I have heard for almost two years about a possible new large shopping center coming to town at exit 97 and Hwy 70 near JR's. The major story was on the front page of last week's paper about the proposed project. Originally, the rumor was that a Home Depot and maybe a Target store were coming. Recently, I have heard more rumors. As you may have read, the developer has made a presentation to the town council.
The developer mentioned possible tenants such as Target, Bass Pro Shop, Cabellas, JC Penney, and IKEA, along with up-scale restaurants and motels. Keep in mind that these are just suggested possibilities. I am all for such a development, so don't get me wrong. However, keep in mind at this point, the developer is selling the idea and soliciting to get $15 million or so in reimbursements from the town for infrastructure improvements.
Personally, I am dubious over the claim of a Cabella's. I would absolutely love to have a Cabella's nearby. I may want to live in one. However, one already was proposed for Four Oaks and that project crashed and burned. Cabella's announced that they were going to put one in to Richmond, VA and figured that one here would be too close to their other proposed location. I find that claim fallacious, however. One can look at the map of their existing locations on their web site and shoot holes through that philosophy. I am not going to drive three hours to go to a Cabella's if that is indeed their strategy. If they reconsider Johnston County because of a better location, highway access, and other development, then hallelujah. I would be thrilled with a Bass Pro Shops, as well.
Anyway, this development would certainly be good for the town for several reasons. First, the developer wants to be voluntarily annexed. Great. They would bring a lot of revenue for electricity and water, if development and subsequent tenants were to become Selma utility customers. The tax revenue would be wonderful, but there is a problem - the developer wants 60% of the sales tax revenues generated for 15 years plus a refund of the difference in property tax values between the property taxes now versus the value of the developed land. To me, this is the rub.
I have no problem with the concept that if the entire development and the subsequent businesses are going to be Selma utility customers, that the town needs to extend the utilities to the customers who would be using our services. That is no different to me than the idea of having to extend water and sewer to a subdivision that would be annexed by the town or when Cisco went in it present location.
I do not even have an issue with the concept of sharing in the expense of any other infrastructure such as roadway improvements that will mutually benefit both the town and the developer. I do not consider those things to be corporate welfare. I consider them to be mutually beneficial and the cost of doing business to service customers. I may not like the idea that a town is in business to sell products and services such as water and electricity that are available from private industry, but that is another discussion for another day.
I do, however, consider total reimbursement for all related improvements to be a corporate welfare program. Taxpayer dollars should not be spent on woo a development, especially in an area that they find to be enticing even without our monetary support. If the facilities that the developer is going to build and the prime location are so attractive to the businesses that were bantered about, then it should not be a large risk to the developer. Furthermore, it should add to his revenue and not be the burden of the town.
As a town, we can certainly assist with expediency of zoning, utility, and other regulatory issues. However, I do not believe in paying someone to come to our town, especially for fifteen years.
In the interest of fairness, however, there were previously offered incentives for development in town, such as on East Anderson Street. If we offered them to one party, we should extend the same offer to any other development planners that come along. I may not like it, but fair is fair. As I recall, the offer tendered for that proposed development zone was a tax break for five years, and that included property taxes only.
It will certainly be interesting to see what "develops" in this situation. I am all for development of fallow ground and expanding this area. I am dubious as to the claims that "as much as $500 million in sales tax is leaving the county each year to go to Wake, Wayne, Wilson and Nash counties." That sounds like an excessively high estimate. It is part of the sales pitch.
I do agree with this quote, though. "Dougherty added that Selma is unique in the county in that it is ideally situated to host such a regional complex. He cited I-95 and US 70 and major thoroughfares. He said Exit 98 is excellent for such a complex because it has great access. "There’s no other city right on the an interchange like this," said the developer".
Either way, I am looking forward to seeing the addition to the town.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Column for Aug. 7, 2008
Welkum too edukashun in the Yoonited Statz uv Amerika
When the Selma Elementary School instituted a dress code, I pretty much supported the idea. Even when I was in elementary and high school, there was an expectation of appropriate attire. As I look back at old school pictures, I marvel at the clothes we wore, although they were not as risque as outfits often are today. They were funky looking clothes, but it was, after all, the 1970's. I still chide my mother for dressing me in such weird clothes whenever we look over a photo album together. In high school, I grew up in an area where flannel button shirts, blue jeans, and work boots were normal attire for a large portion of the school year. We wore Buck knives in leather holsters on our hips (just like in "The Dukes of Hazzard") to school every day and never thought anything of it, nor did the school administrators. A Buck knife was seen as a necessary tool, not a weapon. Anyway, rabbit trail aside, I supported the school dress code until recently.
As I had written previously, I have been active in the life of a boy who is now five and about to enter kindergarten. In a couple of months, this boy will become my step-son, so I have an active interest in his success at school and getting him prepared for it. His grandmother took him shopping for some clothes, but you don't generally find school uniforms at Macy's. I took him and his mother to Target last weekend to buy the requisite school clothes and supplies we would need. After all, the school system was kind enough to post the uniform code and school supply list on the internet for us to find (after hunting down the information by surfing a while).
Like I said, I was all for a school dress code. I believe in modest apparel. What I found, however, was that clothes that should be perfectly acceptable by public standards are not necessarily so for school uniforms. The real trick was finding clothing for winter while still in August, of which we found nothing but a few pairs of pants that met the criteria. We did find some polo or golf type shirts. The real problem was finding them in solid colors with no brand logo on them, and in the appropriate size 5. The boy already had some nice, appropriate shirts in his closet, but they had stripes and a Polo logo. Those shirts are plenty nice for church, but not for sending a tot to kindergarten, apparently. We can buy solid shirts in orange, red, blue, purple, black, white, or whatever color we want, but they can not have logos, pockets, or stripes. If the school REALLY was shooting for a school uniform, one style of shirt of one color should be required, but I digress.
For pants, a good looking pair of corduroys or nice, new blue jeans are taboo. Wow, that would have shot my whole school career attire down, except for the bell bottom hound's tooth or plaid pants my mother used to buy me, along with white patent leather belt. I do find the requirement for cotton twill only to be a bit excessive. We are talking about 5 to 10 year olds, not teenagers. For kindergarteners, we are talking about children who just recently learned to wipe themselves after using the bathroom, may have just learned to tie their shoes, and have recently gotten used to the use of forks. They may still often use "sippy cups". Maybe my future step-son is the "Messy Marvin" of his day (wow, that is dating me a bit), but there is extensive clean up after each meal. He play rough with me, his toys, and my dog, so I am dubious about not putting the lad in denim to go to school.
I am not disturbed so much by the cost of adhering to the dress code, though. I would have to buy him new clothes anyway, since he has grown like a weed just since I first got to know him late last year. We did find some $5 polo shirts and $10 pants. It was the exclusivity without adherence to a true uniform standard that sort of annoyed me.
Here is what DID annoy me...the school supply list. Parents are expected to purchase an entire shopping list of materials and simply turn them over to the school at the time of a parental conference. We are expected to furnish brand name crayons, markers, scissors, baby wipes, paper towels, hand sanitizer, Ziploc bags, tissues, dry erase markers, napkins, highlighter markers, index cards, and more. We are not supposed to put the child's name on anything except his change of clothes and his book bag.
I am sorry, but the last time I looked, we still live in America, not the former USSR. Furthermore, I just got my Johnston County property tax bill this week and I am wondering why I am paying all that money in taxes, the school system keeps asking for more money, we constantly are having school bond referendums, and I am being asked to supply basic classroom materials. Does the school not have a janitor? Do they not have cases of paper towels somewhere in that building? Are the teachers not supplied with dry erase markers to write on their boards? Chalk was used in my day, right through college and that worked fine, but I can understand using dry erase boards now. But still, the school system, with all the millions of dollars we are paying in taxes for their operation, should be furnishing something as basic as paper towels. If the school can not afford the materials, I am sure we can afford enough dry erase markers for the entire school system by cutting Superintendent Parker's salary to a reasonable level for what he does for a living. I will do the same job only better for half of what he makes. That is an official offer to the Johnston County Board of Education, by the way. If not that, then one less assistant principal at the elementary school would furnish all the paper towels we would ever need.
Why I mention the USSR is that by confiscating the materials that we are furnishing for the classroom as a whole, we are teaching communism. When I was in kindergarten, all I had to show up with was my daily lunch and/or snack. The rest was taken care of by the school system, which was much smaller than that of Johnston County with a much smaller budget and much older facilities. Furthermore, we learned. We did not have issues in which we did not pass mandates for performance. As a matter of fact, the state where I grew up used to consistently score in the top of the national SAT averages while having the lowest per capita state expenditure per student for education in the country. Thus, I know that education is not a matter of dollars and materials can be furnished for said education.
Sure, when I got older, I had to furnish my own book covers, but an old paper bag from a shopping trip to the A&P did fine. I furnished my own notebooks eventually, but they were MY notebooks for my use alone. By taking the crayons that I purchase and pooling them with that of others, we are employing a communist system. I was told by the office staff that 60% of the students at Selma Elementary are Hispanic and from families in which English is not the primary language. If Jose and Maria can not afford to buy a 27 cent box of Crayolas, that is their problem. It is not my responsibility to furnish their children with crayons, markers, glue, and paper towels. I bought the crayons, so I know how much they cost. I bought my boy some pencils with his name on them some time ago. I surmise that he will not be able to use them at school, since not all children are so named. We are supposed to protect the self esteem of some illegal immigrant children or even some poor family's kids by furnishing them with Crayolas? All this redistribution of school supply wealth has got to be all one big joke, right? That is liberal academia social engineering with lower educational results for you.
First, I am ticked that the schools are not furnishing these supplies after we are constantly being asked to "pony up" an ever increasing amount of tax dollars for their operation. Then I am extremely annoyed that our children are being taught communisitic principles for politically correct reasons. If you can not afford a trip to Wal-Mart or the dollar store for your child to bring his/her own supplies and not take from others, then I suggest that you forgo that next DVD purchase, 12 pack of beer, tattoo addition, or carton of cigarettes and buy some 22 cent glue sticks and crayons (at least the non big named crayons were 22 cents, but the school specifically requested the five cent higher Crayola brand). Better yet, let the school system slash its over bloated bureaucracy and maybe we could afford to buy the needed supplies instead of double taxing us by demanding a grocery list of supplies before the first day of school. It gets better, though. We were informed that we will be furnished an additional supply list later. Doggone communists of academia. I miss America.
When the Selma Elementary School instituted a dress code, I pretty much supported the idea. Even when I was in elementary and high school, there was an expectation of appropriate attire. As I look back at old school pictures, I marvel at the clothes we wore, although they were not as risque as outfits often are today. They were funky looking clothes, but it was, after all, the 1970's. I still chide my mother for dressing me in such weird clothes whenever we look over a photo album together. In high school, I grew up in an area where flannel button shirts, blue jeans, and work boots were normal attire for a large portion of the school year. We wore Buck knives in leather holsters on our hips (just like in "The Dukes of Hazzard") to school every day and never thought anything of it, nor did the school administrators. A Buck knife was seen as a necessary tool, not a weapon. Anyway, rabbit trail aside, I supported the school dress code until recently.
As I had written previously, I have been active in the life of a boy who is now five and about to enter kindergarten. In a couple of months, this boy will become my step-son, so I have an active interest in his success at school and getting him prepared for it. His grandmother took him shopping for some clothes, but you don't generally find school uniforms at Macy's. I took him and his mother to Target last weekend to buy the requisite school clothes and supplies we would need. After all, the school system was kind enough to post the uniform code and school supply list on the internet for us to find (after hunting down the information by surfing a while).
Like I said, I was all for a school dress code. I believe in modest apparel. What I found, however, was that clothes that should be perfectly acceptable by public standards are not necessarily so for school uniforms. The real trick was finding clothing for winter while still in August, of which we found nothing but a few pairs of pants that met the criteria. We did find some polo or golf type shirts. The real problem was finding them in solid colors with no brand logo on them, and in the appropriate size 5. The boy already had some nice, appropriate shirts in his closet, but they had stripes and a Polo logo. Those shirts are plenty nice for church, but not for sending a tot to kindergarten, apparently. We can buy solid shirts in orange, red, blue, purple, black, white, or whatever color we want, but they can not have logos, pockets, or stripes. If the school REALLY was shooting for a school uniform, one style of shirt of one color should be required, but I digress.
For pants, a good looking pair of corduroys or nice, new blue jeans are taboo. Wow, that would have shot my whole school career attire down, except for the bell bottom hound's tooth or plaid pants my mother used to buy me, along with white patent leather belt. I do find the requirement for cotton twill only to be a bit excessive. We are talking about 5 to 10 year olds, not teenagers. For kindergarteners, we are talking about children who just recently learned to wipe themselves after using the bathroom, may have just learned to tie their shoes, and have recently gotten used to the use of forks. They may still often use "sippy cups". Maybe my future step-son is the "Messy Marvin" of his day (wow, that is dating me a bit), but there is extensive clean up after each meal. He play rough with me, his toys, and my dog, so I am dubious about not putting the lad in denim to go to school.
I am not disturbed so much by the cost of adhering to the dress code, though. I would have to buy him new clothes anyway, since he has grown like a weed just since I first got to know him late last year. We did find some $5 polo shirts and $10 pants. It was the exclusivity without adherence to a true uniform standard that sort of annoyed me.
Here is what DID annoy me...the school supply list. Parents are expected to purchase an entire shopping list of materials and simply turn them over to the school at the time of a parental conference. We are expected to furnish brand name crayons, markers, scissors, baby wipes, paper towels, hand sanitizer, Ziploc bags, tissues, dry erase markers, napkins, highlighter markers, index cards, and more. We are not supposed to put the child's name on anything except his change of clothes and his book bag.
I am sorry, but the last time I looked, we still live in America, not the former USSR. Furthermore, I just got my Johnston County property tax bill this week and I am wondering why I am paying all that money in taxes, the school system keeps asking for more money, we constantly are having school bond referendums, and I am being asked to supply basic classroom materials. Does the school not have a janitor? Do they not have cases of paper towels somewhere in that building? Are the teachers not supplied with dry erase markers to write on their boards? Chalk was used in my day, right through college and that worked fine, but I can understand using dry erase boards now. But still, the school system, with all the millions of dollars we are paying in taxes for their operation, should be furnishing something as basic as paper towels. If the school can not afford the materials, I am sure we can afford enough dry erase markers for the entire school system by cutting Superintendent Parker's salary to a reasonable level for what he does for a living. I will do the same job only better for half of what he makes. That is an official offer to the Johnston County Board of Education, by the way. If not that, then one less assistant principal at the elementary school would furnish all the paper towels we would ever need.
Why I mention the USSR is that by confiscating the materials that we are furnishing for the classroom as a whole, we are teaching communism. When I was in kindergarten, all I had to show up with was my daily lunch and/or snack. The rest was taken care of by the school system, which was much smaller than that of Johnston County with a much smaller budget and much older facilities. Furthermore, we learned. We did not have issues in which we did not pass mandates for performance. As a matter of fact, the state where I grew up used to consistently score in the top of the national SAT averages while having the lowest per capita state expenditure per student for education in the country. Thus, I know that education is not a matter of dollars and materials can be furnished for said education.
Sure, when I got older, I had to furnish my own book covers, but an old paper bag from a shopping trip to the A&P did fine. I furnished my own notebooks eventually, but they were MY notebooks for my use alone. By taking the crayons that I purchase and pooling them with that of others, we are employing a communist system. I was told by the office staff that 60% of the students at Selma Elementary are Hispanic and from families in which English is not the primary language. If Jose and Maria can not afford to buy a 27 cent box of Crayolas, that is their problem. It is not my responsibility to furnish their children with crayons, markers, glue, and paper towels. I bought the crayons, so I know how much they cost. I bought my boy some pencils with his name on them some time ago. I surmise that he will not be able to use them at school, since not all children are so named. We are supposed to protect the self esteem of some illegal immigrant children or even some poor family's kids by furnishing them with Crayolas? All this redistribution of school supply wealth has got to be all one big joke, right? That is liberal academia social engineering with lower educational results for you.
First, I am ticked that the schools are not furnishing these supplies after we are constantly being asked to "pony up" an ever increasing amount of tax dollars for their operation. Then I am extremely annoyed that our children are being taught communisitic principles for politically correct reasons. If you can not afford a trip to Wal-Mart or the dollar store for your child to bring his/her own supplies and not take from others, then I suggest that you forgo that next DVD purchase, 12 pack of beer, tattoo addition, or carton of cigarettes and buy some 22 cent glue sticks and crayons (at least the non big named crayons were 22 cents, but the school specifically requested the five cent higher Crayola brand). Better yet, let the school system slash its over bloated bureaucracy and maybe we could afford to buy the needed supplies instead of double taxing us by demanding a grocery list of supplies before the first day of school. It gets better, though. We were informed that we will be furnished an additional supply list later. Doggone communists of academia. I miss America.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Column for July 31, 2008
Are wastewater reclamation efforts actually bad for the American family?
I read with interest recently about how the Town of Benson was going to move forward with a three million dollar waste water reclamation and recycling project. The US Department of Agriculture is lending Benson $886,000 towards building an eight mile wastewater reclamation pipeline to one customer. The customer, a plant nursery, would use the water for irrigation of decorative and other non food source vegetation. Other possible future use could be for watering golf courses, sod production irrigation, and pasture lands.
Water reclamation is not a bad idea. I am all for recycling used water, often called "gray water" for purposes of irrigation, construction, and other non-potable purposes. If the water is just going to waste anyway, then I say it is a great move to do so. However, I have a slight problem with the US government paying for a small town like Benson to build a pipeline to reclaim said water for the benefit of one customer and the hope of adding more. Why should people in Arkansas or California be contributing to the project here in North Carolina?
Projects like this are what I consider to be pork barrel spending. Sure, some people may benefit. However, it is not the job of the federal government to act like an unending pool of money to be siphoned off for special or experimental projects.
When building or expanding the town's water supply is the time to innovate and include the gray water reclamation lines. I remember that the proposed ethanol plant in Selma was planning on using gray water for its plant. However, there was no such line or reclamation efforts existing anywhere. One would have to be built from the far side of Smithfield all the way in to Selma's fringes. That of course would have been funded by tax dollars in one form or another.
Government grants are TAX DOLLARS. Never forget that fact. Whenever some town applies for a grant to revitalize its downtown, for people to renovate their homes, or whatever, we are talking about tax dollars. Multiply those local expenditures times the tens of thousands of other communities in this nation and you can see why we have such a huge budget in our federal government.
Government loans are probably even worse than grants. Why do I say that? Because the federal government taxes us citizens to get the capital. Then they turn around and lend it to municipalities like Selma or Benson, as is the case in this instance. Then the town has to pay back borrowed tax dollars with funds it derives from...yup, you guessed it, tax dollars. In essence, we are being taxed twice for the same funding.
The federal government has no business being in the lending industry. It has no business redistributing the wealth of its citizens. People wonder why I am passionate about such waste and why I decry it so. It is because it truly impacts each and every tax payer in this nation. There are some who pay no taxes. Even people who pay very little taxes often get back more money than they paid the government by nature of the earned income tax credit and the recent tax rebate incentive package.
In the 1950's, women were primarily stay at home mothers and wives. The man of the house went to work in the morning and came home in the evening. They usually lived comfortably on one salary. Nowadays, that is virtually impossible for many Americans. It means that more and more families can not survive on a single income so now both parents have to work. It means that children are placed in day care so that a stranger can raise the children instead of their own parents. It means that there is a lot more economic pressure that stresses out couples and fractures their marriages. It means that women have lost the sense of femininity and compete with men in the work place instead of glorying in the role of a mother that they were created to perform. It means that the high taxation rates have short changed our youth instead of helping them. It means that welfare queens can have more babies and get more money instead of marrying a man and settling down. It undermines the family. The ironic thing is that such pork barrel spending is intended to benefit the population it destroys by driving the cost of government and subsequently taxation higher and higher.
I am not adverse to spending money on actual infrastructure projects that benefit everyone. For instance, I saw a lot of apparently sewer line construction going on in my neighborhood over the past few weeks. That is something we need to maintain since it serves a vital interest of the entire town. I am all for improvements and replacements when needed. A gray water pipeline, however, would not benefit most citizens, much less all of them. It would be a small population deriving benefits from the pockets of the majority. That is why we have so much spending in our nation and why we can not have "The Donna Reed Show" type family arrangement anymore. The squeeze has been put on the traditional family model and that foundation has been cracking for decades now.
I read with interest recently about how the Town of Benson was going to move forward with a three million dollar waste water reclamation and recycling project. The US Department of Agriculture is lending Benson $886,000 towards building an eight mile wastewater reclamation pipeline to one customer. The customer, a plant nursery, would use the water for irrigation of decorative and other non food source vegetation. Other possible future use could be for watering golf courses, sod production irrigation, and pasture lands.
Water reclamation is not a bad idea. I am all for recycling used water, often called "gray water" for purposes of irrigation, construction, and other non-potable purposes. If the water is just going to waste anyway, then I say it is a great move to do so. However, I have a slight problem with the US government paying for a small town like Benson to build a pipeline to reclaim said water for the benefit of one customer and the hope of adding more. Why should people in Arkansas or California be contributing to the project here in North Carolina?
Projects like this are what I consider to be pork barrel spending. Sure, some people may benefit. However, it is not the job of the federal government to act like an unending pool of money to be siphoned off for special or experimental projects.
When building or expanding the town's water supply is the time to innovate and include the gray water reclamation lines. I remember that the proposed ethanol plant in Selma was planning on using gray water for its plant. However, there was no such line or reclamation efforts existing anywhere. One would have to be built from the far side of Smithfield all the way in to Selma's fringes. That of course would have been funded by tax dollars in one form or another.
Government grants are TAX DOLLARS. Never forget that fact. Whenever some town applies for a grant to revitalize its downtown, for people to renovate their homes, or whatever, we are talking about tax dollars. Multiply those local expenditures times the tens of thousands of other communities in this nation and you can see why we have such a huge budget in our federal government.
Government loans are probably even worse than grants. Why do I say that? Because the federal government taxes us citizens to get the capital. Then they turn around and lend it to municipalities like Selma or Benson, as is the case in this instance. Then the town has to pay back borrowed tax dollars with funds it derives from...yup, you guessed it, tax dollars. In essence, we are being taxed twice for the same funding.
The federal government has no business being in the lending industry. It has no business redistributing the wealth of its citizens. People wonder why I am passionate about such waste and why I decry it so. It is because it truly impacts each and every tax payer in this nation. There are some who pay no taxes. Even people who pay very little taxes often get back more money than they paid the government by nature of the earned income tax credit and the recent tax rebate incentive package.
In the 1950's, women were primarily stay at home mothers and wives. The man of the house went to work in the morning and came home in the evening. They usually lived comfortably on one salary. Nowadays, that is virtually impossible for many Americans. It means that more and more families can not survive on a single income so now both parents have to work. It means that children are placed in day care so that a stranger can raise the children instead of their own parents. It means that there is a lot more economic pressure that stresses out couples and fractures their marriages. It means that women have lost the sense of femininity and compete with men in the work place instead of glorying in the role of a mother that they were created to perform. It means that the high taxation rates have short changed our youth instead of helping them. It means that welfare queens can have more babies and get more money instead of marrying a man and settling down. It undermines the family. The ironic thing is that such pork barrel spending is intended to benefit the population it destroys by driving the cost of government and subsequently taxation higher and higher.
I am not adverse to spending money on actual infrastructure projects that benefit everyone. For instance, I saw a lot of apparently sewer line construction going on in my neighborhood over the past few weeks. That is something we need to maintain since it serves a vital interest of the entire town. I am all for improvements and replacements when needed. A gray water pipeline, however, would not benefit most citizens, much less all of them. It would be a small population deriving benefits from the pockets of the majority. That is why we have so much spending in our nation and why we can not have "The Donna Reed Show" type family arrangement anymore. The squeeze has been put on the traditional family model and that foundation has been cracking for decades now.
Friday, July 25, 2008
Column for July 24, 2008
Usually, I am the one asking questions. Not today.
It is hard to believe that this column concludes two full years of writing this column here at "The Selma News". I wish to offer my sincere gratitude to you, the readers. Whether you like my opinions or hate them, I thank you. I have gotten a lot of feedback over the last two years. Much was positive, a lot was negative. All I care is that you have been reading, which is both humbling and stimulating to me at the same time. I also wanted to thank Rick Stewart, the editor of this paper, for the extraordinary opportunity he gave to this big, ol' opinionated shmoe.
Being what is commonly referred to as a conservative individual, I run across a good many people of like minded passions and beliefs. Since I am very active on the internet, I tend to interact with people from all over the country and world. Recently, I was contacted by someone who runs a web site that opposes John McCain's election to the Presidency. The owner asked to interview me about my views on John McCain. Since I have shared my view points on Barack Hussien Obama, I wanted to share some of my views on John McCain, for the sake of equality. Here is the content of the interview.
Q: How would you self-identify politically? What are your general opinions about the role of government?
A: I would identify myself as a classic liberal. The term libertarian could be used, just not referring to the political party so named. Some would use the term conservative. I am probably most closely aligned with the likes of Barry Goldwater in most of my political philosophies with a few exceptions. I am not affiliated with any party at present.
The purpose of government is fairly well enumerated in the preamble of the US Constitution at the federal level. "...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity". Other than that, there is not much need for government. Highways ensure liberty and the general welfare. Welfare programs do not. Courts ensure justice. Hate crime legislation does not, nor do laws such as Sarbaines-Oxley or McCain-Feingold. Maybe I just made that clear as mud.
However, I also find a good definition in Romans 13:1-4 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil."
Government is there for the purpose of ensuring that the evil doers are punished, protecting those that do good. Government is something invented by God himself and therefore should be taken as something sacred rather than for personal gain.
Q: What are your reasons for opposing the candidacy of John McCain?
A: John McCain is not a "conservative", if I am to pick a term. He may have filled Barry Goldwater's seat in the Senate, but he is no Goldwater. He tends to be weak on items such as border security, the farce of global warming, on free speech (see previous comment on McCain-Feingold) rights, and wants to grant amnesty to millions of law breakers who entered this nation illegally, thus opposing the justice and common defense issues of the purpose of government.
Q: Do you advocate any of the other candidates as an alternative? If so, why? If not, why not?
A: My main support would be for either Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin is on the Constitution Party ticket and will never win. Ron Paul will not win the GOP nomination and has little support from the mainstream of the party. Ron Paul, though I disagree with him on some policy issues such as our presence in Iraq, is the ONLY candidate who truly supported liberty and a return to the original values of the Constitution. Chuck Baldwin espouses the CP values, with which I find myself fairly closely aligned. However, most CP folks are disgruntled GOP who are arrogant and ineffective. At least this is the way at the state party level here in NC. Ergo, I have disassociated myself with them. I can elaborate more on my differences with Ron Paul later if you wish.
Q: Is there any Vice Presidential pick for McCain that could get you to "hold your nose" and vote for him? (If so, why? If not, why not?)
A: Nope. First off, who ever remembers the VP? I personally remember all the VPs since I first started paying attention to the government in my elementary school days. Does the general populace pay attention? Probably not. I have a hard time finding people who know who Dick Cheney is. How many VPs have actually ascended to the Presidency in my lifetime? Only one, and he was not elected to that office. Gerald Ford was appointed VP after Spiro Agnew resigned under the provisions of the 25th Amendment. That was over 30 years ago and is not in the forefront of the knowledge or remembrance of millions of Americans. Since the VP does not make policy except to act as President of the Senate, I do not find that VP candidates are a means of sway for my vote. We would still get McCain as President, our chief executive.
Q: At this point, who do you think will win the general election and why?
A: I believe that Barack Obama will win. Why? Voter apathy, ignorance, and seduction. There are so few people educated on Constitutional principles, know the history of this nation, that follow traditional Christian values, and believe that they should provide for themselves rather than be taken care of by the world's system, we are doomed to become a socialist nation. And yet we will have the same document called The United States Constitution to which we claim to adhere.
It is hard to believe that this column concludes two full years of writing this column here at "The Selma News". I wish to offer my sincere gratitude to you, the readers. Whether you like my opinions or hate them, I thank you. I have gotten a lot of feedback over the last two years. Much was positive, a lot was negative. All I care is that you have been reading, which is both humbling and stimulating to me at the same time. I also wanted to thank Rick Stewart, the editor of this paper, for the extraordinary opportunity he gave to this big, ol' opinionated shmoe.
Being what is commonly referred to as a conservative individual, I run across a good many people of like minded passions and beliefs. Since I am very active on the internet, I tend to interact with people from all over the country and world. Recently, I was contacted by someone who runs a web site that opposes John McCain's election to the Presidency. The owner asked to interview me about my views on John McCain. Since I have shared my view points on Barack Hussien Obama, I wanted to share some of my views on John McCain, for the sake of equality. Here is the content of the interview.
Q: How would you self-identify politically? What are your general opinions about the role of government?
A: I would identify myself as a classic liberal. The term libertarian could be used, just not referring to the political party so named. Some would use the term conservative. I am probably most closely aligned with the likes of Barry Goldwater in most of my political philosophies with a few exceptions. I am not affiliated with any party at present.
The purpose of government is fairly well enumerated in the preamble of the US Constitution at the federal level. "...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity". Other than that, there is not much need for government. Highways ensure liberty and the general welfare. Welfare programs do not. Courts ensure justice. Hate crime legislation does not, nor do laws such as Sarbaines-Oxley or McCain-Feingold. Maybe I just made that clear as mud.
However, I also find a good definition in Romans 13:1-4 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil."
Government is there for the purpose of ensuring that the evil doers are punished, protecting those that do good. Government is something invented by God himself and therefore should be taken as something sacred rather than for personal gain.
Q: What are your reasons for opposing the candidacy of John McCain?
A: John McCain is not a "conservative", if I am to pick a term. He may have filled Barry Goldwater's seat in the Senate, but he is no Goldwater. He tends to be weak on items such as border security, the farce of global warming, on free speech (see previous comment on McCain-Feingold) rights, and wants to grant amnesty to millions of law breakers who entered this nation illegally, thus opposing the justice and common defense issues of the purpose of government.
Q: Do you advocate any of the other candidates as an alternative? If so, why? If not, why not?
A: My main support would be for either Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin is on the Constitution Party ticket and will never win. Ron Paul will not win the GOP nomination and has little support from the mainstream of the party. Ron Paul, though I disagree with him on some policy issues such as our presence in Iraq, is the ONLY candidate who truly supported liberty and a return to the original values of the Constitution. Chuck Baldwin espouses the CP values, with which I find myself fairly closely aligned. However, most CP folks are disgruntled GOP who are arrogant and ineffective. At least this is the way at the state party level here in NC. Ergo, I have disassociated myself with them. I can elaborate more on my differences with Ron Paul later if you wish.
Q: Is there any Vice Presidential pick for McCain that could get you to "hold your nose" and vote for him? (If so, why? If not, why not?)
A: Nope. First off, who ever remembers the VP? I personally remember all the VPs since I first started paying attention to the government in my elementary school days. Does the general populace pay attention? Probably not. I have a hard time finding people who know who Dick Cheney is. How many VPs have actually ascended to the Presidency in my lifetime? Only one, and he was not elected to that office. Gerald Ford was appointed VP after Spiro Agnew resigned under the provisions of the 25th Amendment. That was over 30 years ago and is not in the forefront of the knowledge or remembrance of millions of Americans. Since the VP does not make policy except to act as President of the Senate, I do not find that VP candidates are a means of sway for my vote. We would still get McCain as President, our chief executive.
Q: At this point, who do you think will win the general election and why?
A: I believe that Barack Obama will win. Why? Voter apathy, ignorance, and seduction. There are so few people educated on Constitutional principles, know the history of this nation, that follow traditional Christian values, and believe that they should provide for themselves rather than be taken care of by the world's system, we are doomed to become a socialist nation. And yet we will have the same document called The United States Constitution to which we claim to adhere.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Column for July 17, 2008
Three items that made me go "Hhhhhmmmmmmm"
As scant as the news has been here in Selma the past month or so, I still find things over which to muse right here in this very newspaper. In reading the July 10th edition, I found three stories that made me go, "Hhhhhmmmmmmm." Maybe I am just one who ponders the great mysteries of life as well as employs critical thinking. Maybe I am just a bit pessimistic. Either way, I am able to find fodder for my column.
I had originally planned to be in another town with some friends for the 4th of July celebration. Unfortunately, those plans got canceled at almost the last minute, so I came to downtown Selma to enjoy the fireworks with some family members. For a small town, Selma does put on a great fireworks display each Independence Day. I actually consider July 2nd to be Independence Day, since that is when Lee's Resolution was passed calling for said independence, but that is another discussion for another day.
My method of counting must be very different from that of event organizers. It never fails that I see far fewer people at an event than gets reported in the media. Whether it be the .5 Million Man March, a political rally, or a small town fireworks display, the quoted number of people always exceeds what is readily obvious by two to three fold. I believe that in this case, ten fold. Somewhere, the decimal point was moved when it was reported that "approximately 4,000 to 5,000 people attended throughout the evening".
Shifting gears now, I pop the clutch and roll on to our pending increase in our utility bills. I have heard from some of my readers over the past two years (I am now beginning my third year of writing this column) that they are dismayed at the high electricity bills here in Selma. I read previously that we were going to look at approximately a 12% rate increase in our utility bills. We are also getting a trash collection rate hike and a property tax hike.
It is my understanding that Selma, by nature of its association with Electricities, is a wholesale customer of Progress Energy. What that means to us as customers is that we are prone to more capricious fluctuations in the price of electricity than normal Progress Energy (I still catch myself referring to them as CP&L) customers. Retail customers of Progress Energy are protected from wide price fluctuations by the state's regulatory commission. By regulation, wholesale customers are not subject to such wild market price protections. By the time that retail customers have been even notified that the regulatory agency has approved a price hike for them, we who buy our electricity from the town's monopoly have already been socked with the increases. I got this information directly from a former Selma town manager, so I figure that the description here is accurate.
I have no problem with the town using the electrical grid in town to make money provided that there are several things that will come along with the process. First, that we as a town can use the profits derived from the sale of electricity, water, and sewer services to offset property taxation as a regular, ongoing source of revenue. State regulatory agencies have a problem with that concept, so our budget often reflects that we have a deficiency in funding, and hence the tax increase we are getting. This is not the entire reason, I am sure, but it is certainly a contributing factor. What is the sense of making a profit from a venture if you can not use the revenue as you see fit? If we are not able to use the profits to go towards our general fund, then we need to price the utility rates so that we do not have any profit at all.
For that matter, we should ponder selling our electrical system to Progress Energy and let them provide 100% of the service. That will save us the expense of the employees, vehicles, materials, and operational burdens of having such a utility department in house. If we can get the same service from a private company, then we should seriously consider it. If we can sell the entire system to the power company and make a huge profit from the sale, we can roll back some property taxes and perhaps get a lot of other items taken care of that we could not previously afford as a town. Just food for thought.
The last item that tickled my fancy was the list of some 41 items that our illustrious mayor has given as successes and failures. For almost three years, I have simply said, "Where's the list?" We heard constantly that there was a list of things that the then candidate for mayor and later mayor elect had as his goals for Selma. When the Republican Party was in its "hay day" in 1994 and were elected in landslide elections, they came up with the "Contract for America". This was a list of the things they wanted to get accomplished and pledged to work towards. They made this list readily available and we could look over the list and measure results. We have not yet had this privilege as citizens here in Selma with the promised 50 item agenda. Even with this article in the paper, we still do not have this privilege.
There are only 41 items on this list, and many of them are simply a listing of what has been accomplished, not what was on the list from three years ago. Ergo, we can not as citizens measure the results of what we were promised. Some of the items on the list were obviously not on a list of goals, since they came about long after the envisioning of the original list. A couple had nothing to do with the mayor or town council, and a few were in the works before the mayor even took office.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for listing the achievements and progress made in town. I applaud progress in areas in which progress was needed. I am sure that some of the items so enumerated in the newspaper were originally planned as part of the infamous list of 50 that we kept hearing about but were never afforded the opportunity to read. I am all for adding to a list once it has been started. I am saying that in all fairness, since we as citizens were promised progress on an undisclosed list nearly three years ago, perhaps it is time to compare and evaluate. Had the list not been heralded by the mayor, I would not be so critical in my discernment. However, a promise made that is not known as to its content has no way of standing up to scrutiny or measurement. That is the way I look at it. Since the list was again brought up in the newspaper, I find it fair to bring up a demand for a metric and disclosure of said list. That way, we as citizens can say whether or not we were wise in our choice for mayor; that we can say "well done" or "we want more accomplished" and hold elected officials accountable. We citizens are, after all, the ones that are being represented, cast the votes, and the ones who foot the bill for the town.
As scant as the news has been here in Selma the past month or so, I still find things over which to muse right here in this very newspaper. In reading the July 10th edition, I found three stories that made me go, "Hhhhhmmmmmmm." Maybe I am just one who ponders the great mysteries of life as well as employs critical thinking. Maybe I am just a bit pessimistic. Either way, I am able to find fodder for my column.
I had originally planned to be in another town with some friends for the 4th of July celebration. Unfortunately, those plans got canceled at almost the last minute, so I came to downtown Selma to enjoy the fireworks with some family members. For a small town, Selma does put on a great fireworks display each Independence Day. I actually consider July 2nd to be Independence Day, since that is when Lee's Resolution was passed calling for said independence, but that is another discussion for another day.
My method of counting must be very different from that of event organizers. It never fails that I see far fewer people at an event than gets reported in the media. Whether it be the .5 Million Man March, a political rally, or a small town fireworks display, the quoted number of people always exceeds what is readily obvious by two to three fold. I believe that in this case, ten fold. Somewhere, the decimal point was moved when it was reported that "approximately 4,000 to 5,000 people attended throughout the evening".
Shifting gears now, I pop the clutch and roll on to our pending increase in our utility bills. I have heard from some of my readers over the past two years (I am now beginning my third year of writing this column) that they are dismayed at the high electricity bills here in Selma. I read previously that we were going to look at approximately a 12% rate increase in our utility bills. We are also getting a trash collection rate hike and a property tax hike.
It is my understanding that Selma, by nature of its association with Electricities, is a wholesale customer of Progress Energy. What that means to us as customers is that we are prone to more capricious fluctuations in the price of electricity than normal Progress Energy (I still catch myself referring to them as CP&L) customers. Retail customers of Progress Energy are protected from wide price fluctuations by the state's regulatory commission. By regulation, wholesale customers are not subject to such wild market price protections. By the time that retail customers have been even notified that the regulatory agency has approved a price hike for them, we who buy our electricity from the town's monopoly have already been socked with the increases. I got this information directly from a former Selma town manager, so I figure that the description here is accurate.
I have no problem with the town using the electrical grid in town to make money provided that there are several things that will come along with the process. First, that we as a town can use the profits derived from the sale of electricity, water, and sewer services to offset property taxation as a regular, ongoing source of revenue. State regulatory agencies have a problem with that concept, so our budget often reflects that we have a deficiency in funding, and hence the tax increase we are getting. This is not the entire reason, I am sure, but it is certainly a contributing factor. What is the sense of making a profit from a venture if you can not use the revenue as you see fit? If we are not able to use the profits to go towards our general fund, then we need to price the utility rates so that we do not have any profit at all.
For that matter, we should ponder selling our electrical system to Progress Energy and let them provide 100% of the service. That will save us the expense of the employees, vehicles, materials, and operational burdens of having such a utility department in house. If we can get the same service from a private company, then we should seriously consider it. If we can sell the entire system to the power company and make a huge profit from the sale, we can roll back some property taxes and perhaps get a lot of other items taken care of that we could not previously afford as a town. Just food for thought.
The last item that tickled my fancy was the list of some 41 items that our illustrious mayor has given as successes and failures. For almost three years, I have simply said, "Where's the list?" We heard constantly that there was a list of things that the then candidate for mayor and later mayor elect had as his goals for Selma. When the Republican Party was in its "hay day" in 1994 and were elected in landslide elections, they came up with the "Contract for America". This was a list of the things they wanted to get accomplished and pledged to work towards. They made this list readily available and we could look over the list and measure results. We have not yet had this privilege as citizens here in Selma with the promised 50 item agenda. Even with this article in the paper, we still do not have this privilege.
There are only 41 items on this list, and many of them are simply a listing of what has been accomplished, not what was on the list from three years ago. Ergo, we can not as citizens measure the results of what we were promised. Some of the items on the list were obviously not on a list of goals, since they came about long after the envisioning of the original list. A couple had nothing to do with the mayor or town council, and a few were in the works before the mayor even took office.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for listing the achievements and progress made in town. I applaud progress in areas in which progress was needed. I am sure that some of the items so enumerated in the newspaper were originally planned as part of the infamous list of 50 that we kept hearing about but were never afforded the opportunity to read. I am all for adding to a list once it has been started. I am saying that in all fairness, since we as citizens were promised progress on an undisclosed list nearly three years ago, perhaps it is time to compare and evaluate. Had the list not been heralded by the mayor, I would not be so critical in my discernment. However, a promise made that is not known as to its content has no way of standing up to scrutiny or measurement. That is the way I look at it. Since the list was again brought up in the newspaper, I find it fair to bring up a demand for a metric and disclosure of said list. That way, we as citizens can say whether or not we were wise in our choice for mayor; that we can say "well done" or "we want more accomplished" and hold elected officials accountable. We citizens are, after all, the ones that are being represented, cast the votes, and the ones who foot the bill for the town.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Column for July 10, 2008
We lost a strong leader with the passing of Jesse Helms
I read with sadness about the passing of Jesse Helms, longtime North Carolina Senator. Helms, like him or hate him, was a staunch conservative, often being called "Mr. No". I certainly wish that more elected representatives had the word "no" in their vocabulary. Helms was a straight shooter, which I admired greatly. You always knew where Jesse stood on issues. That is a noble quality in a man. I truly do not like politicians (or your average garden variety of person, for that matter) that waivers and you never know where he or she will stand. Politically, I had a hard time faulting him on many things. This quote from an internet web site, speaks volumes to me. "He was an outspoken conservative who opposed communism, tax increases, abortion, gay rights, affirmative action, food stamps, secularism, and government-funded healthcare." It takes guts to stand against some of these sacred cows that are so beloved by the socialists in our country. I wish we had 100 men just like Jesse Helms in the United States Senate.
I do not support some of Helms' apparently racist views. I have read many of them on the internet over the years, as well as in various media. I do, however, support his conservative view points. He was never politically correct in his approach to politics. Neither am I. He was also very witty in many of his "off the cuff" remarks. I laughed numerous times when he made comments directed at one of my least favorite Senators, Ted Kennedy. I have met and spoken briefly with Ted Kennedy, but I detest his politics, as did Helms. One example of a Helms jab at Kennedy was after having heart valve surgery. He remarked, "It's no piece of cake, but it sure beats listening to Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor." I concur.
It is quite possible that Ronald Reagan would never have been elected President without the help of Jesse Helms. In 1976, Reagan received a strong push for the GOP nomination over incumbent Gerald Ford. Of course, Ford won the nomination and went on to be defeated for President by Jimmy Carter. However, the strong showing made by Reagan with the help of Senator Helms, set up Reagan to be the next GOP nominee in 1980.
Helms chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which was actually a very powerful position. Senator Helms' influence in that position were felt internationally, as Helms had an effect on the USSR, Cuba, and was the first legislator from any country to address the United Nations Security Council.
Before the 1994 election, the GOP were a minority in the Senate and House of Representatives. In 1994, the tide turned for a while, as the rest of America caught up with the Jesse Helms brand of conservatism. Alas, those same representatives and the public at large soon forgot those same principles.
I still have a taped interview that an old friend of mine did with Senator Helms in the early 90's. Perhaps sometime soon, I will digitize it and put it on the internet. In that interview, Jesse Helms spoke of his views, his background, and his faith. If anyone wants a copy, please contact me.
I did support Senator Helms' stance in opposition to the Martin Luther King holiday, though for slightly different reasons. He thought it was a travesty to support that holiday based upon King's alleged ties to communist organizations. He also was aware of King's philandering. The latter is partially my lack of support for that holiday, but certainly not the entirety of my opposition. I loved his stance against homosexuality, and a host of other conservative principles that most so called conservatives today dare not touch because a lack of spine.
I have done some reading up on Senator Helms over the years, and especially since his passing on the early morning of July 4th. By the way, what a magnificent day to have one's life end, on a day we celebrate freedom and the principles that made this country great.
One evening, I had the distinct pleasure of having dinner with a lady who lives here in Johnston County. This young lady (now married with children) served as a clerk or legislative assistant of some sort in Senator Helms' office in Washington, DC. She apparently kept up with Jesse over the years. She said that he still met with friends and associates, though his dementia had taken its toll on him. It was obvious that this lady had a lot of fondness for the late senator. She recounted several stories of her time spent working for Senator Helms.
Oddly enough, that dinner was one of the things that helped to seal my departure from the Republican Party. I was a charter member of the county GOP men's club. That particular night, we had invited the lady speaker and her husband to share about her time with the senator. As it turned out, I was the only one to show up from the Johnston County GOP. Had I not taken my wife with me, the invited guests would have outnumbered the hosting party. I found such a lack of commitment and attendance not only rude but despicable. It was that sort of poor leadership that made me realize how ineffective the GOP really is. That was a portion of my reasons for leaving, but a strong portion.
Like him or hate him, North Carolina and the nation have lost a great leader and statesman in Jesse Helms. I can only hope and pray that we eventually have more men like him in our government some day.
I read with sadness about the passing of Jesse Helms, longtime North Carolina Senator. Helms, like him or hate him, was a staunch conservative, often being called "Mr. No". I certainly wish that more elected representatives had the word "no" in their vocabulary. Helms was a straight shooter, which I admired greatly. You always knew where Jesse stood on issues. That is a noble quality in a man. I truly do not like politicians (or your average garden variety of person, for that matter) that waivers and you never know where he or she will stand. Politically, I had a hard time faulting him on many things. This quote from an internet web site, speaks volumes to me. "He was an outspoken conservative who opposed communism, tax increases, abortion, gay rights, affirmative action, food stamps, secularism, and government-funded healthcare." It takes guts to stand against some of these sacred cows that are so beloved by the socialists in our country. I wish we had 100 men just like Jesse Helms in the United States Senate.
I do not support some of Helms' apparently racist views. I have read many of them on the internet over the years, as well as in various media. I do, however, support his conservative view points. He was never politically correct in his approach to politics. Neither am I. He was also very witty in many of his "off the cuff" remarks. I laughed numerous times when he made comments directed at one of my least favorite Senators, Ted Kennedy. I have met and spoken briefly with Ted Kennedy, but I detest his politics, as did Helms. One example of a Helms jab at Kennedy was after having heart valve surgery. He remarked, "It's no piece of cake, but it sure beats listening to Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor." I concur.
It is quite possible that Ronald Reagan would never have been elected President without the help of Jesse Helms. In 1976, Reagan received a strong push for the GOP nomination over incumbent Gerald Ford. Of course, Ford won the nomination and went on to be defeated for President by Jimmy Carter. However, the strong showing made by Reagan with the help of Senator Helms, set up Reagan to be the next GOP nominee in 1980.
Helms chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which was actually a very powerful position. Senator Helms' influence in that position were felt internationally, as Helms had an effect on the USSR, Cuba, and was the first legislator from any country to address the United Nations Security Council.
Before the 1994 election, the GOP were a minority in the Senate and House of Representatives. In 1994, the tide turned for a while, as the rest of America caught up with the Jesse Helms brand of conservatism. Alas, those same representatives and the public at large soon forgot those same principles.
I still have a taped interview that an old friend of mine did with Senator Helms in the early 90's. Perhaps sometime soon, I will digitize it and put it on the internet. In that interview, Jesse Helms spoke of his views, his background, and his faith. If anyone wants a copy, please contact me.
I did support Senator Helms' stance in opposition to the Martin Luther King holiday, though for slightly different reasons. He thought it was a travesty to support that holiday based upon King's alleged ties to communist organizations. He also was aware of King's philandering. The latter is partially my lack of support for that holiday, but certainly not the entirety of my opposition. I loved his stance against homosexuality, and a host of other conservative principles that most so called conservatives today dare not touch because a lack of spine.
I have done some reading up on Senator Helms over the years, and especially since his passing on the early morning of July 4th. By the way, what a magnificent day to have one's life end, on a day we celebrate freedom and the principles that made this country great.
One evening, I had the distinct pleasure of having dinner with a lady who lives here in Johnston County. This young lady (now married with children) served as a clerk or legislative assistant of some sort in Senator Helms' office in Washington, DC. She apparently kept up with Jesse over the years. She said that he still met with friends and associates, though his dementia had taken its toll on him. It was obvious that this lady had a lot of fondness for the late senator. She recounted several stories of her time spent working for Senator Helms.
Oddly enough, that dinner was one of the things that helped to seal my departure from the Republican Party. I was a charter member of the county GOP men's club. That particular night, we had invited the lady speaker and her husband to share about her time with the senator. As it turned out, I was the only one to show up from the Johnston County GOP. Had I not taken my wife with me, the invited guests would have outnumbered the hosting party. I found such a lack of commitment and attendance not only rude but despicable. It was that sort of poor leadership that made me realize how ineffective the GOP really is. That was a portion of my reasons for leaving, but a strong portion.
Like him or hate him, North Carolina and the nation have lost a great leader and statesman in Jesse Helms. I can only hope and pray that we eventually have more men like him in our government some day.
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Column for July 3, 2008
A trilogy on the Strategic Plan. Will there be another sequel?
I resisted the urge to write about the Selma budget, the recent Supreme Court rulings, and a few other things of interest to me. I figured that I would keep on track with my column and continue with the Strategic Plan critique only because there are a lot of things worthy of consideration for the future of Selma.
When I lived in Raleigh well over a decade ago, I had a pastor who used to live and preach here in Selma in a church he founded. I remember him telling me how people in Selma tended to be stiff-necked and rebellious. I filed that information in my memory bank for later use.
So is the opening of chapter three of Selma's Strategic Plan. "…there is a perception of the town that is less than favorable within the county and area as a whole." After talking to more people over the years, I have found this to be true of Johnston County in general and even more so of Selma. Some of the stereotype (as with all stereotypes) has some basis in truth, some of it fallacious.
Selma does have a reputation for being a high crime, drug infested town. We have a reputation for having a lot of illegal immigrants and low class of residents. A lot of that can be attributed to the high percentage of rental housing in the town, I am sure. We have a reputation for having a lot of dilapidated houses. Some of these things have been worked on by the town council. Right or wrong, these are the perceptions the town faces.
One quote I chapter 3 is "…it has been determined that Selma is visited by travelers off the interstate as well as others that drive in from one or two hours away. The missing demographic is local area residents. The primary reason for this is reputation." Sorry, but this is entirely false. The reason is that Selma has a theme for a downtown shopping district; antiques. I go downtown to visit town hall, a restaurant or two, a thrift store once in a blue moon, for civic meetings, the post office, dry cleaning, and a pharmacy. Seldom do I have the need for an antique store. I have visited several of the downtown antique merchants when shopping for something specific I will not find at my local department store, such as a gift or a desired item. I try to visit a different dealer each quest and usually find what I am looking for somewhere. I may not spend a lot of time or money, but I try. The truth is, however, that the majority of residents around here just are not in the market for antiques and that is what we have in abundance.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this concept. I simply do not shop at stores that do not offer what I want and I do patronize stores more often that do. Ergo, I visit Wal-Mart more often than I do antique stores. That is how the marketplace works.
Because of this truth, I find naïve the statement, "The Town Councilmembers and management of the town should be asking themselves, have I shopped in every business downtown? If there is a special event such as birthdays, weddings, graduations, etc. do I buy gifts in Selma?" If the answer is no, then why not?" The typos were actually in the report, and are not mine. My answer is that not everyone on my gift list wants old stuff. It sounds simple, but it is true. That is part of owning an antique store. I owned both a bookstore and a vending business for years. If people wanted video games instead of books or fresh sub sandwiches instead of candy bars, they spent their money elsewhere.
There was a tea room that failed miserably in this town. It was because of a poorly run business and having products nobody wanted, not because of a lack of support. A new restaurant is in that same space and is flourishing. That is because the owner offers what people want during convenient hours and at a price people are willing to pay. That is just plain business and simple economics.
The report talks about the appearance of the town at its entrance points. It discusses that the entrances at the interstate and from various other routes are less than attractive. Exit 97 looks like a typical interstate interchange. It is partially true that appearance may be a factor in failing to attract visitors or residents. We do have a cemetery, a propane dispensing facility, a repair garage, a trailer park, a gasoline pipeline tank farm, and the like as entrance ways to the town. However, there is not a heap big amount we can do to change those things. I wish we could.
There was another interesting quote in chapter three. "It is imperative that the boards and commissions have more diversity and representation of all the citizens of Selma. There should be an effort to recruit for these boards to balance the representation." I actually agree wholeheartedly with this quote. The only problem is overcoming the apathy of the many. There is a perception that a few handle a lot of the town affairs; that a select few are maintaining control in the town. I have heard this numerous times and I also have this same feeling, myself.
There are over 36 pages in the report and I am only on page 12. Out of these dozen pages, I have gotten three columns worth of commentary and critique. I still have all sorts of notes I took in the margins and in the text of the report, but I only have so much space each week in which to compose. I will be happy to personally offer a forum whereby town officials, committee members, and the public can discuss this further, make explanations, ask questions, etc. Of course my personal feedback is always available upon request.
I resisted the urge to write about the Selma budget, the recent Supreme Court rulings, and a few other things of interest to me. I figured that I would keep on track with my column and continue with the Strategic Plan critique only because there are a lot of things worthy of consideration for the future of Selma.
When I lived in Raleigh well over a decade ago, I had a pastor who used to live and preach here in Selma in a church he founded. I remember him telling me how people in Selma tended to be stiff-necked and rebellious. I filed that information in my memory bank for later use.
So is the opening of chapter three of Selma's Strategic Plan. "…there is a perception of the town that is less than favorable within the county and area as a whole." After talking to more people over the years, I have found this to be true of Johnston County in general and even more so of Selma. Some of the stereotype (as with all stereotypes) has some basis in truth, some of it fallacious.
Selma does have a reputation for being a high crime, drug infested town. We have a reputation for having a lot of illegal immigrants and low class of residents. A lot of that can be attributed to the high percentage of rental housing in the town, I am sure. We have a reputation for having a lot of dilapidated houses. Some of these things have been worked on by the town council. Right or wrong, these are the perceptions the town faces.
One quote I chapter 3 is "…it has been determined that Selma is visited by travelers off the interstate as well as others that drive in from one or two hours away. The missing demographic is local area residents. The primary reason for this is reputation." Sorry, but this is entirely false. The reason is that Selma has a theme for a downtown shopping district; antiques. I go downtown to visit town hall, a restaurant or two, a thrift store once in a blue moon, for civic meetings, the post office, dry cleaning, and a pharmacy. Seldom do I have the need for an antique store. I have visited several of the downtown antique merchants when shopping for something specific I will not find at my local department store, such as a gift or a desired item. I try to visit a different dealer each quest and usually find what I am looking for somewhere. I may not spend a lot of time or money, but I try. The truth is, however, that the majority of residents around here just are not in the market for antiques and that is what we have in abundance.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this concept. I simply do not shop at stores that do not offer what I want and I do patronize stores more often that do. Ergo, I visit Wal-Mart more often than I do antique stores. That is how the marketplace works.
Because of this truth, I find naïve the statement, "The Town Councilmembers and management of the town should be asking themselves, have I shopped in every business downtown? If there is a special event such as birthdays, weddings, graduations, etc. do I buy gifts in Selma?" If the answer is no, then why not?" The typos were actually in the report, and are not mine. My answer is that not everyone on my gift list wants old stuff. It sounds simple, but it is true. That is part of owning an antique store. I owned both a bookstore and a vending business for years. If people wanted video games instead of books or fresh sub sandwiches instead of candy bars, they spent their money elsewhere.
There was a tea room that failed miserably in this town. It was because of a poorly run business and having products nobody wanted, not because of a lack of support. A new restaurant is in that same space and is flourishing. That is because the owner offers what people want during convenient hours and at a price people are willing to pay. That is just plain business and simple economics.
The report talks about the appearance of the town at its entrance points. It discusses that the entrances at the interstate and from various other routes are less than attractive. Exit 97 looks like a typical interstate interchange. It is partially true that appearance may be a factor in failing to attract visitors or residents. We do have a cemetery, a propane dispensing facility, a repair garage, a trailer park, a gasoline pipeline tank farm, and the like as entrance ways to the town. However, there is not a heap big amount we can do to change those things. I wish we could.
There was another interesting quote in chapter three. "It is imperative that the boards and commissions have more diversity and representation of all the citizens of Selma. There should be an effort to recruit for these boards to balance the representation." I actually agree wholeheartedly with this quote. The only problem is overcoming the apathy of the many. There is a perception that a few handle a lot of the town affairs; that a select few are maintaining control in the town. I have heard this numerous times and I also have this same feeling, myself.
There are over 36 pages in the report and I am only on page 12. Out of these dozen pages, I have gotten three columns worth of commentary and critique. I still have all sorts of notes I took in the margins and in the text of the report, but I only have so much space each week in which to compose. I will be happy to personally offer a forum whereby town officials, committee members, and the public can discuss this further, make explanations, ask questions, etc. Of course my personal feedback is always available upon request.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Column for June 26, 2008
Troy's critique of the Selma Strategic Plan Part 2
Last week, I offered the first part of my critique of Selma's Strategic Plan. Hopefully you have either obtained your own copy of the plan or have the Selma News edition from a couple of weeks ago in which the plan was published chapter by chapter.
In chapter two, it was said that feedback from visitor surveys revealed that visitors consider the small town atmosphere attractive. That is actually one of the things that drew me to live here in Selma. The downtown (call it "uptown" if you will, but a rose by any other name, well, you know the rest) is small and somewhat quaint. The town is not so large that one feels lost yet not so small or removed from the rest of civilization that it is totally inconvenient to the things and places I need, want, and go.
It was suggested that we reinvigorate the Community Watch Program. I have thought this same thing for years and would love to see effort in that direction. It was also suggested that we have regularly scheduled gatherings where citizens and town leaders can informally discuss their ideas about how to improve the town.
I will take that last part one step further. I had offered some time ago to host a community gathering whereby citizens could meet, have a beverage, and talk about town affairs just like used to be done in the pubs of colonial America. I also offered to have a regular monthly or quarterly forum, which I would be glad to record and put on the internet for all to hear. That would allow people who do not normally get to have their say at a town government meeting to come and talk informally and express their opinions. It would allow for question and answer sessions and for citizens to hear them at their leisure. I again make this offer, only in a more public setting such as this newspaper.
Another comment was that the gazebo area behind town hall could be developed into a town commons area. One use that I have pondered for that area for several years is to have a regular weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly prayer gathering. This would work well in early spring, autumn, and winter, especially. In summer, it may be wise to take such a gathering indoors. I again volunteer my time to gather with others of faith and prayer in a non partisan and non denominational setting to gather for the expressed purpose of praying for our citizens, our town, our county, our state, and our nation. If people are interested in either of these offers, then simply contact me via this newspaper, at telephone 965-9695, at PO Box 822 in Selma, or via email at troy@troylaplante.com.
Chapter two goes on to comment that the Parks and Recreation Department does an excellent job of organizing and managing events. I have to give credit where credit is due, as well. For such a small department, Joe Carter and his crew do a fine job with what they have to work with. I have seen towns with about the same population do more in terms of actual parks and programs than we do in Selma with the same or even less staff. However, these other towns also have a lot more facilities and budget with which to work. Those same towns also have a few less major events throughout the year than we do in Selma.
In terms of economy and commerce, it is true that Selma draws antique enthusiasts, since that is the theme of downtown. I can not say with total agreement as the plan has stated, that this brings a sense of unity to the downtown area. I have heard widely differing opinions from different shop owners over the years. Some are still here, others have come and gone. I will say from observation that if there was more unity, then perhaps more shop owners would join and participate actively in the Selma Development Partnership. There are a lonely few that show up each month, ergo, I am dubious as to the sense of unity claim. I myself have joined and try to attend meetings as often as I am able.
My main gripe about the concept of looking for grants for all sorts of programs and improvements in town is that if they are grants from the state or federal governments, they are tax dollars. If there are grants from private (non governmental) sources such as foundations or private industry, then I say go for it. Governmental grants are better than loans, if I have to pick the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two evils, however, is still evil. Governmental grants are essentially paid via laundered tax dollars. Loans, however, get paid back so we are taxed twice for their implementation; once for the initial funding, then for repayment.
There are so many other things upon which I have commentary, but again, I have come to the end of my column for the week. Since I doubt that the editor of this publication would like to have a full page of my commentary at any one time, I will have to continue with chapter three next week. I will be serving on jury duty that week, so I am hoping I will have the time needed with which to craft the column.
Last week, I offered the first part of my critique of Selma's Strategic Plan. Hopefully you have either obtained your own copy of the plan or have the Selma News edition from a couple of weeks ago in which the plan was published chapter by chapter.
In chapter two, it was said that feedback from visitor surveys revealed that visitors consider the small town atmosphere attractive. That is actually one of the things that drew me to live here in Selma. The downtown (call it "uptown" if you will, but a rose by any other name, well, you know the rest) is small and somewhat quaint. The town is not so large that one feels lost yet not so small or removed from the rest of civilization that it is totally inconvenient to the things and places I need, want, and go.
It was suggested that we reinvigorate the Community Watch Program. I have thought this same thing for years and would love to see effort in that direction. It was also suggested that we have regularly scheduled gatherings where citizens and town leaders can informally discuss their ideas about how to improve the town.
I will take that last part one step further. I had offered some time ago to host a community gathering whereby citizens could meet, have a beverage, and talk about town affairs just like used to be done in the pubs of colonial America. I also offered to have a regular monthly or quarterly forum, which I would be glad to record and put on the internet for all to hear. That would allow people who do not normally get to have their say at a town government meeting to come and talk informally and express their opinions. It would allow for question and answer sessions and for citizens to hear them at their leisure. I again make this offer, only in a more public setting such as this newspaper.
Another comment was that the gazebo area behind town hall could be developed into a town commons area. One use that I have pondered for that area for several years is to have a regular weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly prayer gathering. This would work well in early spring, autumn, and winter, especially. In summer, it may be wise to take such a gathering indoors. I again volunteer my time to gather with others of faith and prayer in a non partisan and non denominational setting to gather for the expressed purpose of praying for our citizens, our town, our county, our state, and our nation. If people are interested in either of these offers, then simply contact me via this newspaper, at telephone 965-9695, at PO Box 822 in Selma, or via email at troy@troylaplante.com.
Chapter two goes on to comment that the Parks and Recreation Department does an excellent job of organizing and managing events. I have to give credit where credit is due, as well. For such a small department, Joe Carter and his crew do a fine job with what they have to work with. I have seen towns with about the same population do more in terms of actual parks and programs than we do in Selma with the same or even less staff. However, these other towns also have a lot more facilities and budget with which to work. Those same towns also have a few less major events throughout the year than we do in Selma.
In terms of economy and commerce, it is true that Selma draws antique enthusiasts, since that is the theme of downtown. I can not say with total agreement as the plan has stated, that this brings a sense of unity to the downtown area. I have heard widely differing opinions from different shop owners over the years. Some are still here, others have come and gone. I will say from observation that if there was more unity, then perhaps more shop owners would join and participate actively in the Selma Development Partnership. There are a lonely few that show up each month, ergo, I am dubious as to the sense of unity claim. I myself have joined and try to attend meetings as often as I am able.
My main gripe about the concept of looking for grants for all sorts of programs and improvements in town is that if they are grants from the state or federal governments, they are tax dollars. If there are grants from private (non governmental) sources such as foundations or private industry, then I say go for it. Governmental grants are better than loans, if I have to pick the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two evils, however, is still evil. Governmental grants are essentially paid via laundered tax dollars. Loans, however, get paid back so we are taxed twice for their implementation; once for the initial funding, then for repayment.
There are so many other things upon which I have commentary, but again, I have come to the end of my column for the week. Since I doubt that the editor of this publication would like to have a full page of my commentary at any one time, I will have to continue with chapter three next week. I will be serving on jury duty that week, so I am hoping I will have the time needed with which to craft the column.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Column for June 19, 2008
Troy's critique of the Selma Strategic Plan
I waited a couple of weeks to allow the Selma Strategic Plan to be disseminated before I made my commentary thereon public. I figured I would allow people the chance to read it in a previous edition of this very newspaper and download copies from the internet. Also, the town council has formally accepted the plan, so now would be an appropriate time to "add my two cents worth". I downloaded my copy as soon as it was available, printed it out, and got out my red pen to start scribbling notes in the margins.
I am not seeking to criticize any one or even the concept of having the Strategic Plan, though I am proffering my critique. I do seek to add some insights and suggestions for carrying out such a plan for Selma. I found a few things I would like to see added and taken into consideration.
The name of the project is perhaps misleading. The document is not actually a plan so much as it is a list of suggestions for the town for inclusion in a future plan. The 38 page document I have in front of me contains mostly suggestions for improvement after listing some strengths and weaknesses in the town. There is nothing wrong with that per se, and I am glad to see some honesty on the part of the plan makers.
To be quite honest, and I have written about this previously on the internet, I am glad to see that council member Cheryl Oliver has been doing a lot of work on this plan. When she ran for council last year, and I am being blunt about this, I truly felt that though likeable and intelligent, she was lacking on knowledge of the issues facing Selma. This is no slight to her, since she had not been long returned to Selma to reside here.
The only way anyone becomes informed on the issues is with time and with active participation. That is the only way I got to know anything about Selma, by the choice to get actively involved, read, listen, and find out for myself. That made me a better citizen. By her participation in a project like this, I am sure that Ms. Oliver has become a more informed citizen, and just as importantly, a more informed elected representative. That is good for the constituents of Selma as a whole.
I see that Pat Weaver also had a lot to do with the document. I have seen Pat and her husband, Ken get involved with our town. I have had a few conversations with Pat in the past. Perhaps some of our citizens have seen Ken speak at citizen's forums at council meetings. I also serve on the Planning Board with Ken. It is good to see Pat and Ken both becoming involved more in Selma. I do wish that more people would do as they have done and get more involved.
So begins my critique. Chapter One states the mission of the planning committee and the report. It has the obligatory information about who, why, etc. Not much to comment upon except that I did not find the "plan" to contain much in the way of laying out an actual plan, as stated earlier. Still, the document has value.
Chapter Two probably could have been eliminated altogether. The stating of the town's history is not planning or a necessity to a plan, in my opinion, but it was nice to get a refresher and the information out there. I will comment on the town's history and its benefit later.
As to the section "Location", I am perplexed about one sentence. "This makes Selma quite appealing to residents, businesses, and tourists." I have never considered Selma a tourist destination. Sure, we have The Rudy Theater with the fine performances put on there, but other than shopping for antiques, that is about it. I do not consider antique shopping or catching a show to be tourism. That is mission oriented, short-term visitation.
Unfortunately, the one thing that makes Selma an ideal location for travelers on I-95 to stop for a break, being midway between New York and Florida, is the same thing that brings us problems. There is a significant drug trade along I-95 between Miami and the Northeast Corridor. Selma, Kenly, and other towns along our stretch of the interstate are unfortunately both the benefactors and victims of that desirous geography at the same time. We get both the visitors desired and undesired at the same time. I guess we have to take the good with the bad.
I have to chuckle a bit at the idea of a Vick's Museum. Smithfield's great claim to fame is being the birthplace and residence of Ava Gardner. Quite honestly, with Ava having been of a generation earlier than my own, I was not familiar with her so much until I started working and then living in Johnston County. I have one or two of her movies on the shelf, but that is about it. I can see some dedicated fans or movie lovers stopping and seeing the shrine to her in downtown Smithfield, but it is hard to imagine people stopping to see a shrine to VapoRub.
I personally had no idea that the salve my mom used to smear all over my chest and under my nose was invented in the town where I reside until just a couple of years ago. I worked in this town for several years and later lived here a while before I finally found and took the time to read a history of the town. I had no idea that I could look from the end of my drive way and see the building where that smelly stuff was invented. Now that was cool, I thought.
I don't think that we have the original apothecary of Lunsford Richardson laying around anywhere for us to set up. I would personally be amazed if Procter and Gamble would be interested in setting up a museum to their product, but you never know. Perhaps a few well placed VapoRub vending machines in Uptown would be fun and useful. The Vick Building is perhaps the only truly historic building in town, in my opinion, but I will write more on this concept later, as I am out of space for this week.
I waited a couple of weeks to allow the Selma Strategic Plan to be disseminated before I made my commentary thereon public. I figured I would allow people the chance to read it in a previous edition of this very newspaper and download copies from the internet. Also, the town council has formally accepted the plan, so now would be an appropriate time to "add my two cents worth". I downloaded my copy as soon as it was available, printed it out, and got out my red pen to start scribbling notes in the margins.
I am not seeking to criticize any one or even the concept of having the Strategic Plan, though I am proffering my critique. I do seek to add some insights and suggestions for carrying out such a plan for Selma. I found a few things I would like to see added and taken into consideration.
The name of the project is perhaps misleading. The document is not actually a plan so much as it is a list of suggestions for the town for inclusion in a future plan. The 38 page document I have in front of me contains mostly suggestions for improvement after listing some strengths and weaknesses in the town. There is nothing wrong with that per se, and I am glad to see some honesty on the part of the plan makers.
To be quite honest, and I have written about this previously on the internet, I am glad to see that council member Cheryl Oliver has been doing a lot of work on this plan. When she ran for council last year, and I am being blunt about this, I truly felt that though likeable and intelligent, she was lacking on knowledge of the issues facing Selma. This is no slight to her, since she had not been long returned to Selma to reside here.
The only way anyone becomes informed on the issues is with time and with active participation. That is the only way I got to know anything about Selma, by the choice to get actively involved, read, listen, and find out for myself. That made me a better citizen. By her participation in a project like this, I am sure that Ms. Oliver has become a more informed citizen, and just as importantly, a more informed elected representative. That is good for the constituents of Selma as a whole.
I see that Pat Weaver also had a lot to do with the document. I have seen Pat and her husband, Ken get involved with our town. I have had a few conversations with Pat in the past. Perhaps some of our citizens have seen Ken speak at citizen's forums at council meetings. I also serve on the Planning Board with Ken. It is good to see Pat and Ken both becoming involved more in Selma. I do wish that more people would do as they have done and get more involved.
So begins my critique. Chapter One states the mission of the planning committee and the report. It has the obligatory information about who, why, etc. Not much to comment upon except that I did not find the "plan" to contain much in the way of laying out an actual plan, as stated earlier. Still, the document has value.
Chapter Two probably could have been eliminated altogether. The stating of the town's history is not planning or a necessity to a plan, in my opinion, but it was nice to get a refresher and the information out there. I will comment on the town's history and its benefit later.
As to the section "Location", I am perplexed about one sentence. "This makes Selma quite appealing to residents, businesses, and tourists." I have never considered Selma a tourist destination. Sure, we have The Rudy Theater with the fine performances put on there, but other than shopping for antiques, that is about it. I do not consider antique shopping or catching a show to be tourism. That is mission oriented, short-term visitation.
Unfortunately, the one thing that makes Selma an ideal location for travelers on I-95 to stop for a break, being midway between New York and Florida, is the same thing that brings us problems. There is a significant drug trade along I-95 between Miami and the Northeast Corridor. Selma, Kenly, and other towns along our stretch of the interstate are unfortunately both the benefactors and victims of that desirous geography at the same time. We get both the visitors desired and undesired at the same time. I guess we have to take the good with the bad.
I have to chuckle a bit at the idea of a Vick's Museum. Smithfield's great claim to fame is being the birthplace and residence of Ava Gardner. Quite honestly, with Ava having been of a generation earlier than my own, I was not familiar with her so much until I started working and then living in Johnston County. I have one or two of her movies on the shelf, but that is about it. I can see some dedicated fans or movie lovers stopping and seeing the shrine to her in downtown Smithfield, but it is hard to imagine people stopping to see a shrine to VapoRub.
I personally had no idea that the salve my mom used to smear all over my chest and under my nose was invented in the town where I reside until just a couple of years ago. I worked in this town for several years and later lived here a while before I finally found and took the time to read a history of the town. I had no idea that I could look from the end of my drive way and see the building where that smelly stuff was invented. Now that was cool, I thought.
I don't think that we have the original apothecary of Lunsford Richardson laying around anywhere for us to set up. I would personally be amazed if Procter and Gamble would be interested in setting up a museum to their product, but you never know. Perhaps a few well placed VapoRub vending machines in Uptown would be fun and useful. The Vick Building is perhaps the only truly historic building in town, in my opinion, but I will write more on this concept later, as I am out of space for this week.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Column for June 12, 2008
I read with disgust a recent commentary by T.D. Jakes, senior pastor of The Potter's House of Dallas, Texas. You may have seen him on television. His commentary was about the pending nomination of Barack Hussein Obama for Democrat candidate for President. Jakes says that it is an "historic accomplishment". No doubt. Never before has a Black made it so far in a Presidential campaign. Let me say this straight up. I could not care less about the color of a man's skin if he is running for President of the United States of America. I care about his beliefs. I would probably vote for Condi Rice if she was running. I would vote for Allan Keyes over most other candidates in a minute. What I care about are a man's principles and leadership.
It is with amazement that I see a "Bishop" (I hate titles in the Church. Bishop is the latest fad. Before that it was Apostle. Before that, Prophet) giving such accolades to a man simply because he is of the same race. Two things, Mr. Jakes. First, Obama is half Black, since you are paying attention to race. He is not fully Negro. Does that matter, or are you just happy to claim someone as one of your own if he has any Negroid blood in his veins? If we all go back to Adam and Eve, and again down through the lines of Noah, as his "faith" teaches, then we ALL sprang from a common ancestry, just different genetic combinations. It is with great wonder that I look to see how simple yet so complicated it is for genetics to propagate under God's plan and create all varieties of people.
Here is an absolute apostacy of a quote from Jakes. "However, what I really hope people take away from that night is that this is not just a victory for African Americans, it is a victory for democracy that proves that our country provides possibilities for all people. It is also a sign that a metamorphosis is in progress. Today we saw that Americans respect experience, but are interested in change. I hope that we can somehow merge the best ideas of our differences and emerge with a president who epitomizes our highest and best ideals."
Here are some problems with that quote. First, it is not yet a total victory for anyone. It is potentially a nomination and it is not yet secure, but most likely will be. Second, it is not a victory for "African Americans". Personally, I despise that term since it is a misnomer. Not all Blacks in America came from Africa or from ancestors that came from Africa. Furthermore, there are millions of Whites in Africa, as well. I do not consider myself an "Anglo American" or a "Franco American". I am an American. Period. Should White men and women who immigrated from South Africa or other nation on that continent also be referred to as "African Americans?" If my French ancestors were native to French colonies in Africa, then later immigrated to North America, should I start referring to myself as "African American"? Why so many terms by which Black wish to be referenced? There was Black, Colored, Negro, now "African American". Choose one and stick with it. Thus, I refuse to use the term in every day vernacular, just as I refuse to use the term "gay" to refer to homosexuals. Both are hijacked, inaccurate terms arbitrarily and autocratically derived.
Third, we do not live in a "democracy". We live in a representative republic. There is a huge difference. Mr. Jakes should know that, but he instead perpetuates the lie of us being a democracy.
Fourth, Americans DO respect experience. Barack Hussein Obama just has very little of it to be taken seriously as a candidate by everyone who will not vote for him. That has been a major topic of discussion since he announced his candidacy. Mr. Jakes, to WHAT experience do you refer?
Fifth, we can not "emerge with a president who epitomizes our highest and best ideals" in this election cycle. None of the three candidates (stooges) reflect that statement. If Obama epitomizes our highest and best ideals, then the United States must be a Socialist nation and no longer exists in its original form as bound by its Constitution or foundation. Wherein does Barack Hussein Obama reflect the highest ideals of America? He wants to socialize medicine, he refuses to meet with our military leaders in Iraq, he wants to raise taxes, and turn a Republic run on capitalism into a Socialist Utopia.
Another quote by Jakes is "I congratulate not just Sen. Obama on his victory, but the country on this landmark event that has shattered a past all too often filled with reasons to separate us as opposed to a voice of reason to unite us."
Mr. Jakes, it is not the color of Obama's skin that divides him from those of a different skin tone. It is his politics, his beliefs, his lack of experience, and just plain being an inappropriate candidate for President. The only people who are united are those who put their skin color ahead of their principles, or are liberals and therefore have no sound principles.
As a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, T.D. Jakes of all people should be absolutely disgusted with the racist, hateful, and theologically errant pastor, Jeremiah Wright's teachings. As the leader of his home, Barack Hussein Obama chose Rev. Wright to be his spritual mentor, perform his marriage ceremony, baptize him and his children, provide spiritual nourishment for his family, and to sow into that infertile ground with his money and time. Nobody can convince me that you can go to a church for two decades and not understand the sort of philosophies perpetuated by the leader of said church. To deny that is a blatant lie and is of the Father of All lies. For T.D. Jakes to endorse this behavior, indirectly endorse these values, and to approve of a man who has been thusly indoctrinated is just plain wrong and antithetical to the Gospel he claims to represent.
I have no problem congratulating Barack Hussein Obama on his accomplishment. It is indeed an historic event and great accomplishment. However, when men of principle fail to exhibit the very substance for which they purport to stand, it disgusts me. I am a man of faith in Christ before I am a White man or an American. My faith determines my principles and my identity, not my skin color. I have had problems with the theology of T.D. Jakes as it is. This obviously shows more problems with Jakes' theology. Disgusting.
It is with amazement that I see a "Bishop" (I hate titles in the Church. Bishop is the latest fad. Before that it was Apostle. Before that, Prophet) giving such accolades to a man simply because he is of the same race. Two things, Mr. Jakes. First, Obama is half Black, since you are paying attention to race. He is not fully Negro. Does that matter, or are you just happy to claim someone as one of your own if he has any Negroid blood in his veins? If we all go back to Adam and Eve, and again down through the lines of Noah, as his "faith" teaches, then we ALL sprang from a common ancestry, just different genetic combinations. It is with great wonder that I look to see how simple yet so complicated it is for genetics to propagate under God's plan and create all varieties of people.
Here is an absolute apostacy of a quote from Jakes. "However, what I really hope people take away from that night is that this is not just a victory for African Americans, it is a victory for democracy that proves that our country provides possibilities for all people. It is also a sign that a metamorphosis is in progress. Today we saw that Americans respect experience, but are interested in change. I hope that we can somehow merge the best ideas of our differences and emerge with a president who epitomizes our highest and best ideals."
Here are some problems with that quote. First, it is not yet a total victory for anyone. It is potentially a nomination and it is not yet secure, but most likely will be. Second, it is not a victory for "African Americans". Personally, I despise that term since it is a misnomer. Not all Blacks in America came from Africa or from ancestors that came from Africa. Furthermore, there are millions of Whites in Africa, as well. I do not consider myself an "Anglo American" or a "Franco American". I am an American. Period. Should White men and women who immigrated from South Africa or other nation on that continent also be referred to as "African Americans?" If my French ancestors were native to French colonies in Africa, then later immigrated to North America, should I start referring to myself as "African American"? Why so many terms by which Black wish to be referenced? There was Black, Colored, Negro, now "African American". Choose one and stick with it. Thus, I refuse to use the term in every day vernacular, just as I refuse to use the term "gay" to refer to homosexuals. Both are hijacked, inaccurate terms arbitrarily and autocratically derived.
Third, we do not live in a "democracy". We live in a representative republic. There is a huge difference. Mr. Jakes should know that, but he instead perpetuates the lie of us being a democracy.
Fourth, Americans DO respect experience. Barack Hussein Obama just has very little of it to be taken seriously as a candidate by everyone who will not vote for him. That has been a major topic of discussion since he announced his candidacy. Mr. Jakes, to WHAT experience do you refer?
Fifth, we can not "emerge with a president who epitomizes our highest and best ideals" in this election cycle. None of the three candidates (stooges) reflect that statement. If Obama epitomizes our highest and best ideals, then the United States must be a Socialist nation and no longer exists in its original form as bound by its Constitution or foundation. Wherein does Barack Hussein Obama reflect the highest ideals of America? He wants to socialize medicine, he refuses to meet with our military leaders in Iraq, he wants to raise taxes, and turn a Republic run on capitalism into a Socialist Utopia.
Another quote by Jakes is "I congratulate not just Sen. Obama on his victory, but the country on this landmark event that has shattered a past all too often filled with reasons to separate us as opposed to a voice of reason to unite us."
Mr. Jakes, it is not the color of Obama's skin that divides him from those of a different skin tone. It is his politics, his beliefs, his lack of experience, and just plain being an inappropriate candidate for President. The only people who are united are those who put their skin color ahead of their principles, or are liberals and therefore have no sound principles.
As a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, T.D. Jakes of all people should be absolutely disgusted with the racist, hateful, and theologically errant pastor, Jeremiah Wright's teachings. As the leader of his home, Barack Hussein Obama chose Rev. Wright to be his spritual mentor, perform his marriage ceremony, baptize him and his children, provide spiritual nourishment for his family, and to sow into that infertile ground with his money and time. Nobody can convince me that you can go to a church for two decades and not understand the sort of philosophies perpetuated by the leader of said church. To deny that is a blatant lie and is of the Father of All lies. For T.D. Jakes to endorse this behavior, indirectly endorse these values, and to approve of a man who has been thusly indoctrinated is just plain wrong and antithetical to the Gospel he claims to represent.
I have no problem congratulating Barack Hussein Obama on his accomplishment. It is indeed an historic event and great accomplishment. However, when men of principle fail to exhibit the very substance for which they purport to stand, it disgusts me. I am a man of faith in Christ before I am a White man or an American. My faith determines my principles and my identity, not my skin color. I have had problems with the theology of T.D. Jakes as it is. This obviously shows more problems with Jakes' theology. Disgusting.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Column for June 5, 2008
Holy cow! I actually agree with Obama on something...sort of.
I will admit that I would rather be stabbed to death with a plastic fork than vote for Barack Hussein Obama. The same for Hillary Clinton, for that matter. I am almost that way about John McCain, as well, though my feelings about his candidacy are not quite as visceral. I find him repugnant to my sense of decent government nonetheless.
Imagine my surprise when I found something about which I agree with Obama…well, almost. I believe in equal opportunity critique, and find just as many problems with so called conservatives as I do with liberals. One recent issue that came up was whether or not our President should be willing to sit down and have discussions with representatives of other nations deemed to be our country's enemies.
A couple of weeks ago, Barack Hussein Obama was quoted as saying "I want everybody to be absolutely clear about this because George Bush and McCain have suggested that me being willing to sit down with our adversaries is a sign of weakness and sign of appeasement." He believes that a President should be willing to sit down and have diplomatic discussions with adversarial regimes. Personally, I believe that he is 100% correct.
Thomas Jefferson had the same viewpoint as Obama, just with a slightly different end goal, I suspect. The United States negotiated The Treaty of Tripoli with several nations in 1797 in an attempt to end the Barbary Pirate conflict. Prior to finally voting for Lee's Resolution for independence on July 2, 1776 and the initial signing of the Declaration of Independence two days later, the Second Continental Congress drafted and sent The Olive Branch Petition to King George III of England in 1775. I have taught extensively on and love that portion of US history.
Obama said that sitting down and talking was the method of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, and he is correct. The 1986 ReykjavÃk, Iceland summit between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in comes to mind. There were Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty talks (SALT) in 1969 in Helsinki, Finland. There was SALT II in 1979. We also had START I and START II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) in 1991 and 1993, all with the Soviets and later with what became Russia.
The United States has a long history of having talks with our adversaries. I find it amusing that as much as the Republican presidential candidates kept referencing Ronald Reagan during the debates, they refuse to follow his lead in dealing with nations such as Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. I only wish that Reagan took that lead with other nations, as well.
Having dialogue with your adversaries does not show weakness nor legitimize their positions. It shows your willingness to be reasonable while being strong enough to stand for your convictions. That is, provided that you do not acquiesce.
For over 50 years, the US has had a failed policy of cutting off Cuba with a futile embargo. We have nixed all travel by US citizens to the island nation, as well as all trade. While we maintain the position that trade with China will bring about reform and a penchant for our way of life and freedom, we still snub Cuba. Personally, I believe that if we showed them freedom, American goods and ingenuity, and exported our values, then there would come reform from the bottom up. Instead, we have helped that nation remain in the 1950's. I heard one reporter describe his recent visits to Cuba as being "a scene right out of The Godfather, Part 2". I am very familiar with that movie, considering that The Godfather is my all time favorite movie, and I have seen the trilogy many times.
Here is where I differ from Barack Hussein Obama on his position of dialogue with our adversaries. I do not believe for one minute that Obama has the best interest of the US in the forefront of his mind. I believe that he is an appeaser with a soft spot for Islamic terrorists. From my readings and hearing, Obama believes that our own nation is inherently the source of evil in this world while he is soft on Islamic nations who perpetrate violence on the rest of the world. He has already had meetings with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran. I doubt that his meetings had the same tone they would have if I was the one meeting with him.
The difference between Obama's example of Ronald Reagan and myself is that Reagan "carried a big stick" into his meetings and spoke from a position of power and confidence. I personally have no problem with letting someone like Ahmadinejad know that if he messes with us or our troops in Iraq, that I would not hesitate to turn the sands if Iran into a sea of glass and bomb all of Persia back into the Stone Age. Sure, a good portion of that backwards, Third World nation is there already, but I would oblige further should he attack or meddle with the United States.
Though I agree with Obama that we should always be willing to talk with our adversaries, I do agree more with the Teddy Roosevelt philosophy when he quoted loosely from an old African proverb. In 1901, Roosevelt said we should, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." I do not necessarily agree with his foreign policy of "Big Stick Diplomacy" as it was used (I will not get into a long winded discussion of The Monroe Doctrine or Roosevelt's Corollary), but I do believe that we should always negotiate from a position of authority, power, confidence, and with a perspective that will always put our own nation's interests first. I doubt Barack Hussein Obama has that capability.
I will admit that I would rather be stabbed to death with a plastic fork than vote for Barack Hussein Obama. The same for Hillary Clinton, for that matter. I am almost that way about John McCain, as well, though my feelings about his candidacy are not quite as visceral. I find him repugnant to my sense of decent government nonetheless.
Imagine my surprise when I found something about which I agree with Obama…well, almost. I believe in equal opportunity critique, and find just as many problems with so called conservatives as I do with liberals. One recent issue that came up was whether or not our President should be willing to sit down and have discussions with representatives of other nations deemed to be our country's enemies.
A couple of weeks ago, Barack Hussein Obama was quoted as saying "I want everybody to be absolutely clear about this because George Bush and McCain have suggested that me being willing to sit down with our adversaries is a sign of weakness and sign of appeasement." He believes that a President should be willing to sit down and have diplomatic discussions with adversarial regimes. Personally, I believe that he is 100% correct.
Thomas Jefferson had the same viewpoint as Obama, just with a slightly different end goal, I suspect. The United States negotiated The Treaty of Tripoli with several nations in 1797 in an attempt to end the Barbary Pirate conflict. Prior to finally voting for Lee's Resolution for independence on July 2, 1776 and the initial signing of the Declaration of Independence two days later, the Second Continental Congress drafted and sent The Olive Branch Petition to King George III of England in 1775. I have taught extensively on and love that portion of US history.
Obama said that sitting down and talking was the method of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, and he is correct. The 1986 ReykjavÃk, Iceland summit between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in comes to mind. There were Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty talks (SALT) in 1969 in Helsinki, Finland. There was SALT II in 1979. We also had START I and START II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) in 1991 and 1993, all with the Soviets and later with what became Russia.
The United States has a long history of having talks with our adversaries. I find it amusing that as much as the Republican presidential candidates kept referencing Ronald Reagan during the debates, they refuse to follow his lead in dealing with nations such as Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. I only wish that Reagan took that lead with other nations, as well.
Having dialogue with your adversaries does not show weakness nor legitimize their positions. It shows your willingness to be reasonable while being strong enough to stand for your convictions. That is, provided that you do not acquiesce.
For over 50 years, the US has had a failed policy of cutting off Cuba with a futile embargo. We have nixed all travel by US citizens to the island nation, as well as all trade. While we maintain the position that trade with China will bring about reform and a penchant for our way of life and freedom, we still snub Cuba. Personally, I believe that if we showed them freedom, American goods and ingenuity, and exported our values, then there would come reform from the bottom up. Instead, we have helped that nation remain in the 1950's. I heard one reporter describe his recent visits to Cuba as being "a scene right out of The Godfather, Part 2". I am very familiar with that movie, considering that The Godfather is my all time favorite movie, and I have seen the trilogy many times.
Here is where I differ from Barack Hussein Obama on his position of dialogue with our adversaries. I do not believe for one minute that Obama has the best interest of the US in the forefront of his mind. I believe that he is an appeaser with a soft spot for Islamic terrorists. From my readings and hearing, Obama believes that our own nation is inherently the source of evil in this world while he is soft on Islamic nations who perpetrate violence on the rest of the world. He has already had meetings with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran. I doubt that his meetings had the same tone they would have if I was the one meeting with him.
The difference between Obama's example of Ronald Reagan and myself is that Reagan "carried a big stick" into his meetings and spoke from a position of power and confidence. I personally have no problem with letting someone like Ahmadinejad know that if he messes with us or our troops in Iraq, that I would not hesitate to turn the sands if Iran into a sea of glass and bomb all of Persia back into the Stone Age. Sure, a good portion of that backwards, Third World nation is there already, but I would oblige further should he attack or meddle with the United States.
Though I agree with Obama that we should always be willing to talk with our adversaries, I do agree more with the Teddy Roosevelt philosophy when he quoted loosely from an old African proverb. In 1901, Roosevelt said we should, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." I do not necessarily agree with his foreign policy of "Big Stick Diplomacy" as it was used (I will not get into a long winded discussion of The Monroe Doctrine or Roosevelt's Corollary), but I do believe that we should always negotiate from a position of authority, power, confidence, and with a perspective that will always put our own nation's interests first. I doubt Barack Hussein Obama has that capability.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Fan mail and hate mail about my last column
I apparently hit a nerve with my May 29th column. Just a few hours apart, I got some fan mail and some hate mail. Here are both. The fan mail is shorter, so I lead with it.
---------
---------
And now the hate mail, to which I wrote a LONG response and offered to print her letter as a rebuttal column one week.
---------
---------
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:49:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Janie"
To: troy@troylaplante.com
Subject: tired of paying-----
Glad someone is speaking up about these kinds of things. The gov. certainly is not listening tho. I wish they could get hold of some of this wrong doing. I had a hard time getting to whePre I am but I worked hard and did it. So can others. Thanks for speaking out. Janie Corbett Wilsons Mills
---------
And now the hate mail, to which I wrote a LONG response and offered to print her letter as a rebuttal column one week.
---------
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:58:53 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
From: "jennifer"
To: troy@troylaplante.com
Subject: tired of paying for others
Mr. Laplante, I would like to start off by saying that I too love in Public Housing so may not reach the criteria necessary for you to even read this e-mail. I will however write and send it to you for my own benefit. I moved into housing as a single mother of three children recently divorced with only a high school education. During my stay in public housing I have obtained an associate degree and a bachelor degree with the help of Financial Aid, Loans, Scolarships and work study programs. I have not once been without a job since I was fifteen and worked throughout my college career. That having been said I graduated with a Bachelor of Social Work this past May and have gained employment in a field relative to my degree but due to the lack of experience on my part still strive for better paying employment. I cannot afford to move out of public housing even on my income which is higher than most of my fellow project buddies. I personally know the family whose home was broken into. The family has a set of twins both suffering from cerebral palsy. Can you imagine? My sister lives next door in the same set of projects as me and she also has a daughter with cerebral palsy. I personally have no children who suffer from any disease, but I can tell you that my sister pays the full amount of rent which runs about the rate of a house in our neighborhood. The only benfit is the utilitiy costs are substantially lower. Both my sister and I strive to move out of public housing where our homes are entered weekly, our children are not allowed any outside toys, no pools, no tramploines, no sport equipment, we cannot put up border, plant flowers, get satellite without permission, and have any personal privacy. I have no central air, no dryer hook up, and my clothes line is under some trees in a neighbor's yard where birds do there buisness on my clothes daily. My son has been stung by a bee that hid
in his underwear of the line. He has also been biten by a spider that caused him to have his leg sliced open to drain the poison. None of this compares to living in fear that someone that is in our same project will break into our home while we are gone to steal the few possessions we do have not to mention the fear of a home invasion from these same thieves risking the lives of our childre or ourselves. I have so much anger and rage toward your comments about us having to shop in thrift sotres because we cannot afford to have nicer things. Who would choose poverty of prosperity. So many of these families have obstacles you cannot even imagine. Regardless of your claims of poverty, I cannot believe you have endured the lengths of which so many of us in these neighborhoods have. I feel that you have been spoiled by life and are in a position to judge freely because you pay taxes. Had you lived in the years of the depression and seen the government create these programs that helped so many American's to survive. To benefit from these programs should not mean that the person should live the most impoverished life available. You should be ashamed of yourself and your printing of such comments in my opinnion. Who am I though, just an educated poor person striving to gain the luxury you have. I still have so much I would love to say, but I truly believe my experience and beliefs will be waisted upon your ears and eyes. I am just greatful that there are people out there that are not so spoiled by there lives to see that everyone deserves to have a little luxury in there lives that last so short and that there children should not have to be clothed by the local thrift store just because they recieve a little help in this harsh world where they were blessed with two severly sick children who will not recover and will continue to be sick. Diapers for life, specializes equipment, nurses, docters visits, drool that dosen't stop, the lack of speech, feeding tubes, a trach in the throat, and so much more than you can imagine and your worrid about tax money. Money can't buy you or those three babies health or happiness. You disgust me with your thinking. Write a letter to George W. Bush and complain to him about feeding and fighting for the Iraqi people and the war. There are levelsor castes in every society. The rich, the middle class and the poor.It has to be that way according to some philosphers. You should be glad you don't have to work the fields for the fruits and vegetables you eat or for the cotten that your clothes are made of. Be happy you don't have to flip the burger that your family eats on a trip out. Be happy you don't have to wash the nice vehicles of those who come to the car wash. Be happy you have what you have and leave those of us just struggling to have a little of what life has to offer alone. I hope that you are not angered by my opinnions and I hope I sounded a little knowledgable on the subject. I hope these things for myself though not for you. You already have to much luxury in life.
Jennifer Williams
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Column for May 29, 2008
I am tired of paying for others to have a place to live
Recently, there was a news story about a robbery in Selma. On May 4th, I saw that an arrest was made in a break-in case at a Selma Housing Authority apartment. The break-in was committed by another resident of the apartment complex, just a few doors down. This is not the thing that amazes me. What does amaze me, however, is that the thief stole over $4800 in jewelry, electronics, and clothes. I got to thinking about just how much stuff that is. Nearly five grand can buy a heap big amount of bling, Circuit City merchandise, and a few trips to The Gap.
My question is first and foremost, what is someone who can afford stuff worth stealing and worth almost five thousand dollars doing in government subsidized housing? Why are we as tax payers shelling out money to pay for cheap housing for someone who can afford to buy lifestyle items? Sure, everyone needs clothes. But if I am having to live at taxpayer expense, I had better be buying my clothes at Cheap Thrills thrift store in uptown Selma rather than at any new store. I had better not have several televisions, a stereo, video game system, cell phone, VCR, DVD player, all the latest movies, and spend money on such if I am willing to suckle off the government in order to have a place to live.
There should be constant means testing for any government assistance. Someone being handicapped and unable to work is one thing. If someone is able to work and does not, that is something else. If this crime victim is working and underemployed, then that is hardly the fault of the taxpayers of this town, county, state, or nation. Therefore, if he or she can afford to spend money on such items while living in housing that we are subsidizing or owned such items before getting into such housing, then there is something wrong with the system.
I was standing in line at a grocery store not long ago. Ahead of me was a woman checking out, paying with WIC (the Women, Infant, and Children government program) vouchers. She was dressed in a business suit. She had a cell phone with Bluetooth wireless headset. She also had just purchased one of the best toasters and cookware sets in the Wal-Mart store. They were already in her basket, paid for. Then she bought the most expensive juices in the store and baby formula with WIC vouchers. I get real tired of paying for others to eat. Sure, I can afford all that I have, and have money to spare. I was buying some stuff I wanted rather than needed, in addition to some stuff I had need of, and I can afford to do so. That is my prerogative. What irritates me is that someone who had on nice clothes, nice jewelry, bought better kitchen appliances than I own, and can afford a cell phone plan with wireless headset is suckling off the government at the expense of the taxpayers. Multiply this by millions of sucklers and we as a nation are being milked for money to pay for the lifestyle choices of others.
Recently in this very column, I dealt with the voting record of Congressman Bob Etheridge. I just read that he has voted in support of "The American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevent Act of 2008". This bill is designed to help prop up home values and keep foreclosures from happening. Basically, those who bought more house than they could afford or were stupid enough to get and keep an adjustable rate mortgage are in danger of losing their homes. Of course some well meaning, pandering liberals want the government to illegally step in and take up the slack at the expense of the general population. People are indeed losing their homes because of economic conditions and their own bad choices in life. However, it is hardly the responsibility of the populace to bail someone out of their problems.
Why should those who can not afford to pay a regular, private mortgage company be given the opportunity to refinance with a government backed loan, instead? Why should a governmental bureaucracy be allowed to bail out those who can not afford to pay a loan with yet another loan at tax payer risk and expense? If people can not afford their homes, then they need to find other homes that they can afford, even if that means renting an apartment or other meager accommodations. I have been there and lived that myself. When I could not afford to either purchase a house or continue paying the high Raleigh rent rates, I rented a broken down, old trailer in the country here in Johnston County for over five years until I could afford to buy.
I have worked hard to afford the things I have now and I am sure that most of you readers have, as well. I have been dirt poor, earning below the poverty level for years. I have had economic hardships in my lifetime, but refused to look to the government for help. Rather, I worked harder to get out of poverty and live comfortably. I wish that more people in this nation had the same resolve and that law makers would require it of those who are allegedly in need before they gladly fork over our tax dollars under the guise of compassion when they are actually enabling the behavior at our expense.
Recently, there was a news story about a robbery in Selma. On May 4th, I saw that an arrest was made in a break-in case at a Selma Housing Authority apartment. The break-in was committed by another resident of the apartment complex, just a few doors down. This is not the thing that amazes me. What does amaze me, however, is that the thief stole over $4800 in jewelry, electronics, and clothes. I got to thinking about just how much stuff that is. Nearly five grand can buy a heap big amount of bling, Circuit City merchandise, and a few trips to The Gap.
My question is first and foremost, what is someone who can afford stuff worth stealing and worth almost five thousand dollars doing in government subsidized housing? Why are we as tax payers shelling out money to pay for cheap housing for someone who can afford to buy lifestyle items? Sure, everyone needs clothes. But if I am having to live at taxpayer expense, I had better be buying my clothes at Cheap Thrills thrift store in uptown Selma rather than at any new store. I had better not have several televisions, a stereo, video game system, cell phone, VCR, DVD player, all the latest movies, and spend money on such if I am willing to suckle off the government in order to have a place to live.
There should be constant means testing for any government assistance. Someone being handicapped and unable to work is one thing. If someone is able to work and does not, that is something else. If this crime victim is working and underemployed, then that is hardly the fault of the taxpayers of this town, county, state, or nation. Therefore, if he or she can afford to spend money on such items while living in housing that we are subsidizing or owned such items before getting into such housing, then there is something wrong with the system.
I was standing in line at a grocery store not long ago. Ahead of me was a woman checking out, paying with WIC (the Women, Infant, and Children government program) vouchers. She was dressed in a business suit. She had a cell phone with Bluetooth wireless headset. She also had just purchased one of the best toasters and cookware sets in the Wal-Mart store. They were already in her basket, paid for. Then she bought the most expensive juices in the store and baby formula with WIC vouchers. I get real tired of paying for others to eat. Sure, I can afford all that I have, and have money to spare. I was buying some stuff I wanted rather than needed, in addition to some stuff I had need of, and I can afford to do so. That is my prerogative. What irritates me is that someone who had on nice clothes, nice jewelry, bought better kitchen appliances than I own, and can afford a cell phone plan with wireless headset is suckling off the government at the expense of the taxpayers. Multiply this by millions of sucklers and we as a nation are being milked for money to pay for the lifestyle choices of others.
Recently in this very column, I dealt with the voting record of Congressman Bob Etheridge. I just read that he has voted in support of "The American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevent Act of 2008". This bill is designed to help prop up home values and keep foreclosures from happening. Basically, those who bought more house than they could afford or were stupid enough to get and keep an adjustable rate mortgage are in danger of losing their homes. Of course some well meaning, pandering liberals want the government to illegally step in and take up the slack at the expense of the general population. People are indeed losing their homes because of economic conditions and their own bad choices in life. However, it is hardly the responsibility of the populace to bail someone out of their problems.
Why should those who can not afford to pay a regular, private mortgage company be given the opportunity to refinance with a government backed loan, instead? Why should a governmental bureaucracy be allowed to bail out those who can not afford to pay a loan with yet another loan at tax payer risk and expense? If people can not afford their homes, then they need to find other homes that they can afford, even if that means renting an apartment or other meager accommodations. I have been there and lived that myself. When I could not afford to either purchase a house or continue paying the high Raleigh rent rates, I rented a broken down, old trailer in the country here in Johnston County for over five years until I could afford to buy.
I have worked hard to afford the things I have now and I am sure that most of you readers have, as well. I have been dirt poor, earning below the poverty level for years. I have had economic hardships in my lifetime, but refused to look to the government for help. Rather, I worked harder to get out of poverty and live comfortably. I wish that more people in this nation had the same resolve and that law makers would require it of those who are allegedly in need before they gladly fork over our tax dollars under the guise of compassion when they are actually enabling the behavior at our expense.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Column for May 22, 2008
It is not just people in the proposed ETJ that oppose its expansion
Some nights I would rather just stay at home. That is how I felt when debating whether I wanted to attend the last several Selma Town Council meetings. I knew that this last one, which would have the public hearing on the proposed expansion to two miles of the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction for planning and zoning, would be a long meeting. From what I read in the paper, it was. Since I am not sitting on the Council, though I once felt an obligation to attend meetings regularly as a citizen, I am less inclined to do so, especially with all the activities going on in my own busy life the past six months.
Since I am on the Planning Board, I got a chance to see the proposed ETJ expansion map. From what was explained by Stan Farmer on his next to last day on the job, as well as the consultant hired to work on the plan, the town's planning lines up pretty will with what Johnston County has zoned for the ETJ. On that aspect, my recommendation as a member of the Planning Board was that if the town was to go ahead with the ETJ expansion, that we simply take the territory as it is and zone it according to the closest comparable zoning that is in our town code. That was a "no brainer" to me. When asked to put that into a motion, I declined. The reason that I declined was that I was not at all in support of the concept of an ETJ expansion, much less the existence of an ETJ to begin with. Since I am morally opposed to an ETJ on several grounds, I verbalized that I would not make any formal motion that would support the adoption of said jurisdiction. When the motion was made by someone else and the votes cast, I was the only negative vote.
I was reading the comments by some of the citizens of the proposed ETJ and I am inclined to agree with some of what was said. I am only commenting upon what I have read in this very publication. First and foremost, in my estimation, the sole reason for an ETJ is so that the town can control the area just outside of its borders so that it can be consistent with the region inside its borders. The reason for this is for the purpose of expanding the town limits via annexation.
Annexation has been a hotbed of conversation and action in Selma. The folks who expressed a concern about future annexation as a result of this action have a good case for their suspicions. I had expressed this very concern at the Planning Board meeting last month. The reason of "every other town in the county is doing it" is not sufficient reason for Selma or any other town to do so.
I still do not have any earthly idea why Johnston County even has the authority to allow a two mile ETJ. TWO miles, folks. The entire town of Selma is only 3.5 square miles in area. Why should a town that small control such a huge outlaying parcel of land for its own planning purposes? The City of Raleigh had to meet certain population requirements in order to have that much of a planning jurisdiction. It is just plain morally wrong for the towns in a county whose entire population is roughly one third of a city like Raleigh to be entitled to the same size ETJ.
The criticism of the new interim town manager, "when one speaker wanted to know how someone from Louisburg could possibly know anything about what was going on in Selma" is a bit unfounded. First, this entire project was started under someone else's tenure. Secondly, Mr. Gobble has just recently started this job, so I do not expect him to know everything about Selma. For that matter, Stan Farmer, for all the praise he received, never lived in Selma. At least the town manager that the Town Council fired a couple of years ago, Jeff White, had a house right in town, was a Selma citizen, and a voter during his tenure. That is not to slam Stan Farmer's work. Actually, he and I got along well. It is simply to make a point.
The bottom line is that the entire existence of an ETJ is solely for the purposes of lining up and controlling growth outside of a town to prepare that territory to eventually be annexed into the town. Meanwhile, as was noted by one speaker at the public hearing, the residents of the ETJ have zero ability to elect representation within the town who have a measure of control on those without. That is just plain unethical in a representative republic. The only say that anyone from the ETJ has is that residents of the ETJ do have seats on the Planning Board, which are appointed by the Town Council. However, those seats are not directly chosen by the residents themselves, nor are the Planning Board members vested with any binding authority, thus making such representation of no consequence.
The 150 or so people who attended the public hearing and were cynical had every right to be and had experiential evidence to back up their concerns. I, as someone who resides within the town limits, serves on a town board, and cared enough about Selma to run for elected office twice so that I could stand against things like ETJ expansion and annexation, am rather dubious and have said so repeatedly.
Some nights I would rather just stay at home. That is how I felt when debating whether I wanted to attend the last several Selma Town Council meetings. I knew that this last one, which would have the public hearing on the proposed expansion to two miles of the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction for planning and zoning, would be a long meeting. From what I read in the paper, it was. Since I am not sitting on the Council, though I once felt an obligation to attend meetings regularly as a citizen, I am less inclined to do so, especially with all the activities going on in my own busy life the past six months.
Since I am on the Planning Board, I got a chance to see the proposed ETJ expansion map. From what was explained by Stan Farmer on his next to last day on the job, as well as the consultant hired to work on the plan, the town's planning lines up pretty will with what Johnston County has zoned for the ETJ. On that aspect, my recommendation as a member of the Planning Board was that if the town was to go ahead with the ETJ expansion, that we simply take the territory as it is and zone it according to the closest comparable zoning that is in our town code. That was a "no brainer" to me. When asked to put that into a motion, I declined. The reason that I declined was that I was not at all in support of the concept of an ETJ expansion, much less the existence of an ETJ to begin with. Since I am morally opposed to an ETJ on several grounds, I verbalized that I would not make any formal motion that would support the adoption of said jurisdiction. When the motion was made by someone else and the votes cast, I was the only negative vote.
I was reading the comments by some of the citizens of the proposed ETJ and I am inclined to agree with some of what was said. I am only commenting upon what I have read in this very publication. First and foremost, in my estimation, the sole reason for an ETJ is so that the town can control the area just outside of its borders so that it can be consistent with the region inside its borders. The reason for this is for the purpose of expanding the town limits via annexation.
Annexation has been a hotbed of conversation and action in Selma. The folks who expressed a concern about future annexation as a result of this action have a good case for their suspicions. I had expressed this very concern at the Planning Board meeting last month. The reason of "every other town in the county is doing it" is not sufficient reason for Selma or any other town to do so.
I still do not have any earthly idea why Johnston County even has the authority to allow a two mile ETJ. TWO miles, folks. The entire town of Selma is only 3.5 square miles in area. Why should a town that small control such a huge outlaying parcel of land for its own planning purposes? The City of Raleigh had to meet certain population requirements in order to have that much of a planning jurisdiction. It is just plain morally wrong for the towns in a county whose entire population is roughly one third of a city like Raleigh to be entitled to the same size ETJ.
The criticism of the new interim town manager, "when one speaker wanted to know how someone from Louisburg could possibly know anything about what was going on in Selma" is a bit unfounded. First, this entire project was started under someone else's tenure. Secondly, Mr. Gobble has just recently started this job, so I do not expect him to know everything about Selma. For that matter, Stan Farmer, for all the praise he received, never lived in Selma. At least the town manager that the Town Council fired a couple of years ago, Jeff White, had a house right in town, was a Selma citizen, and a voter during his tenure. That is not to slam Stan Farmer's work. Actually, he and I got along well. It is simply to make a point.
The bottom line is that the entire existence of an ETJ is solely for the purposes of lining up and controlling growth outside of a town to prepare that territory to eventually be annexed into the town. Meanwhile, as was noted by one speaker at the public hearing, the residents of the ETJ have zero ability to elect representation within the town who have a measure of control on those without. That is just plain unethical in a representative republic. The only say that anyone from the ETJ has is that residents of the ETJ do have seats on the Planning Board, which are appointed by the Town Council. However, those seats are not directly chosen by the residents themselves, nor are the Planning Board members vested with any binding authority, thus making such representation of no consequence.
The 150 or so people who attended the public hearing and were cynical had every right to be and had experiential evidence to back up their concerns. I, as someone who resides within the town limits, serves on a town board, and cared enough about Selma to run for elected office twice so that I could stand against things like ETJ expansion and annexation, am rather dubious and have said so repeatedly.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Column for May 15, 2008
The new state budget sounds good...or does it?
I was reading with great interest about the proposed budget for the State of North Carolina. Governor Easley recently announced the new state budget. Truthfully, if the figures that I have read are accurate, there are some things I like to see in the budget...at least on the surface. Dig a little deeper and you will see the fallacy of the claims being made.
The first thing is that we as a state are looking at proposed surplus a $152 million. Based upon past performance, I wonder how long it will be before our state legislators spend that surplus, just as they have every other one. Instead of applying that surplus towards public debt or other proposed public funding projects, several huge surpluses, some over one billion dollars, have been spent on pork barrel projects or other frivolous spending sprees.
Governor Easley is playing with figures to claim to be providing a pay increase for teachers in North Carolina. Each year we hear about raising the pay of NC teachers to the national average. Here in NC, the average teacher pay is about 6.9% behind the national average. It is an annual mantra we hear in NC, that we must raise the pay of our teachers to match the national average.
Sorry, but by the very definition of an average, there are some higher, some are lower. NC happens to be on the lower side. So what? Teachers, though they often have a difficult and valuable job, only work some nine months out of the year. I don't get three months off every year, nor do the majority of Americans.
Next, the North Carolina average salary takes into account counties such as Martin, Bertie, and other small, poor, rural areas. Obviously, pay in these areas will be lower than say in Charlotte or Raleigh. That just makes sense. To use rural areas with comparatively few students to argue that all teachers should get an increase based upon an average is no different than comparing states like Arkansas against New York for standards of living and pay to form the national average.
The 4% average pay increase proposed for state employees is really a misnomer. It is a numbers ploy. Basically, the 4% is really only a 1.5% increase plus a $1000 bonus. The numbers game is that this should average out to almost 4% for many employees. Again, it is a numbers game and is being falsely represented. Many employees will earn higher, many lower. Ergo, the claim is specious at best.
There are a couple of tax increases set in this budget. What is really onerous about these tax increases is that the proposed budget takes into account the idea that the proposed tax increases will be passed. If the legislature deems it inappropriate to increase taxes, then the proposed budget surplus is moot.
I am absolutely no fan of tobacco use. I know that this region is "tobacco country". I just find there are few things in life more disgusting than cigarette smoking. As much as I find smoking offensive and stupid, I find the concept of freedom something to be protected. Ergo, I am not one to eliminate any and all smoking, much less heavily tax tobacco products. Yet higher taxes on tobacco is exactly what is proposed by the Governor.
The State of North Carolina is often hypocritical in its stances. First, it promotes agriculture here in the state. Farming tobacco is a part of said agriculture. While supporting farmers, the state is at the same time discouraging the use of the very product raised in North Carolina. Further taxation is effectively a further deterrent of consumption. Each pack of cigarettes sold in North Carolina currently nets the state 35 cents in taxes. The proposal is to take that total to 55 cents per pack. The increased taxes on tobacco products will allegedly fund pay increases for school teachers and administrators. When you tax something, you discourage its consumption or often change behavior. Thus, I am dubious as to the validity of this proposal.
On the surface the claim of a $396 million cut in the general fund is a great thing. However, the overall budget is going up by 870 billion dollars. If spending truly is to be cut, then the budget would not increase, especially in an alleged economic slow down. The government is increasing its staffing and budget, yet the economy is supposedly slowing down. Why would the Governor grow the size of bureaucracy when he should be shrinking it?
Another thing that bothers me is that the state is increasing the budget to the UNC college system by $34.6 million. Yet it is Governor Easley himself that is causing the increase in costs to the state collegiate system. It is Governor Easley who is supporting the idea of allowing illegal aliens to attend our college system. This costs the taxpayers money, just as aliens do in our primary education system. We, the people are subsidizing their education, and these costs will only go up. Instead of looking to educate those who do not even belong in this country to begin with, we could be trimming our budget and/or opening such educational slots to legal citizens.
It would seem to me that if we will in deed have a budget surplus, just as I do when I have one, that some bills would be paid off and my cash flow output would be lessened to a degree. Then again, if I spent my money the way the State of North Carolina does, I would spend that surplus on things I do not need and go further into debt for things I should not buy. I would end up bankrupt whereas the state will tax and borrow more money to meet its shortfalls and create false surpluses.
Don't buy the budget claims on the surface level. Read a little bit and do not be fooled by the rhetoric.
I was reading with great interest about the proposed budget for the State of North Carolina. Governor Easley recently announced the new state budget. Truthfully, if the figures that I have read are accurate, there are some things I like to see in the budget...at least on the surface. Dig a little deeper and you will see the fallacy of the claims being made.
The first thing is that we as a state are looking at proposed surplus a $152 million. Based upon past performance, I wonder how long it will be before our state legislators spend that surplus, just as they have every other one. Instead of applying that surplus towards public debt or other proposed public funding projects, several huge surpluses, some over one billion dollars, have been spent on pork barrel projects or other frivolous spending sprees.
Governor Easley is playing with figures to claim to be providing a pay increase for teachers in North Carolina. Each year we hear about raising the pay of NC teachers to the national average. Here in NC, the average teacher pay is about 6.9% behind the national average. It is an annual mantra we hear in NC, that we must raise the pay of our teachers to match the national average.
Sorry, but by the very definition of an average, there are some higher, some are lower. NC happens to be on the lower side. So what? Teachers, though they often have a difficult and valuable job, only work some nine months out of the year. I don't get three months off every year, nor do the majority of Americans.
Next, the North Carolina average salary takes into account counties such as Martin, Bertie, and other small, poor, rural areas. Obviously, pay in these areas will be lower than say in Charlotte or Raleigh. That just makes sense. To use rural areas with comparatively few students to argue that all teachers should get an increase based upon an average is no different than comparing states like Arkansas against New York for standards of living and pay to form the national average.
The 4% average pay increase proposed for state employees is really a misnomer. It is a numbers ploy. Basically, the 4% is really only a 1.5% increase plus a $1000 bonus. The numbers game is that this should average out to almost 4% for many employees. Again, it is a numbers game and is being falsely represented. Many employees will earn higher, many lower. Ergo, the claim is specious at best.
There are a couple of tax increases set in this budget. What is really onerous about these tax increases is that the proposed budget takes into account the idea that the proposed tax increases will be passed. If the legislature deems it inappropriate to increase taxes, then the proposed budget surplus is moot.
I am absolutely no fan of tobacco use. I know that this region is "tobacco country". I just find there are few things in life more disgusting than cigarette smoking. As much as I find smoking offensive and stupid, I find the concept of freedom something to be protected. Ergo, I am not one to eliminate any and all smoking, much less heavily tax tobacco products. Yet higher taxes on tobacco is exactly what is proposed by the Governor.
The State of North Carolina is often hypocritical in its stances. First, it promotes agriculture here in the state. Farming tobacco is a part of said agriculture. While supporting farmers, the state is at the same time discouraging the use of the very product raised in North Carolina. Further taxation is effectively a further deterrent of consumption. Each pack of cigarettes sold in North Carolina currently nets the state 35 cents in taxes. The proposal is to take that total to 55 cents per pack. The increased taxes on tobacco products will allegedly fund pay increases for school teachers and administrators. When you tax something, you discourage its consumption or often change behavior. Thus, I am dubious as to the validity of this proposal.
On the surface the claim of a $396 million cut in the general fund is a great thing. However, the overall budget is going up by 870 billion dollars. If spending truly is to be cut, then the budget would not increase, especially in an alleged economic slow down. The government is increasing its staffing and budget, yet the economy is supposedly slowing down. Why would the Governor grow the size of bureaucracy when he should be shrinking it?
Another thing that bothers me is that the state is increasing the budget to the UNC college system by $34.6 million. Yet it is Governor Easley himself that is causing the increase in costs to the state collegiate system. It is Governor Easley who is supporting the idea of allowing illegal aliens to attend our college system. This costs the taxpayers money, just as aliens do in our primary education system. We, the people are subsidizing their education, and these costs will only go up. Instead of looking to educate those who do not even belong in this country to begin with, we could be trimming our budget and/or opening such educational slots to legal citizens.
It would seem to me that if we will in deed have a budget surplus, just as I do when I have one, that some bills would be paid off and my cash flow output would be lessened to a degree. Then again, if I spent my money the way the State of North Carolina does, I would spend that surplus on things I do not need and go further into debt for things I should not buy. I would end up bankrupt whereas the state will tax and borrow more money to meet its shortfalls and create false surpluses.
Don't buy the budget claims on the surface level. Read a little bit and do not be fooled by the rhetoric.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Column for May 8, 2008
I am so glad now that the primary election is finally over
The primary election has finally come and gone here in North Carolina and I, for one, am glad it is over. I do believe that this has been one of the most vacuous elections, totally devoid of any substance, that I can remember. The first election that I can remember as a youngster was Gerald Ford versus Jimmy Carter in 1976. I was all of eight years old and it was the first time I started to pay attention to any election. At that time, I remember simply thinking that Carter should be elected because Ford already had a turn at the helm. Though that is not the case in this election, since George W. Bush will be leaving office because of a term limitation, it might as well be the same mindset that elects the next President.
All week long, my telephone has been ringing with recorded messages for and by political figures. I got a call from North Carolina Governor, Michael Easley on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign. When getting a call on behalf of Hillary Clinton, I figured that the caller ID would show a number of (666)666-6666. I was surprised to find that the caller ID actually showed a South Carolina phone number. I also got calls from Leo Daughtry, from political pollsters, and some for the campaigns of candidates running for state senate, the Barack Hussein Obama campaign, and who knows who else. My answering machine has a cute female default voice with a generic message, so I hope that their machines had fun talking to my machine.
Since I work for a large media company, I have been able to hear some of our sales scuttlebutt. Normally, we do very little primary election advertising revenue. This year, we have a ton of such ad revenue. I have seen more newspaper, heard more radio, and seen more television ads for Governor, President, State Senator, Lt. Governor, and County Commissioner than I have ever heard, read, or seen in a while.
The crux of most ads have little to do with actual issues. The issues that are stated usually have zero Constitutional relevance or practicality. The promise of suspending the federal gas tax and funding this proposed tax cut by absconding profits from oil companies is one issue that I have heard on some ads. Wow. Does the promise to steal money to cut taxes really appeal to people? Keep in mind that if it is fine for government to steal from a company, it is also fine for them to steal from ordinary citizens, since a corporation is an artificial entity.
I have heard more negative ads this campaign season than I have heard in a long time. There were plenty of accusations about support of amnesty for illegal immigrants by one candidate and a direct response by the other. Many of the non "mud slinging" ads I have heard were rather generic, were pandering to particular classes of people, and totally vacuous.
What has been rather frustrating for me is that I wanted more information on some of the judicial, state, and county office candidates. I looked to some of the usual media outlets for candidate information. I was familiar with these outlets, having participated in and cooperated with them in the past myself. I found very little in the way of candidate information, especially about the issues. I do believe that I have been more frustrated in this election cycle than in any other in terms of searching for candidate information. I even went to the few web sites I could find for some of the candidates. Even those web sites published by the candidates themselves were lacking in content as to what the candidates stood for and why I should vote for them.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am an issues oriented guy. I do not rely on what party someone belongs to for a measuring stick, though it does tell me to which ideology someone subscribes. I could not care less what the color is of someone's skin or whether the person was born with XX or XY chromosomes. I do care about the character of the individual, the world view of the person, and the stances on the issues. It does not matter to me that Barack Hussein Obama is Black or that Hillary Clinton is a woman. It is their views on the issues that I find repugnant. It is his perspectives on the issues that repel me from voting for John McCain. It is his views on the issues that will cause me to vote against Bob Etheridge. Unfortunately, I could not find the views of some of our candidates and what they believe are the issues at hand.
For these reasons, I do believe that I have been the most unenthusiastic, the most resigned to mediocrity, and the most exasperated that I have been for any major election for which I have had the capacity for remembrance.
One thing I believe for a certainty is that the American public deserves a break when it comes to the exercise of a presidential primary election. We ought not stretch this process out any longer than we already do. This is the first time a North Carolina vote has had any real bearing on a Presidential election in a very long time. However, I would have much rather seen our election happen back on "Super Tuesday", along with the rest of the nation's states, all on the same day. If we can all manage to vote on one day in November, why can we not all manage to vote on one day in this primary process? It would spare us all the seemingly incessant, vacuous pablum with which we have been bombarded.
The primary election has finally come and gone here in North Carolina and I, for one, am glad it is over. I do believe that this has been one of the most vacuous elections, totally devoid of any substance, that I can remember. The first election that I can remember as a youngster was Gerald Ford versus Jimmy Carter in 1976. I was all of eight years old and it was the first time I started to pay attention to any election. At that time, I remember simply thinking that Carter should be elected because Ford already had a turn at the helm. Though that is not the case in this election, since George W. Bush will be leaving office because of a term limitation, it might as well be the same mindset that elects the next President.
All week long, my telephone has been ringing with recorded messages for and by political figures. I got a call from North Carolina Governor, Michael Easley on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign. When getting a call on behalf of Hillary Clinton, I figured that the caller ID would show a number of (666)666-6666. I was surprised to find that the caller ID actually showed a South Carolina phone number. I also got calls from Leo Daughtry, from political pollsters, and some for the campaigns of candidates running for state senate, the Barack Hussein Obama campaign, and who knows who else. My answering machine has a cute female default voice with a generic message, so I hope that their machines had fun talking to my machine.
Since I work for a large media company, I have been able to hear some of our sales scuttlebutt. Normally, we do very little primary election advertising revenue. This year, we have a ton of such ad revenue. I have seen more newspaper, heard more radio, and seen more television ads for Governor, President, State Senator, Lt. Governor, and County Commissioner than I have ever heard, read, or seen in a while.
The crux of most ads have little to do with actual issues. The issues that are stated usually have zero Constitutional relevance or practicality. The promise of suspending the federal gas tax and funding this proposed tax cut by absconding profits from oil companies is one issue that I have heard on some ads. Wow. Does the promise to steal money to cut taxes really appeal to people? Keep in mind that if it is fine for government to steal from a company, it is also fine for them to steal from ordinary citizens, since a corporation is an artificial entity.
I have heard more negative ads this campaign season than I have heard in a long time. There were plenty of accusations about support of amnesty for illegal immigrants by one candidate and a direct response by the other. Many of the non "mud slinging" ads I have heard were rather generic, were pandering to particular classes of people, and totally vacuous.
What has been rather frustrating for me is that I wanted more information on some of the judicial, state, and county office candidates. I looked to some of the usual media outlets for candidate information. I was familiar with these outlets, having participated in and cooperated with them in the past myself. I found very little in the way of candidate information, especially about the issues. I do believe that I have been more frustrated in this election cycle than in any other in terms of searching for candidate information. I even went to the few web sites I could find for some of the candidates. Even those web sites published by the candidates themselves were lacking in content as to what the candidates stood for and why I should vote for them.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am an issues oriented guy. I do not rely on what party someone belongs to for a measuring stick, though it does tell me to which ideology someone subscribes. I could not care less what the color is of someone's skin or whether the person was born with XX or XY chromosomes. I do care about the character of the individual, the world view of the person, and the stances on the issues. It does not matter to me that Barack Hussein Obama is Black or that Hillary Clinton is a woman. It is their views on the issues that I find repugnant. It is his perspectives on the issues that repel me from voting for John McCain. It is his views on the issues that will cause me to vote against Bob Etheridge. Unfortunately, I could not find the views of some of our candidates and what they believe are the issues at hand.
For these reasons, I do believe that I have been the most unenthusiastic, the most resigned to mediocrity, and the most exasperated that I have been for any major election for which I have had the capacity for remembrance.
One thing I believe for a certainty is that the American public deserves a break when it comes to the exercise of a presidential primary election. We ought not stretch this process out any longer than we already do. This is the first time a North Carolina vote has had any real bearing on a Presidential election in a very long time. However, I would have much rather seen our election happen back on "Super Tuesday", along with the rest of the nation's states, all on the same day. If we can all manage to vote on one day in November, why can we not all manage to vote on one day in this primary process? It would spare us all the seemingly incessant, vacuous pablum with which we have been bombarded.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
