shills make policy for you. Just because they say they’re ‘progressive’ you just trot behind them? What do you get besides some smug satisfaction in your aggressively vicious and cowardly trashing of people who try to assist you in recognizing fascism? You think it can’t happen here? And it can’t happen if the people who are governing you call themselves progressive? And it’s not a partisan thing, by the way. It’s not right or left. It’s Communitarian. Take some time and educate yourselves.

  95. anon says:

    Agenda 21 is nothing more than a boogey man fed to the barely educated by developers like Christian Hudson. Hudson wants to be able to develop his land to the fullest extent without paying for infrastructure like roads or wastewater treatment and without having to consider the environmental impact.

    In other words, people like Christian Hudson want to make as much money as possible from developing land while making WE THE PEOPLE pay for the roads and infrastructure necessary to support it and while our children suffer from contaminated water and toxic fish.

    Barely educated idiots like Evan Queitsch are doing his bidding for him. The Tea Partiers are his puppets.

  96. geezer says:

    “…I just don’t get it….”

    See? A nugget of truth.

  97. TeleMan says:

    I can report that the Cape Henlopen Regional Plan http://www.capehenlopenregionalplan.org/regional-planning
    is an attempt for the citizens in the region to contemplate options for the possibility of developing a real plan one day. Is is so far from being anything concrete that the notion that there is an overarching agenda is laughable.

    Imagine the planning commissions of the various coastal towns and Sussex Co. actually speaking to each other, and listening to the residents. And the residents have an opportunity to speak! What a foreboding construct! Too bad these old guys with too much free time try to torpedo any opportunity for thought and consideration about how you would wish where you live shall be.

  98. TeleMan says:

    I must add that as much as I appreciate the Plan 9 From Outer Space lead-in to this thread, and everything Ed Woodian for that matter, there is a far more appropriate clip that represents the paranoia and surrealism of the current political climate. From Glen or Glenda, I give you the impenetrable Bela Lugosi:


  99. Dave says:

    I have no objection to those who pursue Rosswellian Apocalypses as a pastime. Hey everyone should have hobbies. What is troublesome, is when those pastimes become all consuming at the expense of living in the real world where there needs to be some relationship between development and the infrastructure to support that development, including development in flood basins where uncontrolable natural processes wreak on that which man has built. A plan for the region is simply a framework within which the affect communities can make educated decisions.

    I have no objection to Hudson developing his property, but if he wants have that develop access infrastructure such as roads, sewer, etc, we the people (interesting phrase, that) have a right to establish conditions under which that access takes place.

    But do let’s spend our time on Agenda 21 because I’m sure the UN is looking in our windows even as we speak.

  100. JRolph44 says:

    Never heard of this cat till recently, but being associated with Christine”couldn’t get elected dog-catcher” O’Donnell is already not working in his favor. Agenda 21 is pure, evil fiction. While I agree the UN is a complete failure, and the US should withdraw, I don’t really see them as out to rule the US

  101. SussexAnon says:

    “While I agree the UN is a complete failure…” Do some research, your Ignorant American is showing.

  102. TeleMan: That…was…AWESOME!

    Something tells me that one Eric Bodwnweiser has absorbed every frame of that movie.

  103. anon says:

    I love that link, John. Tells you everything you need to know.

  104. heragain says:

    I knew a guy who was an all NRA individual freedom dog. He opposed having the low-lying areas of the town sign in to federal flood control zoning, because he didn’t want those out of town fancy pants college boys telling him how to build his house. The last time a small rain took out his house he didn’t have the money to rebuild, because, well, no flood insurance on his code-free construction, and he was no longer young enough to wrassle the material for construction directly out of Gods Earth.

    So now his house has been removed, and he lives on his wife’s government salary down in Sussex, where I’m sure he believes all this nonsense whole-heartedly.

    Maybe another way to spell the evil plot of Agenda 21 would be “karma.’