Oct 272008
 


Barack Obama: “The Civil Rights Movement… coalitions of power by which you bring about redistribtutive change”
Click the following link listen to the complete recording.
Source: Chicago Public Radio – Odyssey Program audio library January 18, 2001


I know some my vocal Democratic friends will continue to spin any evidence of a ‘radical’ Obama as meaningless or disjointed segements, but actually in my view, the true picture of who Obama is and his agenda is finally beginning to appear through the haze spread by Obama, his surrogates and of course, the media.

I suppose at this point I could launch into paragraphs of conspiracy theory interspersed with historical fact, voting records and aliens — the space kind, but what’s the point. National politics is a cesspool of extremists left, extremists right and elitist media, which is 90% wacko left.

Look at the media feeding frenzy over ‘Joe the Plumber’, a regular guy, like any one of us. What infurates me, as I said in an earlier post, is the media’s political bias controls the throttle of coverage and investigation. It was true of Whitewater scandal, FBI Filegate, the Rose Law billling records and it is true now of Barrak Obama and his radical ties to extremists and terrorists Jeremiah (XXX Damn America) Wright {link}or William (Weather Underground) Ayers {link} respectively.

I haven’t voted yet, I prefer to vote on election day. I have to wonder how angry people will be or will they even admit it to themselves, if the lid blows off the Obama kettle and we all discover the depth of his character or lack thereof. It won’t be pretty.

Just like a shell game, evidentually the real Obama will be uncovered — radical, redistribtutive change or not.

Oct 262008
 

Endorsed by the ScribeAs innocuous as a School Board race may seem in the shadow of the tumultuous national races, we do in fact, face four members of current School Board who are looking to change the strategic focus of schools, spending even more on ‘Title 1′ schools and to use a recently coined phrase ‘spread the wealth around’ by changing the policy on neighborhood schools to allow the busing of children to meet ‘socioeconomic’ balance.

While the race for Federal offices are important, the state crucial, nothing touches your lives and that of your children, like the School Board. Unless your planning to put your kids in private school, then I suggest you vote for people whose values you share and can depend upon to listen when you speak.

I wholeheartedly endorse Laura Minsk and David Scholl.

Village Scribe 2008 School Board Endorsements
Laura Minsk – At Large 

In 2006 Laura Minsk came very close to being elected coming in 3rd. Not willing to concede any ground, Laura has continued to remain engaged in school issues, attending meetings and contributing to the discussion of what is really important to the schools. Laura brings to the table a unique combination of academic and agriculture backgrounds. 

 

David Scholl – At Large 

David was also school board candidate in 2006, has continued to show commitment and dedication towards building a school system remembers that our children’s education is what is important, not a political spoils system.

From my experience of working with David on the Union County Education Foundation, I feel confident he will work tirelessly for the betterment of school system.

 

Oct 222008
 

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?
First appeared in print in The Rhinoceros Times, Greensboro, NC
Orson Scott Card – October 5, 2008

An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President’s Men and thinking: That’s journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn’t come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It’s a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can’t repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can’t make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It’s as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of Congressmen who support increasing their budget.)

Isn’t there a story here? Doesn’t journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren’t you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefitting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. “Housing-gate,” no doubt. Or “Fannie-gate.”

Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall.com essay entitled Do Facts Matter? “Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury.”

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was … the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was … the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie. Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It’s not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let’s follow the money … right to the presidential candidate who is the number-two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Freddie Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate’s campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an “adviser” to the Obama campaign — because that campaign had sought his advice — you actually let Obama’s people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn’t listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That’s what you claim you do, when you accept people’s money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that’s what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don’t like the probable consequences. That’s what honesty means. That’s how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time — and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter — while you ignored the story of John Edwards’s own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That’s where you are right now.

It’s not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation’s prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama’s door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a Senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe –and vote as if — President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats — including Barack Obama — and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans — then you are not journalists by any standard.

You’re just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it’s time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a daily newspaper in our city.

Editors Note: I read this today for the first time and I wanted to share it with Scribe readers.

Oct 212008
 

As you may know, last week the Union County School Board voted to call the new Middle and High Schools ‘Cuthbertson’. According to board members this name was the most frequently submitted by parents. In retrospect, many parents were just suggesting a name and not necessarily a choice.

Judging from the reaction, most parents don’t share this choice.

Final Poll Results

Final ts as of Oct 17, 2008

Complete Survey Results: {click to view}

Besides the poll question concerning the school name, most of the survey respondents elected to share their opinions on the quality and quantity of communication provided by our School Board and graded the performance of school principals, teachers and grade curriculum.

What next

While double the number of people responded to this poll than submitted names to the school board, the school board is not likely to entertain a effort to revisit the name unless a board member leads the charge. Naturally, some feel the District 6 representative, Kimberly Morrison-Hansley would be advocate for parents who wish a change, by virtue of Middle & High School “C” being geographically in her district.

Following is her contact info:
Ms. Morrison-Hansley email: kim.morrison-hansley@ucps.k12.nc.us phone:(704) 764-9001

postscript
I regret to report that on Tuesday, October 21nd the likelihood of changing the name of Middle and High School ‘C’ from ‘Cuthbertson’ may have passed – permanently.

Board member Kim Rogers asked to amend the work-session agenda with an item to re-consider the name issue. She was immediately challenged by Board Vice Chair John Collins who seemed to take it as a personal affront the mere mention of reconsidering the name. After a brief back and forth, a vote was taken. Kim Rogers, Dean Arp and Carolyn Lowder voted to add the item to the agenda. Thank you! to those three members who took the time to listen.

Needless to say, appeals to Kimberly Morrision-Hansley fell on deaf ears, as it so often has in the past two years. You’d expect support from your own District representative, as it would have not caused any great discomfort to hear the issue again. A school name is an important matter and enough people had no idea it was under consideration.

There was no ‘Connect-Ed’ call to parents in the school district, no notice to parents sent home, no attempt to reach out by the board to let people know the issue as up for parents to vote. Even worse was the method used where parents are asked to make name suggestions or nominate a name choice. To many of us, such a methodology suggests that a vote will be taken, but it’s not. In this case, 61 submitted the name ‘Cuthbertson; out of approximately 300 submissions. Hardly a majority.

There are serious issues facing the School Board and to most board members, this a name controversy is trivial. But, is it? A few years ago, many of these same board members ignored appeals by parents, petitions, editorials and REFUSED to enlarge the superintendent search beyond Dr. Davis. Was that trivial?

To what level of urgency must an issue rise before School Board members who were elected to R E P R E S E N T us actually do so? All too often, it seems some just tolerate our interest.

Oct 112008
 
Water Plant failed EPA Standards for more than a year!

According to a story published in the Fort Mills Times {link}, August 13, 2008, the joint Union County and Lancaster County water plant has exceeded EPA standards for trihalomethanes for more than a year. Department of Health and Environmental Control has placed the plant under a ‘Consent Order’ that requires the plant to provide a written schedule of how the trihalomethane issue will be solved.

Lancaster waters users were notified in June about the contamination. Surprisingly, Union County users have yet to be notified and there is a question now, if Union County officials were or are aware of the problem.

Trihalomethanes which may occurs as the result of chlorine interaction with organic matter in the water, have been shown to cause liver, kidney, nervous system problems and could lead to an increased cancer risk.

In response to this story (VSO’s), Union County issued this press release: {link} denying any problem with water contamination. In reading the county’s statement, note the ‘silver lining’ of Union County not being burdened with water storage facilities and other infrastructure that would allow the storage of water and the possibility of trialomethanes.

As reassuring as the County’s response is concerning our water quality, the question remains as mentioned in the Fort Mill Times story, why must Union County pay for the upgrade to the system, if Lancaster County has the problem.

Speaking of trialomethanes (tri·hal·o·meth·ane), you may be hearing that word in connection with speculation that Union and Anson County are building a new pipeline and waterplant just inside Union County.

Union County announced yesterday a special joint meeting of Union County and Anson commissioners on Monday, October 13, 2008, at 7:00pm in Wadesboro to discuss “water services”.

Typical of the opaque Chairman Baucom, the announcement lacked any detail.