In a news article in the Times-News it was announced that all the charges were dropped against Sonny Alt. Not only were the charges dismissed, they were dismissed with prejudice. Prejudice implies coming to a judgement on the subject based on false beliefs.
Many people in the community believed all along that Sonny Alt was falsely accused, now the court system seems to agree. Sonny falls in the same category as the Duke Lacrosse Team. Where does he go to get his reputation back? Who do you ask to fix all the damage done to his reputation by the false accusations?
What about the voters, how should they respond? In 2004 Sonny Alt was elected to serve a 6-year term as County Clerk, so now we have disenfranchised voters because he was removed from office based on false accusations.
There were people in Mineral County ready to tar and feather Sonny based on rumor and hearsay, but in today's world you get tried and convicted in the court of public opinion. Mike Nifong even when he knew the accusations were false, refused to drop the case of apologize. The Duke Lacrosse team eventually got a public apology from the North Carolina Attorney General, because he did the honorable thing when when nobody else would. Who will be the first in Mineral County government to do the honorable thing and publicly apologize to Sonny Alt for the damage done to his reputation?
Friday, May 25, 2007
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Memorial Day Tidings to the Troops From Rockefeller and the Left in Congress
If you criticize someone when they deserve it, you also ought to take time and praise someone. Although I disagree with Senator Robert Byrd's spoken position on the Iraq theatre of the War on Terror, it must be pointed out that his most recent vote, with the majority against cutting off funds for the war on a certain date, was for the troops. Left wing congressional Democrats have tried to undercut our troops by delaying or even halting funding for them while they still serve in the field. Byrd's vote does not indicate a change of mind so much as it demonstrates that he does not want our troops left without the tools they need to fight. Hopefully it also means that he does not support cutting out in such a humiliating fashion.
Right now left wing congressional Democrats have no concern for America's fighting men and women. They have no concern for those that have supported us and believed in us in Iraq who will suffer greatly if we leave prematurely (or come to the US in large numbers looking for assylum.) They have no concern for America's leadership position in the world, which recent European elections have shown is at a very high level right now. Count Senator Rockefeller among these people.
Except for a handful this stand does not reflect principle, but politics. They see certain opinion polls and change their stripes to reflect what they consider to be the popular mood. Many published polls show a minority supporting the war. Less publicized polls also show that most Americans do not support leaving prematurely. Rockefeller has probably not seen them. He voted for the war, but then claimed he did not understand the information presented to him as ranking Senate member on the Intelligence Committee.
Rockefeller knows that he is vulnerable, but he does not understand that this vote may have killed him should a strong and well-funded opponent appear. With so many West Virginians in the Iraq theatre needing the essentials to fight and do the job we sent them to do, Senator Rockefeller voted to cut off their funds. This will send a loud and clear message that the West Virginia GOP should make sure every West Virginian hears by next fall.
Unfortunately the message from this vote, taken so close to the day when we are supposed to honor our fighting men, sends a message to our enemies as well. It tells them to hang in there just a little longer. Unless moderate, patriotic Democrats and Republicans stand firm, the left wingers can win the war for the terrorists.
Right now left wing congressional Democrats have no concern for America's fighting men and women. They have no concern for those that have supported us and believed in us in Iraq who will suffer greatly if we leave prematurely (or come to the US in large numbers looking for assylum.) They have no concern for America's leadership position in the world, which recent European elections have shown is at a very high level right now. Count Senator Rockefeller among these people.
Except for a handful this stand does not reflect principle, but politics. They see certain opinion polls and change their stripes to reflect what they consider to be the popular mood. Many published polls show a minority supporting the war. Less publicized polls also show that most Americans do not support leaving prematurely. Rockefeller has probably not seen them. He voted for the war, but then claimed he did not understand the information presented to him as ranking Senate member on the Intelligence Committee.
Rockefeller knows that he is vulnerable, but he does not understand that this vote may have killed him should a strong and well-funded opponent appear. With so many West Virginians in the Iraq theatre needing the essentials to fight and do the job we sent them to do, Senator Rockefeller voted to cut off their funds. This will send a loud and clear message that the West Virginia GOP should make sure every West Virginian hears by next fall.
Unfortunately the message from this vote, taken so close to the day when we are supposed to honor our fighting men, sends a message to our enemies as well. It tells them to hang in there just a little longer. Unless moderate, patriotic Democrats and Republicans stand firm, the left wingers can win the war for the terrorists.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Andrew Jackson, Alive and Kicking
Why do Democrats call their yearly dinners “Jefferson-Jackson Day?” Seems to me that the Republican or Libertarian parties have more claim on both of these men’s positive legacies than the Democrats.
********************************************************************************
Andrew Jackson is alive and well in American politics and both political parties have failed to recognize him. He was President Bush’s biggest ally in his two victories. Who will he support in 2008?
Of course this doesn’t mean that President Jackson is literally here stumping for his favorite candidates. However his legacy lives on, especially in areas such as West Virginia. In 1828 and again in 1832 Andrew Jackson won the presidency due to the support of the rural backcountry common people. He won because he shared their values. Their frontier upbringing taught them the necessity of a strong national defense. However they also shared a strong distrust for the major institutions of big government and big business. They feared that either of these two elements of the American system could threaten their liberties.
The supporters of Jackson cherished their liberties which included the right to pursue and keep property, the right to defend their property by force, the right to speak openly and freely and exercise their full political rights. Jacksonian Democracy lives on in the rural South. Often Jacksonians are belittled for being reactionary in their defense of individual liberty because others see that kind of freedom as standing in the way of what they define as progress. Since Jacksonians often are poor or have some experience in that condition, they understand that when liberties are curtailed in the name of “progress,” the vulnerable usually end up exploited.
Thus we have the phenomenon of a state like West Virginia that has voted Republican in presidential races and Democratic on the state level. Jacksonian voters mistrust the big government ideals backed by national Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama. They also fear the stereotype of Republicans as the party of big business (which is further from the truth than most people realize. For the most part, Republicans believe in capitalist competition as opposed to simply support of big business.) Who will “Jackson” support in 2008? Most likely the presidential and other candidates that have the most respect for liberty and freedom.
********************************************************************************
Andrew Jackson is alive and well in American politics and both political parties have failed to recognize him. He was President Bush’s biggest ally in his two victories. Who will he support in 2008?
Of course this doesn’t mean that President Jackson is literally here stumping for his favorite candidates. However his legacy lives on, especially in areas such as West Virginia. In 1828 and again in 1832 Andrew Jackson won the presidency due to the support of the rural backcountry common people. He won because he shared their values. Their frontier upbringing taught them the necessity of a strong national defense. However they also shared a strong distrust for the major institutions of big government and big business. They feared that either of these two elements of the American system could threaten their liberties.
The supporters of Jackson cherished their liberties which included the right to pursue and keep property, the right to defend their property by force, the right to speak openly and freely and exercise their full political rights. Jacksonian Democracy lives on in the rural South. Often Jacksonians are belittled for being reactionary in their defense of individual liberty because others see that kind of freedom as standing in the way of what they define as progress. Since Jacksonians often are poor or have some experience in that condition, they understand that when liberties are curtailed in the name of “progress,” the vulnerable usually end up exploited.
Thus we have the phenomenon of a state like West Virginia that has voted Republican in presidential races and Democratic on the state level. Jacksonian voters mistrust the big government ideals backed by national Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama. They also fear the stereotype of Republicans as the party of big business (which is further from the truth than most people realize. For the most part, Republicans believe in capitalist competition as opposed to simply support of big business.) Who will “Jackson” support in 2008? Most likely the presidential and other candidates that have the most respect for liberty and freedom.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
What's Fashionable Isn't Always Fair
It's been fashionable for a long time to bash Wal Mart. To some the retail giant presents an easy target. It started in a poor Southern state and grew from one small general store to become one of the largest chains in the world, an all-American success story. Wal Mart caters to the average American, especially those in rural and suburban areas.
Along the way, Wal Mart eliminated many of its rivals. We don't see many G. C. Murphy Marts or Ben Franklins anymore. Low prices, high variety, and an ability to respond to what the market desired meant that Wal Mart succeeded where smaller chains and a lot of small businesses failed, giving more fodder to its critics. This is the American way too. Those that can serve the market best succeed while others adapt or disappear.
Did Wal Mart wipe out small town downtowns? I remember when I was growing up in Ripley in the 1980s, for a time that happened. Ben Franklin and O.J. Morrison's Department store went out of business because they sold the same items at higher prices. However in Ripley and other areas, downtowns rebounded. Small businesses emerged that satisfied more specific market niches. The new small town economy in many areas has seen a more vibrant array of businesses as a result.
Wal Mart serves local communities in other ways. It provides a strong tax anchor for local government and reliable levels of employment. Certainly the wages are not going to enable the workers to buy a Bentley and critics love to point this out. However, like McDonalds and other service jobs with major companies, adavncement is an option to those willing to learn and work hard. Companies with large organizations such as these provide opportunities that G. C. Murphy and O. J. Morrison could not.
Wal Mart also strives to serve communities as a good corporate citizen. On May 19th in Moorefield, Wal Mart is hosting a customer and military appreciation day with all proceeds going to children's charities. I remember a classmate receiving a full college scholarship from Wal Mart because he never missed a day of class. These types of things are discounted or ignored by critics.
As with a lot of similar situations, Wal Mart bashing reflects a deeper attitude because the chain represents capitalism. Its rise from nothing to prominence in a generation proves that anything is still possible in a capitalist America given hard work, ability and the willingness to take risks. Capitalism and success ought not be dirty words. They should be ideals that guide anyone, like Sam Walton, that dares to dream big.
Along the way, Wal Mart eliminated many of its rivals. We don't see many G. C. Murphy Marts or Ben Franklins anymore. Low prices, high variety, and an ability to respond to what the market desired meant that Wal Mart succeeded where smaller chains and a lot of small businesses failed, giving more fodder to its critics. This is the American way too. Those that can serve the market best succeed while others adapt or disappear.
Did Wal Mart wipe out small town downtowns? I remember when I was growing up in Ripley in the 1980s, for a time that happened. Ben Franklin and O.J. Morrison's Department store went out of business because they sold the same items at higher prices. However in Ripley and other areas, downtowns rebounded. Small businesses emerged that satisfied more specific market niches. The new small town economy in many areas has seen a more vibrant array of businesses as a result.
Wal Mart serves local communities in other ways. It provides a strong tax anchor for local government and reliable levels of employment. Certainly the wages are not going to enable the workers to buy a Bentley and critics love to point this out. However, like McDonalds and other service jobs with major companies, adavncement is an option to those willing to learn and work hard. Companies with large organizations such as these provide opportunities that G. C. Murphy and O. J. Morrison could not.
Wal Mart also strives to serve communities as a good corporate citizen. On May 19th in Moorefield, Wal Mart is hosting a customer and military appreciation day with all proceeds going to children's charities. I remember a classmate receiving a full college scholarship from Wal Mart because he never missed a day of class. These types of things are discounted or ignored by critics.
As with a lot of similar situations, Wal Mart bashing reflects a deeper attitude because the chain represents capitalism. Its rise from nothing to prominence in a generation proves that anything is still possible in a capitalist America given hard work, ability and the willingness to take risks. Capitalism and success ought not be dirty words. They should be ideals that guide anyone, like Sam Walton, that dares to dream big.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Reforming Apathy in City Elections
If the idea of city government affairs does not fill you with excitement, anticipation, or joy, don’t feel too bad. You are not alone.
This spring, a little over 100 voters turned out for Morgantown’s municipal elections. One hundred voters electing the leadership of the most dynamic city in the state that by 2020 could be the largest. In contrast, West Virginia University has classes with over 300 students. Charleston’s upcoming elections will fare better, already 653 took advantage of early voting. However, Election Day turnout is expected to be paltry with a popular Republican incumbent and a Democratic nominee that has not even campaigned.
Why bother and why care? Local government has more direct effect on the lives of citizens and business than the state or federal systems. Locally the parking issue in Keyser probably brought more people to city council meetings than actually voted for council and mayor in Morgantown. Particularly frightening is the election in that city. Almost any idiot (or in the case of Morgantown, perhaps a Communist) can round up a hundred people to vote for them. Then you get stuck with at best incompetence, at worse corruption. Either situation does not attract continued development and progress.
Ben Beakes of the Secretary of State’s office recommends that each municipality piggyback its elections with those for the county and state. Not only will this increase turnout, but Beakes also states that less need for poll workers and buying ballots in larger bulk saves money. Many West Virginia cities have adopted these measures already.
Voting in city elections makes as much sense as participating in those with larger stakes. A larger turnout can ensure that an extreme or corrupt candidate does not hijack the local government. Each voter gives his or her local government a fighting chance to keep moving their city ahead.
This spring, a little over 100 voters turned out for Morgantown’s municipal elections. One hundred voters electing the leadership of the most dynamic city in the state that by 2020 could be the largest. In contrast, West Virginia University has classes with over 300 students. Charleston’s upcoming elections will fare better, already 653 took advantage of early voting. However, Election Day turnout is expected to be paltry with a popular Republican incumbent and a Democratic nominee that has not even campaigned.
Why bother and why care? Local government has more direct effect on the lives of citizens and business than the state or federal systems. Locally the parking issue in Keyser probably brought more people to city council meetings than actually voted for council and mayor in Morgantown. Particularly frightening is the election in that city. Almost any idiot (or in the case of Morgantown, perhaps a Communist) can round up a hundred people to vote for them. Then you get stuck with at best incompetence, at worse corruption. Either situation does not attract continued development and progress.
Ben Beakes of the Secretary of State’s office recommends that each municipality piggyback its elections with those for the county and state. Not only will this increase turnout, but Beakes also states that less need for poll workers and buying ballots in larger bulk saves money. Many West Virginia cities have adopted these measures already.
Voting in city elections makes as much sense as participating in those with larger stakes. A larger turnout can ensure that an extreme or corrupt candidate does not hijack the local government. Each voter gives his or her local government a fighting chance to keep moving their city ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)