But she is for real. And her Deep Stupid has consequences for real people, real lives. I would imagine that the number of people wanting to laugh in her face are greatly outnumbered by those who simply want to see the back of her as she leaves City Hall for good.
Until that happens, though, she's a "public servant," which means when the people want to talk to her - or laugh at her - it's her job to sit there and take it. That might be unpleasant, but do you really think, as Cherie testified she does, that negative public comments mean there is "no longer a safe environment"? Do critical but non-threatening words really create "a safety issue" as Cherie contends?
Not a threat, Cherie. Not a safety issue.
Not even a distraction. Just that pesky freedom of speech.
Or could these silly, baseless statements be, oh, I don't know, lame attempts to justify her own outrageous behavior after the fact?
As for citizens holding up signs during a City Council meeting...Let me just ask you, dear readers, if you could still function were you one of the people sitting at the front of the room, even if people were holding up signs? Apparently Cherie cannot, poor dear, since she describes said signs as "distracting."
Distracting? Really? Hmmm...I thought something that is distracting would be intended to possible draw your attention away from a particular subject or task. Given that these signs were supposed to focus and direct the Council's attention on an issue people feel is important, I would say that the signs in question were actually the opposite of distracting.
Can you grasp that concept, Cherie?
Anyway, we'll see what the Ethics Board comes up with this Friday. They called three good witnesses, and one rotten one. That's a good sign, but of course, per Cherie Kidd's worldview, there may be no such thing as a good sign - at least not in City Hall.