Chesterfield Fireworks are coming early in 2010. No not at the Fairgrounds but at the Government Complex. The situation facing Chesterfield County regarding the financial shortfall facing the school system now pegged at some 40 million has created a turf war with local government.
Each cycle, we as citizens have an opportunity to cast votes for candidates for the Board of Supervisors and the School Board. The actual role and responsibility of these leaders seems pretty straightforward, however thats only when things are going well regarding the budgets. This is not the first time where our Supervisors, who hold the purse, have decided to interject its power over the School Board by basically trying to influence or better yet modify the School Boards budget to reflect what they want.
The problem for our current Board of Supervisors is this time around it is very ill-timed. Our nation is facing this issue at the Federal level where Washington is attempting to yeild unwarranted influence over banks and auto companies under the grounds that because bailouts came on the backs of taxpayers that they have this right. Its no different here in Chesterfield except the language is a bit different.
The Supervisors are taking the position that because they take in the revenues from taxpayers (the purse) and than distribute it to the School Board (now about 61% of the overall purse) that they should have some say as to how that money is spent by the School Board.
In fact Chairman Daniel Gecker of Midlothian says as much in his statement to school officials that the County (the Board of Supervisors)"does not intend to allocate more (funds)without complete agreement to how the funds will be spent".
Excuse me. I suspect that the Supervisors have their hands full with their own issues within their own budget than to someohw think that they to can tackle the School Board budget as well. I had not realized that we elected our Supervisors to oversee or better yet micromanage the School Boards budget as well eventhough we know that the Supervisors do "allocate" the funds to fund the school system.
Its like the bank loaning you the money but telling you that they will be overseeing exactly how you are spending it and if they do not like how you are using the funds than they simply will halt funding further.
Is this reasonable governance?
The fact remains that various studies and audits have been undertaken regarding the CCPS and in fact Chesterfield has been recognized as one of the most "efficient school systems in the country".
So why is the charge that the CCPS is being mismanaged andn if so why has there not been a push for the removal of Marcus Newsome who recently voluntarily reduced his salary by 15,000 or 7% in the new budget? Its because the Supervisors are blaming the State more so than the School Board. One of Gov. Kaine's last acts was to halt the payment of 25 million to the CCPS through the stimulus package; no doubt a political move given Chesterfield's historical conservative voting record. Doubtful Kaine would have undertaken the same positon for say an Arlington County.
The CCPS employs some 9,000 employees and currently educates just under 59,000 student. Newsome is recommending 3-4% pay reductions and eliminating 304 positions from the rolls and raising the classroom average by one student.
Gecker believes "that there are other items" that should be examined before he pupil/teacher ratio is raised. Maybe, Gecker would be willing to come clean with exactly what those measures should be.
I for one am a strong supporter of limited government and though I believe the CCPS have some opportunities before them as illustrated by the shortfall, I also firmly believe that had the Board of Supervisors not grossly mismanaged the growth in Chesterfield maybe our schools would not be facing such financial woes. Does the School Board control zonings and developments? Do they have any real power with regard to how the County plans the future?
Maybe if our Supervisors want to take over the School Boards responsibilty regarding budgeting, the School Board ought to have some say in what the Board of Supervisors does regarding planning given any decision they undertake directly impacts classrooms throughout the County. So they next time you read about the Board approving some development like Roseland, think about exactly how that may impact the School Board's long term planning as well.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Chesterfield County- The Future Begins With Us
While I am sure that most of us today were busy working today and taking care of our families and paid little attention to the follow-up to last nights State of the Union address, I urge all residents of Chesterfield to begin to focus their attention on matters of hand here in Chesterfield as opposed to Washington. I undertand that is a bit harder said than done given the twenty four hour news cycle concentrating on Washington but there are things afoot here in Chesterfield that could undermine our ability to continue to remain a First Choice Community.
The Board of Supervisors will release soon a targeted property tax rate to be debated that must be published before they can take up the matter in a mere two months. This published rate by law cannot be exceeded by vote but the rate certaibnly can be lower than the proposed publish rate if citizens get engaged.
The rate is important because recently the School Board has asked the BOCS to increase the property tax rate from 95 cents to 1.01 per $100 of assessed values. The justification for this increase is that such an increase would be revenue nuetral in that with the falling property assessments the amount paid by residents would roughly be the same as 2009. Such an increase would add some 19 million in tax revenue with the CCPS getting around 12 million.
This effort is meant to address the 40 to 50 million in budget cuts facing the School Board which is centered around a reduction in teacher ranks, establishing furloughs and potentially authorizing the elimination of school athletics saving 1.8 million.
These efforts are said to be essential in large part because the monies from the Federal Stimulus Package that were to be marked for schools (some 19 million) in Chesterfield was removed by then Governor Kaine.
Its time that residents get engaged. There is a growing conservative Tea Party group here in Chesterfield and I urge them to engage in this process and expose those leaders that have implemented gimmicks in order to please voters and passed unneccesary zonings to satisfy the special interests.
Many residents who challenged the current Board members for lowering the tax rate some two years ago are outraged. The very thing that many warned the members has happened. The time has come for these leaders to be held accountable and for conservatives to rally around each other and signal the beginning of the end for some of these members.
The Schools are a huge issue with regard to the County budget. Yes the CCPS should be fully audited and their budget completely overhauled in search of savings. There is absolutely no reason why the CCPS should be operating at levels exceeding State mandates. The high salary levels of top adminstrators both in and outside the CCPS is alrming. If the average adjusted gross income in Chesterfield is around 80K than some of these folks are earning 3 times that average in salary and car allowances. 3 times.
The fact that such car allowances are being sold as neccessary to attract top notch people is a dated and tired arguement. Are they telling us that the County cannot find anyone qualified in America willing to run CCPS for under 252K. I think its time that the CCPS and the BOCS get a big dose of reality from citizens.
Fact si there is plenty of blame to go around. Its not merely the CCPS fault for the shortfall in their budget. The BOCS shares a lions share of the responsibility. Members like Daniel Gecker from Midlothian have overseen in the last nine years the largest misguided growth pattern in the Chesterfield's history. The lack of defined comprehensive planning has resulted in unsustainable capacity levels that will require of schools to raise the number of students per classroom to over 30. Increasing the class size by a mere student is said to save the CCPS 112 teachers and some 6 million.
Why would raising these class level sizes be neccessary in the first place? Ill-conceived planning has created an environment where new schools must be built and older schools modernized faster than the amount of revenues can be collected to address these needs. The costs of construction skyrocketed in terms of new schools as well. Members like Gecker have been quoted has stating that any effort to focus money at the middle school level are unjustified and yet new middle schools have come on line and very well may continue to be required. Gecker while on the Planning Commisssion before joining the Board after the 2007 elections has directly contributed to the woes facing Chesterfield in terms of excessive capacity in the housing market driving down home values and requiring the neccessary adjustments to cash proffers in the coming years whether he believes in them or not. The County had the opportunity to raise the cash proffer levels to comparable standards of other Virginia localities with similar growth rates, but members like Gecker did not support an increase to the proposed level and forced a lower rate all be it higher than the previous years. The fact that the CCPS is facing capacity concerns is a direct result of approving zonmings for areas without the capacity to support children in the classrooms. This forces hastily planned school constrcution to meet the demands and creates an environment where Chesterfield families face new school boundaries and potentially school shuffling.
Its simple. You do not permit housing developments in areas where there are no seats in the classrooms for students. Obviously these leaders failed to get the message in Field of Dreams- "If you build it, they will come". Well, they built it and now our schools are taxed as well as our infrastructure and in particular our roadways. Traffic is at its highest levels as well as vehicular accidents and yet still the Board continues to approve more developments.
Will residents accept that fact that the CCPS may have to eliminate school athletics? I mean, how can we reconcile the fact that we are saying that our young people are out of shape, many obese and at the same time take away such programs that promote the very best things in our youth; health, teambuilding, and respect for authority. Its as if they are saying that the 1.8 million has no real "benefit" to our children.
I would support for sure the ability for parents to pay for their children to participate in sports. I think the case can be made that it makes little sense to require all residents to pay for such programs anymore than it makes sense for all of us to pay for other peoples healthcare as proposed in Washington. There needs to be a shared responsibility between the County adn citizens if we want to keep these programs and a big start would be the ability for volunteer coaches and assistants to come from outside the CCPS system. Should we be pay higher salaries for teachers willing to coach neccessarily if we can get volunteer coaches from our community? Should we be willing to eliminate programs before taking a look at administrative salaries? Should our teachers be the frontline casualties first?
We as citizens have some very hard questions to face in terms of the direction we want Chesterfield to go. It must start with us and not the leaders in the backrooms. We must demand that programs that we believe benefit our children and our communities be funded and those that seem to merely benefit government be eliminated. There is no reason we should be spending funds on government facilities like new courtrooms, new adminstrative buildings, new libraries when another one already open can maintain the traffic when we need a focused laser on schools and public safety.
There will be plenty of opportunity in the coming weeks for citizens to get engaged. Will you join us or sit back and let Chesterfield begin to fall behind the curve. The future of Chesterfield is in our hands.
The Board of Supervisors will release soon a targeted property tax rate to be debated that must be published before they can take up the matter in a mere two months. This published rate by law cannot be exceeded by vote but the rate certaibnly can be lower than the proposed publish rate if citizens get engaged.
The rate is important because recently the School Board has asked the BOCS to increase the property tax rate from 95 cents to 1.01 per $100 of assessed values. The justification for this increase is that such an increase would be revenue nuetral in that with the falling property assessments the amount paid by residents would roughly be the same as 2009. Such an increase would add some 19 million in tax revenue with the CCPS getting around 12 million.
This effort is meant to address the 40 to 50 million in budget cuts facing the School Board which is centered around a reduction in teacher ranks, establishing furloughs and potentially authorizing the elimination of school athletics saving 1.8 million.
These efforts are said to be essential in large part because the monies from the Federal Stimulus Package that were to be marked for schools (some 19 million) in Chesterfield was removed by then Governor Kaine.
Its time that residents get engaged. There is a growing conservative Tea Party group here in Chesterfield and I urge them to engage in this process and expose those leaders that have implemented gimmicks in order to please voters and passed unneccesary zonings to satisfy the special interests.
Many residents who challenged the current Board members for lowering the tax rate some two years ago are outraged. The very thing that many warned the members has happened. The time has come for these leaders to be held accountable and for conservatives to rally around each other and signal the beginning of the end for some of these members.
The Schools are a huge issue with regard to the County budget. Yes the CCPS should be fully audited and their budget completely overhauled in search of savings. There is absolutely no reason why the CCPS should be operating at levels exceeding State mandates. The high salary levels of top adminstrators both in and outside the CCPS is alrming. If the average adjusted gross income in Chesterfield is around 80K than some of these folks are earning 3 times that average in salary and car allowances. 3 times.
The fact that such car allowances are being sold as neccessary to attract top notch people is a dated and tired arguement. Are they telling us that the County cannot find anyone qualified in America willing to run CCPS for under 252K. I think its time that the CCPS and the BOCS get a big dose of reality from citizens.
Fact si there is plenty of blame to go around. Its not merely the CCPS fault for the shortfall in their budget. The BOCS shares a lions share of the responsibility. Members like Daniel Gecker from Midlothian have overseen in the last nine years the largest misguided growth pattern in the Chesterfield's history. The lack of defined comprehensive planning has resulted in unsustainable capacity levels that will require of schools to raise the number of students per classroom to over 30. Increasing the class size by a mere student is said to save the CCPS 112 teachers and some 6 million.
Why would raising these class level sizes be neccessary in the first place? Ill-conceived planning has created an environment where new schools must be built and older schools modernized faster than the amount of revenues can be collected to address these needs. The costs of construction skyrocketed in terms of new schools as well. Members like Gecker have been quoted has stating that any effort to focus money at the middle school level are unjustified and yet new middle schools have come on line and very well may continue to be required. Gecker while on the Planning Commisssion before joining the Board after the 2007 elections has directly contributed to the woes facing Chesterfield in terms of excessive capacity in the housing market driving down home values and requiring the neccessary adjustments to cash proffers in the coming years whether he believes in them or not. The County had the opportunity to raise the cash proffer levels to comparable standards of other Virginia localities with similar growth rates, but members like Gecker did not support an increase to the proposed level and forced a lower rate all be it higher than the previous years. The fact that the CCPS is facing capacity concerns is a direct result of approving zonmings for areas without the capacity to support children in the classrooms. This forces hastily planned school constrcution to meet the demands and creates an environment where Chesterfield families face new school boundaries and potentially school shuffling.
Its simple. You do not permit housing developments in areas where there are no seats in the classrooms for students. Obviously these leaders failed to get the message in Field of Dreams- "If you build it, they will come". Well, they built it and now our schools are taxed as well as our infrastructure and in particular our roadways. Traffic is at its highest levels as well as vehicular accidents and yet still the Board continues to approve more developments.
Will residents accept that fact that the CCPS may have to eliminate school athletics? I mean, how can we reconcile the fact that we are saying that our young people are out of shape, many obese and at the same time take away such programs that promote the very best things in our youth; health, teambuilding, and respect for authority. Its as if they are saying that the 1.8 million has no real "benefit" to our children.
I would support for sure the ability for parents to pay for their children to participate in sports. I think the case can be made that it makes little sense to require all residents to pay for such programs anymore than it makes sense for all of us to pay for other peoples healthcare as proposed in Washington. There needs to be a shared responsibility between the County adn citizens if we want to keep these programs and a big start would be the ability for volunteer coaches and assistants to come from outside the CCPS system. Should we be pay higher salaries for teachers willing to coach neccessarily if we can get volunteer coaches from our community? Should we be willing to eliminate programs before taking a look at administrative salaries? Should our teachers be the frontline casualties first?
We as citizens have some very hard questions to face in terms of the direction we want Chesterfield to go. It must start with us and not the leaders in the backrooms. We must demand that programs that we believe benefit our children and our communities be funded and those that seem to merely benefit government be eliminated. There is no reason we should be spending funds on government facilities like new courtrooms, new adminstrative buildings, new libraries when another one already open can maintain the traffic when we need a focused laser on schools and public safety.
There will be plenty of opportunity in the coming weeks for citizens to get engaged. Will you join us or sit back and let Chesterfield begin to fall behind the curve. The future of Chesterfield is in our hands.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
On Haiti
Don't get me wrong, we all feel a sense on compassion for the plight of the Haitian people as they pull themselves and their nation up out of this disaster, but it really begs the question if our politicians ever really truly get things right when its a tragedy is no longer frontpage news.
I can remember when buddies of mine serving in the U.S. Army and Marines back in the 90's were task with assisting in places like Haiti, Liberia, and Somolia and it was always the same political story. It was a hot button issue as long as it was on the front page of the Wapo or NY Times, but as soon as the light on the country dimmed so did the focus of our government. If you were in any of thoese countries, it is hardly a surprise that even though many have contributed large amounts of money over the years that progress has been slow and slower. Bill Clinton's influence notwithstanding.
I can't help but see how the politicos twist themselves over and over about the right way to spin these things. Think Katrina for a second. I cannot recall the massive international relief effort for one thing as we have seen in Haiti and I really also do not recall such a massive undertaking by Hollywood in this nation to raise money for our own people in a post-Katrina environment. Its as if these folks believe that our government should take care of our own and that places like Haiti and the Far Eastern Tsunami plaqued areas deserve all of their fundraising efforts. It really makes you wonder about the mentality of people whose sole livelihood is derived from our people more or less and yet seem so content with using their money and reputation which can be leveraged to raise more money for so many other causes than the ones here at home.
Again, do not get me wrong. What many of these celebrities are doing is honorable and commendable. I just wonder how many of them will continue to step up say six months down the road when this disaster will be off the radar and its not "in" thing to do in Hollywood.
If you do not think it will happen, there are plenty of examples to look at where the media drowns us in images for a period of time and than neglects to after story....Iraq for one. Katrina for another. Except of course if they can make some political assertion to cast the other side in some bad light.
I could not help be be floored whe I saw the pundits on MSNBC try and portray civilian contractors who would go in to Haiti to stabilize and help rebuild the nation as "profiteers" like they did to many in Iraq and still do in Afghanistan. Apparently, Jeremy Scahill (resident MSNBC loon) has some kind of vendetta against contractors because he still has not retracted his stories rooted in falsehoods about the involvement of Blackwater contractors at Nissor Square who were cleared. In fact, Scahill virtually anoints those insurgents that killed Blackwater contractors in Fallujah, Iraq as heroes. Scahill this time around as brought in by MSNBC to comment on Haiti takes his anti-contractor rhetoric to new levels when he asserts that those Blackwater contractors that went into New Orleans during Katrinia were nothing more than a militia of hired thugs. Funny thing is it was these former policeman and military veterans that were task with creating a sense of order when many in the New Orleans police failed to report for duty during the crisis. Instead of going after those idiots who abandoned their own citizens, Scahill and the liberal media goes after the remedy that never would have been required had these officers not abandoned their posts.
Scahill's efforts to distort and manipulate details to his own end is not new to MSNBC as Maddow and Olbermann routinely engage in such commentary--just see Olbermann tirade over MA-Senator Scott Brown. The effort is to create an environment where the government will be forced to end its use of private contractors, but instead grow the actual size of government by creating such areas within our agencies to formulate its own ranks to perform such endeavors. This is classic liberal doctrine.
The lack of admission by these liberal pundits that the very reason Iraq has been a non-issue in large part is do to the work of these contractors who still to this day outnumber our military forces in both Iraq and now Afghanistan.
What does it say to people like Scahill,Maddow and Olbermann that even Obama recognizes the value of these contractors to perform highly skilled functions in country that our military could not. Of course, no admission as to why our military could not respond accordingly came in the wake of eight years of President Clinton desimating our armed forces as his basis for balancing the federal budget. Those of us downsized in the 90's during this purge know the truth. Spin it as they may.
Now in Haiti, these pundits want to make it hard for the White House to send contractors to to the effort in Haiti. Its amazing to me that these people just have no clue about the real politics at work. Just like in Afghanistan, if Obama can send 30K trooops but send 200K contractors through contracts with private and public firms why would he want to send 80K or more military forces and face the backlash? Contractors are a political end and have been a decade or more now.
With all the celebrity assistance, the telethons, the texts donations.....eventually the question will have to be how BEST to put those funds to work on the ground in Haiti. If the past is an example of whats to come, they could be in for a long road in Haiti in terms of true re-building.
I can remember when buddies of mine serving in the U.S. Army and Marines back in the 90's were task with assisting in places like Haiti, Liberia, and Somolia and it was always the same political story. It was a hot button issue as long as it was on the front page of the Wapo or NY Times, but as soon as the light on the country dimmed so did the focus of our government. If you were in any of thoese countries, it is hardly a surprise that even though many have contributed large amounts of money over the years that progress has been slow and slower. Bill Clinton's influence notwithstanding.
I can't help but see how the politicos twist themselves over and over about the right way to spin these things. Think Katrina for a second. I cannot recall the massive international relief effort for one thing as we have seen in Haiti and I really also do not recall such a massive undertaking by Hollywood in this nation to raise money for our own people in a post-Katrina environment. Its as if these folks believe that our government should take care of our own and that places like Haiti and the Far Eastern Tsunami plaqued areas deserve all of their fundraising efforts. It really makes you wonder about the mentality of people whose sole livelihood is derived from our people more or less and yet seem so content with using their money and reputation which can be leveraged to raise more money for so many other causes than the ones here at home.
Again, do not get me wrong. What many of these celebrities are doing is honorable and commendable. I just wonder how many of them will continue to step up say six months down the road when this disaster will be off the radar and its not "in" thing to do in Hollywood.
If you do not think it will happen, there are plenty of examples to look at where the media drowns us in images for a period of time and than neglects to after story....Iraq for one. Katrina for another. Except of course if they can make some political assertion to cast the other side in some bad light.
I could not help be be floored whe I saw the pundits on MSNBC try and portray civilian contractors who would go in to Haiti to stabilize and help rebuild the nation as "profiteers" like they did to many in Iraq and still do in Afghanistan. Apparently, Jeremy Scahill (resident MSNBC loon) has some kind of vendetta against contractors because he still has not retracted his stories rooted in falsehoods about the involvement of Blackwater contractors at Nissor Square who were cleared. In fact, Scahill virtually anoints those insurgents that killed Blackwater contractors in Fallujah, Iraq as heroes. Scahill this time around as brought in by MSNBC to comment on Haiti takes his anti-contractor rhetoric to new levels when he asserts that those Blackwater contractors that went into New Orleans during Katrinia were nothing more than a militia of hired thugs. Funny thing is it was these former policeman and military veterans that were task with creating a sense of order when many in the New Orleans police failed to report for duty during the crisis. Instead of going after those idiots who abandoned their own citizens, Scahill and the liberal media goes after the remedy that never would have been required had these officers not abandoned their posts.
Scahill's efforts to distort and manipulate details to his own end is not new to MSNBC as Maddow and Olbermann routinely engage in such commentary--just see Olbermann tirade over MA-Senator Scott Brown. The effort is to create an environment where the government will be forced to end its use of private contractors, but instead grow the actual size of government by creating such areas within our agencies to formulate its own ranks to perform such endeavors. This is classic liberal doctrine.
The lack of admission by these liberal pundits that the very reason Iraq has been a non-issue in large part is do to the work of these contractors who still to this day outnumber our military forces in both Iraq and now Afghanistan.
What does it say to people like Scahill,Maddow and Olbermann that even Obama recognizes the value of these contractors to perform highly skilled functions in country that our military could not. Of course, no admission as to why our military could not respond accordingly came in the wake of eight years of President Clinton desimating our armed forces as his basis for balancing the federal budget. Those of us downsized in the 90's during this purge know the truth. Spin it as they may.
Now in Haiti, these pundits want to make it hard for the White House to send contractors to to the effort in Haiti. Its amazing to me that these people just have no clue about the real politics at work. Just like in Afghanistan, if Obama can send 30K trooops but send 200K contractors through contracts with private and public firms why would he want to send 80K or more military forces and face the backlash? Contractors are a political end and have been a decade or more now.
With all the celebrity assistance, the telethons, the texts donations.....eventually the question will have to be how BEST to put those funds to work on the ground in Haiti. If the past is an example of whats to come, they could be in for a long road in Haiti in terms of true re-building.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Snake Oil Liberalism- Part I
In looking back on the decade that has just past, it is growingly apparent that though the Democrats sit in power of this great land they have lost their souls. Not all "Democrats" however apear willing to to fall into the abyss of liberalism and are beginning to pull back. These Democrats are those mostly residing in the South, who have never actually been truly aligned with the Northeastern brand of Liberalism that permeates the Democrat Party. Many of these Dixiecrats and Conservative Democrats are more closely related with the moderate policies of say a Bill Clinton than the vastly liberal ones of a Barrack Obama.
We also have to examine the transition undergone by the platform of the Democrats itself. How many self-professed "progressives" were there at the beginning of the last decade in Congress? Now, like so many things in the Democrat Party the leadership appears content with attaching itself to whats hip or cool in the short term. Afterall, the term "liberal" had pretty much taken the worst beating of any political philosophy from a pure publicity standpoint. Even the leadership of the Party must admit that its purely a stunt to have these leadrrs who have been in Congress for decades to suddenly shift in thought to a "progressive" view of the world.
Fact is these leaders have not shifted. Its a muse. Like so much in Washington its smoke and mirrors. Its Liberalism with a nice shiny coat of lipstick. And Snake Oil Liberalism at that. The selling of this new foundation of the Party has hit one very big hurdle with the Party elite; America ain't buying. The polling is demonstrating that the Party is losing any opportunity to capitalize on its power and further demonstrates that Democrats are not programed as a Party apparatus to lead. Instead, Democrats are more established as the opposition party and that role is better suited for them. Why?
If you paid attention this last decade, Democrats do better with a villain, a target, or frankly just someone to blame for everyone's lot in life. They have shown in 2009 that they are ill-suited to be the Party in power and can't seem to get it together in terms of agenda. The reason for this is the Democrats "big tent" mantra creates splinter elements all the way up the leadershop ladder who have allegiances to varying elements. An example of this is easily demonstrated over the so called "public option" coupled with the issues regarding abortion funding in the health care bill.
I mentioned early on about the Dixiecrats or Southern New Democrats whom are mostly conservative and are reffered in Congress as "blue dogs" will have a huge cross to bear in coming years if they do not withdraw support for this administrations agenda. The result if they fail to do will be catastrophic to them both individually and to the South as well. You see, "blue dogs" will have to face the growing momentum of liberals in the Party to take a very hard look at gun control in the next year or so. It does not take a political genius to recognize that Southerns love their guns. What will the conservatives in the Party do when the Obama folks circle the wagons on this issue and expect all Democrats to deliver reform of gun rights and laws?
Snake Oil policy thats what. They will placate the liberals with the notion of gun reform all the while hoping to rope in the conservatives with some watered down policy that will inch the country closer and closer to the British model. Afterall, the Progressives seek to model America after the failed state of Europe with every policy they have sought to implement. This of course smacks of denying our own history and the principles upon which our great nation was founded.
The heros are not the Washingtons, Jeffersons, or the Madisons but rather the radicals of the Progressive movement of the turn of the century in the eyes of the leadership in Washington today. They have sought to change the very education our youth experience by focusing more on "causes" than on history. They seek to create a disconnect with performance, individuality and goal setting and replace it with more of a greater dependence on society. They have sought to create a collective community and have been using the educational system as a sword to do so. They started first with the removal of Christian elements, ending the pledge of allegiance and of course attempted to remove any reference of God in coursework or celebration in an attempt to create a more collective community; a more sympathetic environment for the minority and one where it is more important to heed the offenses of others than promote the truth of our Founding Fathers and the true heritage of this country.
During the last decade we have seen that these Progressive appear to be engaging in a "de-americanization" process of our government. They have done so buy attemtping to grant even more power to central government, which is exactly what our Founding Fathers warned against. They have sought to expand roles of Fed policy and left the Fed unchecked all the while telling America that it was the lack of regulation that created the most recent crisis in our economy. They have sought to target Wall Street as the great evil and yet never appear to want to tackle the fact that in Texas its big oil, in California its Silicon Valley that have as must political weight as Wall Street where the average worker brings in around 75K a year. Again they have created a target to illustrate why it is that their policy should be followed and yet everyone of the principle players in Obama's house has ties to this "evil" and come directly from the lions den of Wall Street. An industry by the way that contributed more to Obama's campaign in 2008 than to McCain and one located in the state of New York which leans highly liberal in ideology and voting historically.
Again, Snake Oil Liberalism.
We also have to examine the transition undergone by the platform of the Democrats itself. How many self-professed "progressives" were there at the beginning of the last decade in Congress? Now, like so many things in the Democrat Party the leadership appears content with attaching itself to whats hip or cool in the short term. Afterall, the term "liberal" had pretty much taken the worst beating of any political philosophy from a pure publicity standpoint. Even the leadership of the Party must admit that its purely a stunt to have these leadrrs who have been in Congress for decades to suddenly shift in thought to a "progressive" view of the world.
Fact is these leaders have not shifted. Its a muse. Like so much in Washington its smoke and mirrors. Its Liberalism with a nice shiny coat of lipstick. And Snake Oil Liberalism at that. The selling of this new foundation of the Party has hit one very big hurdle with the Party elite; America ain't buying. The polling is demonstrating that the Party is losing any opportunity to capitalize on its power and further demonstrates that Democrats are not programed as a Party apparatus to lead. Instead, Democrats are more established as the opposition party and that role is better suited for them. Why?
If you paid attention this last decade, Democrats do better with a villain, a target, or frankly just someone to blame for everyone's lot in life. They have shown in 2009 that they are ill-suited to be the Party in power and can't seem to get it together in terms of agenda. The reason for this is the Democrats "big tent" mantra creates splinter elements all the way up the leadershop ladder who have allegiances to varying elements. An example of this is easily demonstrated over the so called "public option" coupled with the issues regarding abortion funding in the health care bill.
I mentioned early on about the Dixiecrats or Southern New Democrats whom are mostly conservative and are reffered in Congress as "blue dogs" will have a huge cross to bear in coming years if they do not withdraw support for this administrations agenda. The result if they fail to do will be catastrophic to them both individually and to the South as well. You see, "blue dogs" will have to face the growing momentum of liberals in the Party to take a very hard look at gun control in the next year or so. It does not take a political genius to recognize that Southerns love their guns. What will the conservatives in the Party do when the Obama folks circle the wagons on this issue and expect all Democrats to deliver reform of gun rights and laws?
Snake Oil policy thats what. They will placate the liberals with the notion of gun reform all the while hoping to rope in the conservatives with some watered down policy that will inch the country closer and closer to the British model. Afterall, the Progressives seek to model America after the failed state of Europe with every policy they have sought to implement. This of course smacks of denying our own history and the principles upon which our great nation was founded.
The heros are not the Washingtons, Jeffersons, or the Madisons but rather the radicals of the Progressive movement of the turn of the century in the eyes of the leadership in Washington today. They have sought to change the very education our youth experience by focusing more on "causes" than on history. They seek to create a disconnect with performance, individuality and goal setting and replace it with more of a greater dependence on society. They have sought to create a collective community and have been using the educational system as a sword to do so. They started first with the removal of Christian elements, ending the pledge of allegiance and of course attempted to remove any reference of God in coursework or celebration in an attempt to create a more collective community; a more sympathetic environment for the minority and one where it is more important to heed the offenses of others than promote the truth of our Founding Fathers and the true heritage of this country.
During the last decade we have seen that these Progressive appear to be engaging in a "de-americanization" process of our government. They have done so buy attemtping to grant even more power to central government, which is exactly what our Founding Fathers warned against. They have sought to expand roles of Fed policy and left the Fed unchecked all the while telling America that it was the lack of regulation that created the most recent crisis in our economy. They have sought to target Wall Street as the great evil and yet never appear to want to tackle the fact that in Texas its big oil, in California its Silicon Valley that have as must political weight as Wall Street where the average worker brings in around 75K a year. Again they have created a target to illustrate why it is that their policy should be followed and yet everyone of the principle players in Obama's house has ties to this "evil" and come directly from the lions den of Wall Street. An industry by the way that contributed more to Obama's campaign in 2008 than to McCain and one located in the state of New York which leans highly liberal in ideology and voting historically.
Again, Snake Oil Liberalism.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
State Sen. Steve Martin(R- 11th)Facebook & New Media
We all know that New Media has become all the rage and in recent years has been leveraged by the political community to organize, fundraise and simply to spread the word regarding issues. That said, what many local leaders are learning is that new media platforms like Twitter and Facebook provide a level of access to voters that in the past was virtually unheard of.
So whats the problem?
Well, access means accountability and such accountability is something all to often our leaders shy away from. We are seeing this in Washington, Richmond and now apparently Chesterfield where leaders must come up to speed on the true nature of New Media taking into consideration the good and the bad.
To voters transparency and access is never abad thing. To Party insiders and various politicians such access can create opportunities for gaffes and embarrassing events that can come back and haunt them come election time. A fine line always must be walked.
For example, in recent days the Army Col. Van T. Barfoot (Ret)story has hit national news wires regarding the Colonel's battle with his Homeowners Association over the placement of a 21 foot flagpole in his yard, which violates certain restrictions within the HOA .
Local State Senator Steve Martin(R-Chesterfield, Colonial Heights), in an effort to bring support to Colonel Barfoot's plight decided to bring the matter up by posting on his Facebook page alerting his some 3,600 friends and followers of his support for the Colonel. But in doing so, the State Senator enters that gray area of having to engage those who follow him on Facebook whom may have a different take on the issue. Afterall, while many people would support the Colonel in his efforts given his service, I doubt those same people would want their next door neighbor to erect a 21 foot flagpole in their front yard.
Afterall, as pointed out in the Martin thread regarding the Colonel's challenge Martin represents a large portion of growing Chesterfield County. This growth has been spurned by many large developments like Charter Colony, Magnolia Green, Roseland, Hallseley, Harpers Mill, Hampton Park, Woodlake, Brandermill and the list goes on that for the most part all of some Homeowner's Association rules or restrictions upon property owners within the developments. Usually, these restrictions or covenants are approved before closing on a property otherwise if a potential buyer does not agree with such rules they can forget ever closing. In addition each month these HOA fees paid by property owners each month further reinforce the contract they have to to abide by such restrictions.
Sen. Martin apparently believes that in the case of Col. Barefoot that the contract he entered into with his HOA is meaningless given the background of the party concerned and the fcat that Col. Barefoot is a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient. Martin even blasts followers on his page for mistakingly using the term "winner" instead of recipient in a harsh manner, but only apparently to single out those that appear to challenge his view on the matter. The use of "winner" is fairly common with those not familar with the honor or the military. Instead of merely taking a second to educate, Martin took the opportunity to throw a jab.
I say "appear" because Martin apparently singles out those that ask for a simple clarification on his position. Instead of clarifying Senator Martin engages in claims of rudeness and disrespect towards his position and merely appears to stand off posting his positon other than to say look at his record.
Martin has been the Senator for the 1tth since 1994 and before that was in the House of Delegates.
So last I checked Sen. Martin was indeed an elected official. Not only is he answerable to the people but it is our duty as citizens to seek from our leaders exactly what their postions are and why they see them the manner in which they do. Apparently, Senator Martin does not subscribe to this view. Martin was simply asked to clarify position of matters regarding the flagpole controversy.
If you read Sen. Martin Facebook post he fails to adequately describe the full matter regarding the issue. He states that the Colonle is a personal friend so one has to weigh that with any judgement, but the matter at hand has nothing to do with banning the flag. Martin seesm to subscribe to the herd mentality of such a controversy in that as patriotic Americans we all think that recipients of the CMOH probaly should be able to do whatever they want to do in terms of the flag.
But in reality, as a comment alluded to on the Martin Facebook page we are all or at least are all supposed to be equal under the law. A contractual obligation or commitment is legally binding regardless of who the party involved is or whether they are a CMOH recipient or not.
Many of you who comment here are veterans and we all share a big place in our hearts for all our vets and all those in the armed services, but even Sen. Martin knows this issue has nothing to do with the CMOH nor does it have anything to do with the flying of our Stars and Stripes, but has to do with the construction of a 21 foot flagpole by which to fly that flag.
I dam sure know that Col. Barefoot has earned my respect, but that does not change the fact that if he were leaving in many other developments throughout Chesterfield he would be violating the HOA rules as well with the construction of the pole in the front yard.
The issue is not who Col. Barefoot is but rather does his pole violate the HOA restrictions. It should not matter as posted on Martin's Facebook page who the person is with regard to the manner in which this issue is resolved and as much respect and compassion we have for Col. Barefoot's fight we all know if it were one of us we would not be able to keep the pole without avoiding a lawsauit costing us thousands of dollars.
What I find rather interesting is a local leader engaging the debate through Facebook with followers, but than when the discussion ventures into analysis of the issue seeks to ridicule and even ask for commentors to cease commenting on his page. In essence, if you do not agree with me and my views stay off the page.
Gee, does Senator Martin represent all the citizens in the 11th or just those that agree with him?
After evaluating the comments, I fail to see anyone acting out of line at all let alone being "disrespectful" or rude. In fact, people appear to be going out of theri way not to offend people by qualifying statements and even a few stating that they are sorry but they see it differently.
Frankly, these leaders must grasp both the pros and cons of New Media. Its a good thing Senator Martin is not a blogger because he very well may be too sensitive for that media genre. The blogosphere is brutal, but if you are going to put yourself out there on Facebook for constituents you had better be a bit more thick skinned than this issue has demonstrated.
Afterall, if you have the opportunity to check it out and if you live in the 11th it may be of interest for you to see just how your State Senator engages voters. I assume the majority of his friends are indeed voters or at the very least Republicans from the area.
I took a gander at some other local leaders and it appears to Sen. Martin's credit he Facebooks much more than most in the area.
In the end, I hope that Col. Barefoot is successful in having that flagpole restriction removed not just himself but for all residents in his community if of course that is the concensus of those living in that community.
So whats the problem?
Well, access means accountability and such accountability is something all to often our leaders shy away from. We are seeing this in Washington, Richmond and now apparently Chesterfield where leaders must come up to speed on the true nature of New Media taking into consideration the good and the bad.
To voters transparency and access is never abad thing. To Party insiders and various politicians such access can create opportunities for gaffes and embarrassing events that can come back and haunt them come election time. A fine line always must be walked.
For example, in recent days the Army Col. Van T. Barfoot (Ret)story has hit national news wires regarding the Colonel's battle with his Homeowners Association over the placement of a 21 foot flagpole in his yard, which violates certain restrictions within the HOA .
Local State Senator Steve Martin(R-Chesterfield, Colonial Heights), in an effort to bring support to Colonel Barfoot's plight decided to bring the matter up by posting on his Facebook page alerting his some 3,600 friends and followers of his support for the Colonel. But in doing so, the State Senator enters that gray area of having to engage those who follow him on Facebook whom may have a different take on the issue. Afterall, while many people would support the Colonel in his efforts given his service, I doubt those same people would want their next door neighbor to erect a 21 foot flagpole in their front yard.
Afterall, as pointed out in the Martin thread regarding the Colonel's challenge Martin represents a large portion of growing Chesterfield County. This growth has been spurned by many large developments like Charter Colony, Magnolia Green, Roseland, Hallseley, Harpers Mill, Hampton Park, Woodlake, Brandermill and the list goes on that for the most part all of some Homeowner's Association rules or restrictions upon property owners within the developments. Usually, these restrictions or covenants are approved before closing on a property otherwise if a potential buyer does not agree with such rules they can forget ever closing. In addition each month these HOA fees paid by property owners each month further reinforce the contract they have to to abide by such restrictions.
Sen. Martin apparently believes that in the case of Col. Barefoot that the contract he entered into with his HOA is meaningless given the background of the party concerned and the fcat that Col. Barefoot is a Congressional Medal of Honor recipient. Martin even blasts followers on his page for mistakingly using the term "winner" instead of recipient in a harsh manner, but only apparently to single out those that appear to challenge his view on the matter. The use of "winner" is fairly common with those not familar with the honor or the military. Instead of merely taking a second to educate, Martin took the opportunity to throw a jab.
I say "appear" because Martin apparently singles out those that ask for a simple clarification on his position. Instead of clarifying Senator Martin engages in claims of rudeness and disrespect towards his position and merely appears to stand off posting his positon other than to say look at his record.
Martin has been the Senator for the 1tth since 1994 and before that was in the House of Delegates.
So last I checked Sen. Martin was indeed an elected official. Not only is he answerable to the people but it is our duty as citizens to seek from our leaders exactly what their postions are and why they see them the manner in which they do. Apparently, Senator Martin does not subscribe to this view. Martin was simply asked to clarify position of matters regarding the flagpole controversy.
If you read Sen. Martin Facebook post he fails to adequately describe the full matter regarding the issue. He states that the Colonle is a personal friend so one has to weigh that with any judgement, but the matter at hand has nothing to do with banning the flag. Martin seesm to subscribe to the herd mentality of such a controversy in that as patriotic Americans we all think that recipients of the CMOH probaly should be able to do whatever they want to do in terms of the flag.
But in reality, as a comment alluded to on the Martin Facebook page we are all or at least are all supposed to be equal under the law. A contractual obligation or commitment is legally binding regardless of who the party involved is or whether they are a CMOH recipient or not.
Many of you who comment here are veterans and we all share a big place in our hearts for all our vets and all those in the armed services, but even Sen. Martin knows this issue has nothing to do with the CMOH nor does it have anything to do with the flying of our Stars and Stripes, but has to do with the construction of a 21 foot flagpole by which to fly that flag.
I dam sure know that Col. Barefoot has earned my respect, but that does not change the fact that if he were leaving in many other developments throughout Chesterfield he would be violating the HOA rules as well with the construction of the pole in the front yard.
The issue is not who Col. Barefoot is but rather does his pole violate the HOA restrictions. It should not matter as posted on Martin's Facebook page who the person is with regard to the manner in which this issue is resolved and as much respect and compassion we have for Col. Barefoot's fight we all know if it were one of us we would not be able to keep the pole without avoiding a lawsauit costing us thousands of dollars.
What I find rather interesting is a local leader engaging the debate through Facebook with followers, but than when the discussion ventures into analysis of the issue seeks to ridicule and even ask for commentors to cease commenting on his page. In essence, if you do not agree with me and my views stay off the page.
Gee, does Senator Martin represent all the citizens in the 11th or just those that agree with him?
After evaluating the comments, I fail to see anyone acting out of line at all let alone being "disrespectful" or rude. In fact, people appear to be going out of theri way not to offend people by qualifying statements and even a few stating that they are sorry but they see it differently.
Frankly, these leaders must grasp both the pros and cons of New Media. Its a good thing Senator Martin is not a blogger because he very well may be too sensitive for that media genre. The blogosphere is brutal, but if you are going to put yourself out there on Facebook for constituents you had better be a bit more thick skinned than this issue has demonstrated.
Afterall, if you have the opportunity to check it out and if you live in the 11th it may be of interest for you to see just how your State Senator engages voters. I assume the majority of his friends are indeed voters or at the very least Republicans from the area.
I took a gander at some other local leaders and it appears to Sen. Martin's credit he Facebooks much more than most in the area.
In the end, I hope that Col. Barefoot is successful in having that flagpole restriction removed not just himself but for all residents in his community if of course that is the concensus of those living in that community.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
2020: Three Parties- Republican, Democrat & Conservative Party
If the history of political parties is any indication than it may just be time for the American political landscape to once again expand. There were always offshoots or breakaways within history, but its been quite some time since we have seen it in reality. And no Ross Perot does not count.
Seeing as how the Democrats are under the control of the liberal arm of the Party they are certainly becoming the modern day "Do Nothing Party" since gaining control of both houses of Congress. What they are proposing to do will force the right of the Party known as blue dog conservatives further away from them. The GOP which the media left for dead last year is regrouping, but it is apparent its intent is to consolidate much of the social conservative elements of the Party over that of the fiscal conservatives or even the moderates.
Independents will remain stuck right at the center of the political landscape BUT if things keep rolling the way they are on the ground level and Congress keeps acting as if they live in the Beltway Bubble conservatives and moderates on both sides may be forced to leave both parties by 2020.
A Conservative Party could be born in America. The question remains just who would make up that Party. Would it be the Palin conservatives, the Gingrich conservatives or some other force yet to have taken the reigns. Will the GOP be purely the social conservative party or will it be the social conservatives who leave the GOP fold to form the Conservative Party.
Alot could hinge on the 2012 election IMHO. If Sarah Palin is not given the level of respect a former Vice President selection should be given that may lead to a big rift between the grassroots of the GOP and the insiders that frankly control the Party. Lets face it, the insiders and media elite control much of the primary process, whether you are talking about coverage, fundraising or even the debate schedules.
Stay tuned. There is growing discontent with both Parties at an all time high. Throw in universal healthcare, cap and tax, rising income taxes and you have a recipe for political disaster for the two established Parties. Right now they have little fear of a third party movement, but that could change over the next ten years.
Of course, a large part of a true Conservative Party movement would require a ton of money!!!
Seeing as how the Democrats are under the control of the liberal arm of the Party they are certainly becoming the modern day "Do Nothing Party" since gaining control of both houses of Congress. What they are proposing to do will force the right of the Party known as blue dog conservatives further away from them. The GOP which the media left for dead last year is regrouping, but it is apparent its intent is to consolidate much of the social conservative elements of the Party over that of the fiscal conservatives or even the moderates.
Independents will remain stuck right at the center of the political landscape BUT if things keep rolling the way they are on the ground level and Congress keeps acting as if they live in the Beltway Bubble conservatives and moderates on both sides may be forced to leave both parties by 2020.
A Conservative Party could be born in America. The question remains just who would make up that Party. Would it be the Palin conservatives, the Gingrich conservatives or some other force yet to have taken the reigns. Will the GOP be purely the social conservative party or will it be the social conservatives who leave the GOP fold to form the Conservative Party.
Alot could hinge on the 2012 election IMHO. If Sarah Palin is not given the level of respect a former Vice President selection should be given that may lead to a big rift between the grassroots of the GOP and the insiders that frankly control the Party. Lets face it, the insiders and media elite control much of the primary process, whether you are talking about coverage, fundraising or even the debate schedules.
Stay tuned. There is growing discontent with both Parties at an all time high. Throw in universal healthcare, cap and tax, rising income taxes and you have a recipe for political disaster for the two established Parties. Right now they have little fear of a third party movement, but that could change over the next ten years.
Of course, a large part of a true Conservative Party movement would require a ton of money!!!
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Loupassi, Ware & O'Bannon Retain House Seats & McDonnell Rolls
Without the turnout numbers from the City coming to pass like last Fall, incumbants M. Loupassi and John O'Bannon win re-election to the House of Delegates. Loupassi's challenger Bill Grogan will likely come in with about 30% and O'Bannon's challenger Tom Shields is estimated to come in with about 40% of the voter once all have reported.
Turnout of course is always a big issue in these off cycle elections and it appears as though turnout was greatest with the older demographic and the younger demographic was well off the 22% turnout number from last Fall. Turnout for the African-American vote that traditionally supports Democrat candidates was well off the highs of last year and will likely show up in the data in the Governors race where Bob McDonnell has won handily over Creigh Deeds along with Bolling and Cuccinelli.
More to follow.
Turnout of course is always a big issue in these off cycle elections and it appears as though turnout was greatest with the older demographic and the younger demographic was well off the 22% turnout number from last Fall. Turnout for the African-American vote that traditionally supports Democrat candidates was well off the highs of last year and will likely show up in the data in the Governors race where Bob McDonnell has won handily over Creigh Deeds along with Bolling and Cuccinelli.
More to follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
