When is an abuse of power for personal gain by an elected official not an abuse of power for personal gain? When it’s committed in West Valley City by and I quote the Salt Lake Tribune “a GOP star” whose “a political force” City Councilmen as he “ponders his next big move”.
When West Valley City Councilman at large Mike Winder recently used the city’s email system to promote his new book, solicit city employees to buy it and forward the email to family and friends he committed an abuse of power for personal gain. An excuse of youthful exuberance may have pacified Paul Rolly of the Tribune but not me.
This blatant misuse of power which barely got mentioned in the Tribune’s recent glowing article along with the exaggerated picture of Winder on the front page of the paper is the real story, not the punch and cookies of said article. When the Tribune chooses to showcase a political figure as though it’s a paid political announcement or advertisement instead of doing some in depth investigation into the actions of the political figure, one must ask, “What is the intention of the Paper?” It apparently was not the reporting of a misuse of public trust by a public official.
But I guess when you are driving in the motorcade of the Vice President of the United States to take him to a meeting of political secrecy, attended by unnamed political figures without any media coverage using a city’s email system for personal gain is small potatoes.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Monday, July 23, 2007
Candidacy Announcement
Over the last few years I have steadily increased my telephone and written comments to elected and appointed government officials. Most of the comments I have made have been in disagreement with a policy or action of those officials. I have also contacted elected officials when their actions, words or political philosophy are ones with which I am more in agreement, however admittedly fewer of them. I have suggested courses of action and involvement to some of the younger as well as mature people I know. I have written a blog to express some of my thoughts and opinions. I have now involved myself in the elected political process and announce my candidacy for the Third District Seat on the West Valley City Council.
I am a candidate for elected office because one person can sow the seeds of change. One person can start the discussion, which leads to a change of opinion or stance. One person can toss the pebble into the pond, which starts the ripples of progress. One person can make a difference. Each of us is that one. When we stand as one with each other we become many. As many, each of us effects and has responsibility for the world in which we live.
I am aware there are very few of you who read this who can vote in this particular election. If you can, I ask for your voter support. Any volunteer or campaign financial assistance you may offer would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Have a great day.
I am a candidate for elected office because one person can sow the seeds of change. One person can start the discussion, which leads to a change of opinion or stance. One person can toss the pebble into the pond, which starts the ripples of progress. One person can make a difference. Each of us is that one. When we stand as one with each other we become many. As many, each of us effects and has responsibility for the world in which we live.
I am aware there are very few of you who read this who can vote in this particular election. If you can, I ask for your voter support. Any volunteer or campaign financial assistance you may offer would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Have a great day.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Liberal Utah Judges
Once again liberal Utah judges are legislating from the bench. Recently the Utah Supreme Court ruled that the 120,000 Utahns who signed the petition for a referendum regarding Utah’s school voucher law would get their day in court. Not only would they get their day in court but they would also be allowed to have the second, yet totally separate voucher bill, be included in the referendum decision. How dare this minuscule group of experienced legal minds have an opinion, which calls into question the wisdom and integrity of the Utah Legislature? Where does this tiny group get their audacity? How dare they question the Legislature’s intention of funding private and secular schools with public tax paid funds?
I could go on but by now I hope you’ve realized I’m being facetious. I have intentionally avoided being facetious in this blog before now. I wanted you, the readers, to know where I was coming from and what my opinions about things were. Today however, I thought I might catch some members of the other side unaware and get them to start reading. Maybe I could entice a few of them into reading further on.
What the Utah Supreme Court did was an excellent example of the constitution’s intentional separation of powers within the three branches of our government. This brilliantly conceived structure of three separate branches of government and the specific checks and balances it creates is one of the most significant features of our form of government. It provides for the rule of law interpreted by non-partisan evaluators, judges and the system used by those judges, the courts. Our adversarial court system is presided over by these judges.
The two sides, the adversaries, the pro-voucher proponents and the anti-voucher opponents brought their different opinions regarding the issue of a one vote referendum on both bills passed by the Legislature to the court. The court heard legal arguments about the law from each side’s interpretation and then decided one argument had greater standing under the law. Their decision was for one vote for either up or down, tying both of the Legislature’s two laws together in the referendum vote. I totally agree with the court’s decision. I believe the referendum vote outcome will show a significantly larger number of Utahns are against school vouchers paid for with tax dollars.
Some members of our Legislature have suggested the Court overstepped its authority with its decision. Some suggested additional legislation, which would circumvent the court’s decision. How dare those non-elected judges think their opinion took precedence over the opinion of elected officials? What do you call a group of little boys who take their ball home when the umpire rules against their desires? Spoiled comes to mind.
I could go on but by now I hope you’ve realized I’m being facetious. I have intentionally avoided being facetious in this blog before now. I wanted you, the readers, to know where I was coming from and what my opinions about things were. Today however, I thought I might catch some members of the other side unaware and get them to start reading. Maybe I could entice a few of them into reading further on.
What the Utah Supreme Court did was an excellent example of the constitution’s intentional separation of powers within the three branches of our government. This brilliantly conceived structure of three separate branches of government and the specific checks and balances it creates is one of the most significant features of our form of government. It provides for the rule of law interpreted by non-partisan evaluators, judges and the system used by those judges, the courts. Our adversarial court system is presided over by these judges.
The two sides, the adversaries, the pro-voucher proponents and the anti-voucher opponents brought their different opinions regarding the issue of a one vote referendum on both bills passed by the Legislature to the court. The court heard legal arguments about the law from each side’s interpretation and then decided one argument had greater standing under the law. Their decision was for one vote for either up or down, tying both of the Legislature’s two laws together in the referendum vote. I totally agree with the court’s decision. I believe the referendum vote outcome will show a significantly larger number of Utahns are against school vouchers paid for with tax dollars.
Some members of our Legislature have suggested the Court overstepped its authority with its decision. Some suggested additional legislation, which would circumvent the court’s decision. How dare those non-elected judges think their opinion took precedence over the opinion of elected officials? What do you call a group of little boys who take their ball home when the umpire rules against their desires? Spoiled comes to mind.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Your Guy?
I have previously mentioned in this blog former President Bill Clinton’s indiscretion with a woman during his tenure in office. The entire country witnessed the GOP led charge to investigate this matter. The president made statements under oath. He used selective specific language during his testimony. Interpretation of parts of the selective specific language testimony by mostly GOP members of congress led to charges of lying under oath. All of which led to the formal charges for his impeachment by the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives impeached the president, a constitutional event trigger by a majority vote of its’ membership. The Senate did not find him guilty, a constitutional process terminated by a vote which fall short of the necessary two thirds majority of its’ membership. Both of these two votes coming down to expressions of political party lines. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of the constitutional process and an equally rudimentary mathematical capability would have come to the inescapable conclusion of ultimate failure of the process. Therefore the entire sequence of events must have had a different ultimate goal. I suggest the embarrassment of the president and theatre for the ultra right wing of the Republican Party as the real reasons.
President George W. Bush has said he fulfilled his commitment to the Texas National Guard. He said he would hunt down those responsible for the events of 9/11. He said we would get Osama bin Laden. He said Saddam Hussein had ties to Al Qaeda. He said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, both chemical and biological. He said Hussein was attempting to build atom weapons with the aluminum rods from Niger. He said he had nothing to do with the outing of a CIA operative. He said the war with Iraq would cost less than 50 billion dollars. He said Iraqi oil production would pay for the war. He said there would be less than 5000 American troops left in Iraq five years after the invasion. He said our troops would be welcomed with flowers in Iraq. He said the mission was successful and complete from the deck of an aircraft carrier. He had no plan for occupation of his conquered country. He has continually said the U. S. was winning the war in Iraq. He has been saying there is no civil war going on in Iraq. He has told our all-volunteer armed forces their tours of duty in Iraq would be twelve months. He has told them they would be allowed to stay home for at least one year in between tours of duty. If you have any questions regarding any of these assertions, I would suggest you watch Bill Moyers’ recently aired PBS special. Unless you believe everything you see on the documentary is smoke and mirrors, in which case I have some swamp land in Florida for sale…a facetious statement, I believe you’ll come away from the documentary with a different perspective.
The war in Iraq, which has still not been formally declared by vote of the Congress under constitutional mandate, is in its sixth year. More than 154,000 troops remain there. More than 3,200 Americans have died there. More than 16,000 have been wounded. Many of those include amputees and others who will suffer the effects of their wounds for the rest of their lives. Their deserved medical treatment and benefits will effect the national treasury and budget for the next seventy-five years or so. The Iraqi war has already cost in excess of one trillion dollars, $1,000,000,000,000.00. This figure does not include the necessary funds to replenish and repair the military hardware already used.
Which one of these two presidents is your guy?
President George W. Bush has said he fulfilled his commitment to the Texas National Guard. He said he would hunt down those responsible for the events of 9/11. He said we would get Osama bin Laden. He said Saddam Hussein had ties to Al Qaeda. He said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, both chemical and biological. He said Hussein was attempting to build atom weapons with the aluminum rods from Niger. He said he had nothing to do with the outing of a CIA operative. He said the war with Iraq would cost less than 50 billion dollars. He said Iraqi oil production would pay for the war. He said there would be less than 5000 American troops left in Iraq five years after the invasion. He said our troops would be welcomed with flowers in Iraq. He said the mission was successful and complete from the deck of an aircraft carrier. He had no plan for occupation of his conquered country. He has continually said the U. S. was winning the war in Iraq. He has been saying there is no civil war going on in Iraq. He has told our all-volunteer armed forces their tours of duty in Iraq would be twelve months. He has told them they would be allowed to stay home for at least one year in between tours of duty. If you have any questions regarding any of these assertions, I would suggest you watch Bill Moyers’ recently aired PBS special. Unless you believe everything you see on the documentary is smoke and mirrors, in which case I have some swamp land in Florida for sale…a facetious statement, I believe you’ll come away from the documentary with a different perspective.
The war in Iraq, which has still not been formally declared by vote of the Congress under constitutional mandate, is in its sixth year. More than 154,000 troops remain there. More than 3,200 Americans have died there. More than 16,000 have been wounded. Many of those include amputees and others who will suffer the effects of their wounds for the rest of their lives. Their deserved medical treatment and benefits will effect the national treasury and budget for the next seventy-five years or so. The Iraqi war has already cost in excess of one trillion dollars, $1,000,000,000,000.00. This figure does not include the necessary funds to replenish and repair the military hardware already used.
Which one of these two presidents is your guy?
Friday, April 13, 2007
What Price?
The United States government as opposed to the Bush administration is now telling American Fighting men and women that their tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to be lengthened to 15 months from the now stated 12 months. This length increase traded for a guarantee of 12 months at home in between tours. I was under the impression and so were a lot of soldiers they already got to stay home for twelve months between tours. Was the Bush administration lying then or now?
Who cares? I’m of the opinion that not enough of you do. You’re not volunteering for service so you don’t give a damn if other young men and women get to spend an extra three months in a combat zone. You’re not going over there, you have nothing to worry about, and you don’t have to dodge bullets or IEDs. You just keep putting three-dollar a gallon gas into your car and drive off to the movies.
How can you keep letting a small, dedicated group of people risk their lives in combat as you play video games in the safety of your living rooms? How do you justify that inequity to yourselves? How do you sleep at night? Apparently you can without any qualms and visions of sugarplums dancing in your head.
Last year in the U S approximately 45,000 people died in car accidents. Another 45,000 to 50,000 died as a result of a gunshot wound. 200,000 or so died from the effects of cancer. About that same number died from heart disease. Where are the wars to stop these killers of Americans? Far greater numbers die each year from these causes than died in the attacks of 911. Why have we the people let 3,200 and counting young Americans die in Iraq and Afghanistan?
What are you afraid of America? How did you get to this state? What are you willing to change in order for the betterment of all? Please, starting right now, require more personal involvement from yourselves and demand greater integrity from our government.
Who cares? I’m of the opinion that not enough of you do. You’re not volunteering for service so you don’t give a damn if other young men and women get to spend an extra three months in a combat zone. You’re not going over there, you have nothing to worry about, and you don’t have to dodge bullets or IEDs. You just keep putting three-dollar a gallon gas into your car and drive off to the movies.
How can you keep letting a small, dedicated group of people risk their lives in combat as you play video games in the safety of your living rooms? How do you justify that inequity to yourselves? How do you sleep at night? Apparently you can without any qualms and visions of sugarplums dancing in your head.
Last year in the U S approximately 45,000 people died in car accidents. Another 45,000 to 50,000 died as a result of a gunshot wound. 200,000 or so died from the effects of cancer. About that same number died from heart disease. Where are the wars to stop these killers of Americans? Far greater numbers die each year from these causes than died in the attacks of 911. Why have we the people let 3,200 and counting young Americans die in Iraq and Afghanistan?
What are you afraid of America? How did you get to this state? What are you willing to change in order for the betterment of all? Please, starting right now, require more personal involvement from yourselves and demand greater integrity from our government.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Choices
Congratulations to the Utahns for Public Schools political information committee on their success in gaining 130,000 signatures from Utahns who feel the School Voucher program passed by the legislature should be voted upon by the public. This grass roots, all volunteer group has passed the first hurdle the legislature placed in their path on the road to undoing the voucher bill. It seems to me that when the legislative body which is supposed to represent the people of the state puts roadblocks up to impede the democratic will of those people then maybe it’s time for new members of the legislative body.
Along those tines, I would like to paraphrase Mr. Lewis Black again, as I ask the internet commentator to the article in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning regarding this issue when he stated he was sure the measure would be passed in a referendum vote. “Where do you go to get the drugs which make you so delusional?” A vote on this issue will surely come down on the side of not spending taxpayer monies on private schools.
To the Parents for Choice in Education, the political action committee on the other side of this issue, you already have a choice. You can have your children attend public schools or send them to private ones. The choice is yours. The rest of us ARE NOT going to pay for your choice. Your arrogance in suggesting we do is staggering.
During my life I have made a number of choices that have had some high costs associated with the consequences of those choices. I have never asked any of you Parents for Choice in Education to help pay for any of my choices. Where do you find the nerve?
Along those tines, I would like to paraphrase Mr. Lewis Black again, as I ask the internet commentator to the article in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning regarding this issue when he stated he was sure the measure would be passed in a referendum vote. “Where do you go to get the drugs which make you so delusional?” A vote on this issue will surely come down on the side of not spending taxpayer monies on private schools.
To the Parents for Choice in Education, the political action committee on the other side of this issue, you already have a choice. You can have your children attend public schools or send them to private ones. The choice is yours. The rest of us ARE NOT going to pay for your choice. Your arrogance in suggesting we do is staggering.
During my life I have made a number of choices that have had some high costs associated with the consequences of those choices. I have never asked any of you Parents for Choice in Education to help pay for any of my choices. Where do you find the nerve?
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Miscellaneous Ramblings
I have been under the weather lately; that is, I somehow managed to lock my right shoulder while stretching out to pet one of our dogs. The pain, which started to manifest itself the next day, reached up into the 8.5 on a ten-point scale for me. I’ve visited my chiropractor twice and a pain management therapist trying to ease the pain and regain control of body movements. One of the things it literally hurt to do was type and move a computer mouse. The pain management therapist inquired about some of my habits and I mentioned this blog. She asked if I wrote with passion and I said I thought there was some of that in here. She then asked if it was passion with tension. I had to think about that for a moment and then realized she was correct. Therefore I will attempt to continue with logical passion minus any tension. But I am becoming aware of a tightening in my right shoulder trying to make me notice it.
First off, can’t thinking adults admit there is nothing wrong with the word Merlot? The recent flap over one man’s personal license plate using the word and another’s self righteous object is beyond me. In the opinions of both Lewis Black and George Carlin there are no dirty words. By the by, after tens years of use of said license plate hasn’t some sort of legal precedent be made? How does the State Tax Commission decide one plate’s worthiness and another’s non-worthiness? Is it at least two out of three votes against or does one person yield all that power? My brother indicates to me, based upon his professional professor status that his students have a completely different understanding of the term “milk shake” than you and I do. Do the students understand the meaning of these two harmless words in the context I think they do? If so, where are the word police?
To the Utahn with the under developed math skills who attempted to justify President Bush’s mid term removal of several federal prosecutors with President Clinton’s “mid term” removal of all sitting federal prosecutors on March 23 1993, my I remind mister wizard that President Clinton’s term started on January 20, 1993. Sixty days into his term, President Clinton cleaned house just like most Presidents have after taking office. This can hardly be deemed mid term. The real trouble here is not the firing of the prosecutors, but the reasons for the actions and any attempts to undermine the U S Justice Department by turning prosecution into a politically partisan exercise. By the way, isn’t lying about all of this under oath a federal offense? Isn’t that the reason they impeached President Clinton? Will you all take a closer look at this one?
How many of you have noticed George and Tony’s latest adventure. Two U S aircraft carrier groups off the coast of Iran are playing war games. Iran is holding fifteen British soldiers as captives. We have dueling GPS units establishing where said troops were when Iran detained them. I’ve always thought one of the military’s main goals was not to get captured by the bad guys. Not to be flip, but the report I saw of the detainees showed a group of young folks that looked like they were at a Friday night social. Where were the hard core military operatives who should have been tasked with this mission? Is it just me or is there something wrong with this picture?
That’s all for now. My back is indicating I’m not completely back in form.
First off, can’t thinking adults admit there is nothing wrong with the word Merlot? The recent flap over one man’s personal license plate using the word and another’s self righteous object is beyond me. In the opinions of both Lewis Black and George Carlin there are no dirty words. By the by, after tens years of use of said license plate hasn’t some sort of legal precedent be made? How does the State Tax Commission decide one plate’s worthiness and another’s non-worthiness? Is it at least two out of three votes against or does one person yield all that power? My brother indicates to me, based upon his professional professor status that his students have a completely different understanding of the term “milk shake” than you and I do. Do the students understand the meaning of these two harmless words in the context I think they do? If so, where are the word police?
To the Utahn with the under developed math skills who attempted to justify President Bush’s mid term removal of several federal prosecutors with President Clinton’s “mid term” removal of all sitting federal prosecutors on March 23 1993, my I remind mister wizard that President Clinton’s term started on January 20, 1993. Sixty days into his term, President Clinton cleaned house just like most Presidents have after taking office. This can hardly be deemed mid term. The real trouble here is not the firing of the prosecutors, but the reasons for the actions and any attempts to undermine the U S Justice Department by turning prosecution into a politically partisan exercise. By the way, isn’t lying about all of this under oath a federal offense? Isn’t that the reason they impeached President Clinton? Will you all take a closer look at this one?
How many of you have noticed George and Tony’s latest adventure. Two U S aircraft carrier groups off the coast of Iran are playing war games. Iran is holding fifteen British soldiers as captives. We have dueling GPS units establishing where said troops were when Iran detained them. I’ve always thought one of the military’s main goals was not to get captured by the bad guys. Not to be flip, but the report I saw of the detainees showed a group of young folks that looked like they were at a Friday night social. Where were the hard core military operatives who should have been tasked with this mission? Is it just me or is there something wrong with this picture?
That’s all for now. My back is indicating I’m not completely back in form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)