I'm no John Kerry, voting for something one year and against it the next year. I do the guy one better: I've figured out how to vote both for and against things at the same time.
I've got several variations of this one. Sometimes I'll say, "I started out against this, but I've done a lot of soul-searching, and now I'm for it." That always gets 'em. The opponents get to think I'm on their side, sort of, even when I'm giving them the royal screw.
Version 2 is, "I'm against this, but I'm voting for it because if we turn this proposal down, under our rules we'll be forced to approve something worse later." This is my favorite when we're letting some guy stick a pigsty in a neighborhood. I say yes to it, but only on the theory that our city code is so weak the developer could hammer the neighbors worse. So far, nobody's noticed that we're in charge of the city code. Sometimes, after I use that one, I'll go home and crank up Steely Dan's "Pretzel Logic" on the stereo.
Lately, I've been trying a new one with the park exclusion mess. I introduce an ordinance, and then refuse to support it myself. That'll keep 'em guessing.
Then there's the old standby, "I'm still really conflicted about this, I can see both sides, but here's my vote." I use this one as my default. It's great damage control on those sticky-wicket issues.
As Randy's finding out, you can't act too sure of yourself in this job. It ruffles too many feathers. You need a little toe-dance before you deliver the kick.
Gotta run, bloggy. We're brainstorming today on how to get a piece of the same-sex marriage publicity. You know me -- I try to keep it real. I don't go preaching about matters outside city jurisdiction. So far, I'm thinking: off-leash hours for gay dogs.
Posted by Jim at March 15, 2004 07:47 AM