tmilanese Posted October 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 Exactly. I look forward to seeing you back Shearin and Carruth when I'm supporting Heath and Graves. Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 I look forward to seeing you back Shearin and Carruth when I'm supporting Heath and Graves. You know, if you guys would dump Paulette and promise to not support Shearin, I think we line up on most other issues. I mean really, Paulette? And Jerry was certainly pushing to get her in office. I would prefer to see all the cronies split up on both sides of the aisle so they never have the ability to "rubber stamp" their buddies' favorite projects again like back in the Shearin dictatorship. We might become big buddies before it is all said and done. Stranger things have happened. Animal and I became friends during the last election........ Link to post Share on other sites
surepip Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 You know, if you guys would dump Paulette and promise to not support Shearin, I think we line up on most other issues. I mean really, Paulette? And Jerry was certainly pushing to get her in office. I would prefer to see all the cronies split up on both sides of the aisle so they never have the ability to "rubber stamp" their buddies' favorite projects again like back in the Shearin dictatorship. We might become big buddies before it is all said and done. Stranger things have happened. Animal and I became friends during the last election........ Yes, wasn't that a hoot. Animal and I became friends as well.....he finally saw the light Don't worry Ithy, hell will freeze over before anyone with any sense will back Shearin again. The feathers from the last plate of crow are still stuck in my throat. You and Virginia and your AFP guys go at it. You got Paulette elected, and we can only hope she keeps her shoes on, at least during the session. God forbid she should work hard for her constituents. At least we have places like p.com to thank for allowing some to see the nitty-gritty on who is running, including Boykin! Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 The thing that got me so amused by this episode was the proverbial strangeness of bedfellows that is so characteristic of politics. I say that because in my interactions with Mr. Tingler, I would never have pegged him as an AFP stooge Oh, and I still don't. pubby PS: I was similarly amused by Mayor Austin's support for Nathan Deal in the recent gubernatorial contest including his introduction of the soon to be Governor in the Dallas Square during the GOP primary. Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 Things can get pretty wild when you are not so much "for" one candidate, but "against" another candidate. I can list way more that I am against than I am for. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
lotstodo Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 Things can get pretty wild when you are not so much "for" one candidate, but "against" another candidate. I can list way more that I am against than I am for. Bingo! Why is it that so many elected officials get into office and then tell us to drop our drawers? Is it really that hard to represent the wishes of the majority of your constituents? Paulette gets into office, keeps her mouth shut the entire session, votes in lockstep with the republican leadership, and then happily turns a third of her conservative district over to very liberal Democratic representation without so much as a whimper in order to garner favor not with her constituents, but with the powerful within her party. It's disgusting, and so typical as to go virtually unnoticed. Link to post Share on other sites
tmilanese Posted October 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2011 Anyone see CBS 46 outside of City Hall today? Link to post Share on other sites
LPPT Posted October 29, 2011 Report Share Posted October 29, 2011 Anyone see CBS 46 outside of City Hall today? Yep, searching and watching for whats up. nothing yet, you got any ideas? Link to post Share on other sites
NewsJunky Posted October 29, 2011 Report Share Posted October 29, 2011 Bingo! Why is it that so many elected officials get into office and then tell us to drop our drawers? Is it really that hard to represent the wishes of the majority of your constituents? Paulette gets into office, keeps her mouth shut the entire session, votes in lockstep with the republican leadership, and then happily turns a third of her conservative district over to very liberal Democratic representation without so much as a whimper in order to garner favor not with her constituents, but with the powerful within her party. It's disgusting, and so typical as to go virtually unnoticed. Maybe it won't go Democrat yet. I met a young man by the name of Michael Miller who has announced for District 66. He is on the BOE in Douglas County and he is an attorney. Very bright capable young man. Link to post Share on other sites
vslade Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Anyone see CBS 46 outside of City Hall today? Just wondering if you heard anything about this, what they were doing? Link to post Share on other sites
Animal Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 You know, if you guys would dump Paulette and promise to not support Shearin, I think we line up on most other issues. I mean really, Paulette? And Jerry was certainly pushing to get her in office. I would prefer to see all the cronies split up on both sides of the aisle so they never have the ability to "rubber stamp" their buddies' favorite projects again like back in the Shearin dictatorship. We might become big buddies before it is all said and done. Stranger things have happened. Animal and I became friends during the last election........ Geee thanks Link to post Share on other sites
vslade Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Did anybody else see it on tv? Link to post Share on other sites
NewsJunky Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Did anybody else see it on tv? See what? Link to post Share on other sites
vslade Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 See what? Channel 46 interviewed both of them. Link to post Share on other sites
NewsJunky Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Channel 46 interviewed both of them. I found it. Thanks. http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/15915595/mayors-race-in-small-city-of-dallas-turns-ugly Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 we understand that CBS 46 has picked up on the story about the Mayor calling Tingler's boss at GA Tech to complain that he is campaigning on state time/payroll. As Tingler's boss stated, that is not an issue at the institution. The funny thing is that if what I read in an op-ed in the NYTimes, had anyone at city hall had anything on the ball, they could have made a Hatch Act effort to block Tingler's challenge. See, the NYTimes says that incumbents are abusing an expansion of the Hatch Act (which limits activities of federal employees (and apparently others who receive money from the government through grants, etc.) to claim that the running for political office is a violation of that federal law. That venerable law has been used to force potentially good candidates to drop their efforts for local and state political races because of federal grants to local institutions like Fire Departments etc. prohibiting a local fireman from running for a school board position in some state in the east. The bottom line is that legal precedent not in place gives the employee/candidate a choice of either resigning their position to run - at least while they are running - or dropping out of the race in order to maintain their job. Here's the article. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/31/opinion/the-hatch-act-a-law-misused.html It was written by one of the government attorneys who is responsible for enforcing the law who says flatly the law needs to be changed because it is has been interpreted by the courts too broadly and is depriving local communities of bright, intelligent public figures and public servants. pubby Link to post Share on other sites
MarkPalm Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 I would never vote for Boyd Austin after reading his admission in that story. I guess it's good for him I can't vote in Dallas. Link to post Share on other sites
lotstodo Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Pubby if everyone who received a federal grant could not run, the Democrats couldn't field a candidate. Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Pubby if everyone who received a federal grant could not run, the Democrats couldn't field a candidate. Ya think? Remember that the GOP has basically been in control of Congress since January 1995 and if I were to line up the number of Republicans that like money and the number of bleeding heart Democrats; I do think the Republican line would be longer. And remember they weren't at all bashful about asking for things like hundred million dollar bridges to be built at public expense to private islands. pubby Link to post Share on other sites
EagleWings Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Ya think? Remember that the GOP has basically been in control of Congress since January 1995 and if I were to line up the number of Republicans that like money and the number of bleeding heart Democrats; I do think the Republican line would be longer. And remember they weren't at all bashful about asking for things like hundred million dollar bridges to be built at public expense to private islands. pubby And the democrats had it for 40 years prior to that so any line made by the repubs would look like the vegetable line at a school cafeteria. Link to post Share on other sites
tmilanese Posted November 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Another article has been published on this: http://dallas-hiram.patch.com/articles/austin-defends-inquiry-into-opponent-s-work-schedule “My goal was just to find out if he was working on taxpayer dollars. I’m one of those state taxpayers, I pay a significant portion of my income. I don’t begrudge anybody running, but I’m not going to pay for him or fund him. If there is nothing there, that’s fine—the question simply posed was ‘How do you know if somebody is on the clock?’ If they work from home, how do you know when they’re working for you and what they’re doing? I think it’s a valid question for anybody in business, and particularly in state government—if people are going to work from home, that we get the value for the dollars that we’re paying them, and that other duties and other things are not being neglected. And that’s exactly why the call was made.” “My concern is that if someone is going to talk about transparency and promote honesty and open government, then you need to make sure that applies equally to the person speaking as to the person they’re opposing,” Austin said. “So I did make the call and said, ‘I’d just like to verify that he is clocked out, that you have some way to verify that.’ It was not intended in any way to threaten him—it was more or less a watchdog for the taxpayers." “I think that certainly, that’s something that should be a concern to the taxpayers, and if it’s not an issue, if the records show otherwise, then that’s fine. But I thought the question needed to be raised,” Austin added." What's amazing is that Boyd expected G.T. to call him back and give him information about one of their employees. I guess basic H.R. Policies and Procedures are foreign to Mayor Austin. Can you imagine your employer investigating you based on a random call from someone and then your employer calls that random person back to report their findings? Give me a break. Boyd was throwing darts at the wall and one bounced back and hit him in the rear. Link to post Share on other sites
Lady Raider Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Looks like Austin is defending his reasoning for doing what he did.. Link to post Share on other sites
vslade Posted November 1, 2011 Report Share Posted November 1, 2011 Another article has been published on this: http://dallas-hiram.patch.com/articles/austin-defends-inquiry-into-opponent-s-work-schedule What's amazing is that Boyd expected G.T. to call him back and give him information about one of their employees. I guess basic H.R. Policies and Procedures are foreign to Mayor Austin. Can you imagine your employer investigating you based on a random call from someone and then your employer calls that random person back to report their findings? Give me a break. Boyd was throwing darts at the wall and one bounced back and hit him in the rear. And he don't campaign when he is supposed to be working?????????? Link to post Share on other sites
feelip Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 All political offices should have term limits. 16 years? Politicians are like diapers, they need changing regulary and for the same reason. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
vslade Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 All political offices should have term limits. 16 years? Politicians are like diapers, they need changing regulary and for the same reason. I totally agree. Link to post Share on other sites
Deepgreenlighting Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 Ya think? Remember that the GOP has basically been in control of Congress since January 1995 and if I were to line up the number of Republicans that like money and the number of bleeding heart Democrats; I do think the Republican line would be longer. And remember they weren't at all bashful about asking for things like hundred million dollar bridges to be built at public expense to private islands. pubby You know as well as I do that BOTH parties suck and both parties play with OUR money to buy votes. Some give it to corps that EMPLOY people and add to the GDP and others give it to the ones too lazy to work and contribute to our GDP. Its just the DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS that we disagree on. Both are guilty and are liars and we fight to protect and justify the liars instead of giving them term limits and stopping this madness. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
gpatt0n Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 You know as well as I do that BOTH parties suck and both parties play with OUR money to buy votes. Some give it to corps that EMPLOY people and add to the GDP and others give it to the ones too lazy to work and contribute to our GDP. Its just the DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS that we disagree on. Both are guilty and are liars and we fight to protect and justify the liars instead of giving them term limits and stopping this madness. I understand your feeling and attitude but what has me walking - no running - away from term limits is that putting new people that don't know the first thing about government and governing into office every two or four years does nothing but empower the bureaucrats whose task, it becomes, is to keep it together. What we have to do is come up with a way that empowers the politicians but keeps them transparent and honest. Right now, except for specific caucuses, there is no more pathetically unpowerful person than a Congressman. Only by association with others of like mind do they gain power. And while it is a pretty good job - pays well but does require a lot of overtime - keeping it is a challenge in fundraising. Hence the power of money in political parties and elections ... and that is where not only does transparency come into play, but campaign finance. That doesn't mean much in a local election but do know that if you look around at some of the changes that have happened, you'd swear that the Mayor had the wax removed from his ears when Marvin Tingler decided to run. Frankly, he's been a better mayor in the last year and we can all thank Mr. Tingler for that. Whether there will be enough people to vote for him in gratitude, I wouldn't hazard a guess but that things changed and things happened as a result is a good thing. I personally don't live in the city limit and can't vote. I will say Pcom did move but we didn't move out of Dallas ... just off the square. pubby Link to post Share on other sites
Deepgreenlighting Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 I understand your feeling and attitude but what has me walking - no running - away from term limits is that putting new people that don't know the first thing about government and governing into office every two or four years does nothing but empower the bureaucrats whose task, it becomes, is to keep it together. What we have to do is come up with a way that empowers the politicians but keeps them transparent and honest. Right now, except for specific caucuses, there is no more pathetically unpowerful person than a Congressman. Only by association with others of like mind do they gain power. And while it is a pretty good job - pays well but does require a lot of overtime - keeping it is a challenge in fundraising. Hence the power of money in political parties and elections ... and that is where not only does transparency come into play, but campaign finance. That doesn't mean much in a local election but do know that if you look around at some of the changes that have happened, you'd swear that the Mayor had the wax removed from his ears when Marvin Tingler decided to run. Frankly, he's been a better mayor in the last year and we can all thank Mr. Tingler for that. Whether there will be enough people to vote for him in gratitude, I wouldn't hazard a guess but that things changed and things happened as a result is a good thing. I personally don't live in the city limit and can't vote. I will say Pcom did move but we didn't move out of Dallas ... just off the square. pubby was thinking more of an 8 year term limit. This would allow all new guys and old guys and gals to be in a system a lot like the college football teams. There would be some Freshmen to SR's and this would allow for freshness in the system. If the system was too complicated they would be forced to simplify it and would make the changes needed quicker than having to wait 20 years for them. Im speaking of larger politics than just local. Local Mayors and all are ok with no term limits as they are small enough to actually have grass root uprisings easier and they are local to answer for their actions. Different when they spend 75% of their time in DC. Link to post Share on other sites
Nice Green Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 was thinking more of an 8 year term limit. This would allow all new guys and old guys and gals to be in a system a lot like the college football teams. There would be some Freshmen to SR's and this would allow for freshness in the system. If the system was too complicated they would be forced to simplify it and would make the changes needed quicker than having to wait 20 years for them. Im speaking of larger politics than just local. Local Mayors and all are ok with no term limits as they are small enough to actually have grass root uprisings easier and they are local to answer for their actions. Different when they spend 75% of their time in DC. I don't see how limiting someone's term would be conducive to our form of democracy as it stands now. Shouldn't one have the freedom to serve the public as long as he/she wants and is able to? Yes, the longer you're in the system, perhaps the more likely you are to learn how to game it, or the more likely you're in someone's pocket. But that doesn't mean newcomers can't be owned in the same way. If you have term limits, you're still going to have political parties and community and business leaders grooming their next candidates. So you still have candidates that can be or are influenced by those in power. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss," I think someone once said. Link to post Share on other sites
Mariposa Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 Historically, I don't think there is a huge pool of people who WANT to be mayor of Dallas. We have a couple of folks to choose from, but if you put term limits, you may run out of candidates at some point Link to post Share on other sites
rednekkhikkchikk Posted November 3, 2011 Report Share Posted November 3, 2011 Is it really that hard to represent the wishes of the majority of your constituents? Well yeah, when you're already so busy representing the highest bidder and your fellow politicians. Shouldn't one have the freedom to serve the public as long as he/she wants and is able to? Sure, now if we could just find someone more interested in serving the public than in enriching themselves. (The solution is actually to change the way we respond to the way campaigns are run and stop electing the ones with the most money or rewarding these clowns for turning the process into a mud-slinging contest - in other words, elect leaders and hold them accountable and rid ourselves of politicians. One need not be a politician to be a leader) Link to post Share on other sites
Lady Raider Posted November 3, 2011 Report Share Posted November 3, 2011 All political offices should have term limits. 16 years? Politicians are like diapers, they need changing regulary and for the same reason. I gave you a positive for that one after I was through laughing Link to post Share on other sites
LisaKW@bellsouth.net Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 Sure, now if we could just find someone more interested in serving the public than in enriching themselves. (The solution is actually to change the way we respond to the way campaigns are run and stop electing the ones with the most money or rewarding these clowns for turning the process into a mud-slinging contest - in other words, elect leaders and hold them accountable and rid ourselves of politicians. One need not be a politician to be a leader) It would also be nice if folks would stop voting for people based on the campaigner's last name or who they are/were married to... Link to post Share on other sites
stercus tauri Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 It does make me wonder if Mayor Austin has done this sort of thing before to people when he disagrees with them. Link to post Share on other sites
halo 2 Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 no has opposed him before i do not think. I like him as a person, he has been nice to me and listened to me and all. I simply wish the City the best in whomever they chose. I just hope to see PROGRESS in the city and i DO IN THE COUNTY AS WELL. WE NEED GROWTH Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now