Pick a Side

October 30, 2005

There’s nothing funny about it, folks. Whether they are truly just paranoiac conspiracy theorists or witting tools of a criminal political machine, there is an element at large determined to poison the atmosphere of political discussion and to stifle free speech.

It’s unfortunate that they also seem to have been smoking dope when they should have been paying attention in English class. Their composition skills, incredibly, are even worse than their reasoning skills.

The Hon. Maury Goldberg, the former city council member for the 3rd District, has attempted to give us a history of the atrocious management of New Albany’s sanitation department. Speaking loutly, if incoherently, certain elements have willingly misinterpreted these histories to support their own miserable preconceptions.

How anyone could possibly take what Mr. Goldberg reports and twist it to support a belief that trash collection user fees are “propping up” the city’s sewer utility operations is beyond me.

Mr. Goldberg is earnestly seeking answers. He clearly favors a solution to our sanitation problems that would necessitate a 50% increase in user fees. That’s a solution that I believe, after 15 years of an ongoing subsidy from the general fund and other fund accounts, is untenable. Nonetheless, I do believe MG is being intellectually honest, no matter how much I may disagree.

For one thing, New Albany is the home of a large proportion of residents on fixed incomes. Proportionally, this city has a large number of lower-income residents and an out-of-proportion number of elderly single-person households who do not have the ability to shoulder the burden of a trash-collection fee of $21 a month.

No one, least of all the cave-dwelling troglodytes, has made a convincing case that maintaining sanitation as a purely civic service is worth the cost to our fixed- and limited-income population.

No, the psychotic strain spews the canard that the only explanation is greed, corruption and an inherent desire to harm the community.

I, and many, many others are here to make the case that the current administration is demonstrating courage by addressing an intractable problem that has plagued this city for nigh unto a generation. The sanitation operations of this city have been so miserably mismanaged, with no easy solution in sight, that the only choice is to consider contracting this service to a private company.

Adhering to core principles of accountability and recognizing the valuable contributions made to municipal services by the current workforce, this mayor has continued to make the continued employment of the existing employees a priority. James Garner has not once descended to the tactic of criticizing the work ethic of the current workforce.

Of course, he will not be given credit for retaining these jobs. Political enemies will cast this as a callous betrayal of public employees. Reasonable people, however, will see that there has been nothing hasty or callous about the mayor’s course of action.

His plan maintains municipal control over the level of service. His plan strives to keep a maximum number of current workers employed. Furthermore, his plan fulfills the city’s obligation to the cooperative venture that is the Clark-Floyd landfill.

Continuation of services is jeopardized by the ongoing obstruction by the Gang of Four. As requests for proposals issue this week, the mayor and his administration are committed to the absolute minimum of job losses (the preference is zero job losses) and to maintaining our obligations to utilize the community landfill operations.

It is clear that opponents either don’t understand the basic mathematics of fund accounting or that they are committed to a political agenda to keep the city operating inefficiently.

It is beyond ironic that the mayor’s opponents claim to be champions of the “little people” while insisting that the poorest of our citizens carry the burden of a provably inefficient sanitation operation.

There is no question but that 50 years of outrageous cronyism and preferential treatment would give rise to such an unreasoned anger and vitriol. What’s most ironic, however, is that those who decry it most strenuously are ignoring the first, best chance to destroy the machine that has perpetuated this abomination of government accountability.

At long last, New Albany has a reform mayor, a mayor who is willing to disrupt the old boy network no matter the political cost. Those criminal and near-criminal elements who assumed that Garner would be “their boy” are angry and embittered. Clumsily, but evidently, they have enlisted a cadre of already disillusioned citizens to do their dirty work.

Whether that dirty work involves disinformation (the Schmidt modus operandi), craven populism and self-evident disdain of every communitarian instinct (the Price modus operandi), pure ignorance (the Coffey modus operandi), or naked political calculation (the Kochert M.O.), it is drawing the attention of the citizenry.

New Albanians are not stupid. They may have, in the past, paid little attention to the day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month machinations of city government. That day has passed.

Citizens are paying attention. They see who is seeking to move this city forward. They see who is making the tough decisions. They see who is timid and who is bold.

And now, the desperation of Garner’s political opponents has ramped up to a fever pitch. No tactic is beneath them. Slander is but the poisoned tip of their arrows. They do not hesitate to employ any tactic. These vandals, these Klansmen, these Nazis, see their hegemony threatened by a mayor who will not submit to their direction. They see an awakened constituency no longer accepting of an attitude of “it’s always been this way.”

New Albanians will not be cowed by criminal violence. They will not be fooled by crackpots pressing an agenda of racism, religious persecution, theocracy, homophobia, and xenophobia. They will react. They will reject the appeal to nativism and intolerance. They will, no matter which party banner it marches under, declare a preference. Choose YOUR side very carefully.


Democratic Party Dinner a Triumph

October 28, 2005

It was a grand night at The Grand for America’s oldest continuous political party and their Floyd County adherents. A happier bunch I’ve never seen as everyone involved seemed to be on the same page.

Baron Hill, our member of Congress until this year, made it very clear that he intends to reclaim that seat for the Democrats. Few House seats generate $4 million in outside funding, but the GOP elected to pour that much into the Ninth District to help take the seat away from the Democratic Party. Hill reports that, somewhat to his surprise, the Democrats aren’t disillusioned by the loss, but energized, and that the party will reclaim its rightful stewardship of the Congressional office.

In his first real public exposure, county chairman Randy Stumler was appealing, even endearing, in what turned out to be a highly motivating lovefest.

With the national Republican party imploding and the local Republican party still rudderless, there is great cause for optimism as we approach the 2006 national and local county elections.

CM Donnie Blevins was his usual taciturn self, joining two groups of Hurricane Katrina evacuees at Mayor James Garner’s front row table.

For the record, this observer noted not one moment of discord or dispute, even among intraparty opponents. The celebration of the legacy of FDR was the centerpiece, and the party was one in reasserting its principles. Thanks go out to Judge Joe Weber for his masterful recap of the Roosevelt philosophy.

Perhaps embarrassed to show their faces after their performance during 2005, the Gang of Four, all putative Democrats, elected to show their back ends to a party that’s more than ready to leave them behind. Go ahead and make that party switch, guys. I’m sure there’s nothing Franklin Delano Roosevelt can teach you. After all, “we’ve nothing to fear but fear itself” is a slogan completely at odds with your style of politics.

CM Jack Messer and his lovely wife were a big hit, drawing praise from all quarters for his fearless stance against the obstructionist Gang of Four during the past 12 months. County Council President Ted Heavrin exhibited an esprit de corps seldom seen and spent most of the evening with a smile on his face. And the ever gracious New Albany Township Trustee added to the spirit of the evening.

The new party central committee pulled off a great event, mixing new blood with all the active stalwarts Floyd County has come to know and love.

Great job, Randy, Marcey, Tony, Adam and all the organizing committee. You put together a stirring program that bodes well for the future of the party.

And we would be remiss if we did not give kudos to Steve and Bill Lohmeier for their inspiring rendition of Woody Guthrie’s “This Land is Your Land,” modified to represent the true spirit of Guthrie.


Self or Community?

October 27, 2005

The American Ideal – is it the embodiment of “rugged individualism,” where the citizenry is encouraged to be self-centered, or does it institutionalize a belief that we are one people with common goals. Here’s one woman’s opinion.

This, I believe.

I believe that our Constitution is the most unique document in the world because it is about society; creating a more just and equal society, for all people. – Our Preamble begins with the words We, the people, not I, the individual. America’s Constitution, introduced by our most unique Preamble, was meant to bring a new order of relations among people.

I believe that we must strive to provide conditions which are beneficial for our society, and for our posterity; that is a good life – a life well lived; so that after you are gone- you will be remembered for the good that you have done.

This nation was formed to change forever the relationship of people to each other; to create true justice, equality, liberty and happiness; that a life worth living is one of giving of one’s self, for in that alone do we find true happiness

I believe that money is only a tool, and even that distinction is a given; Value, real wealth, does not flow from paper, or gold or possessions, but from economic activity. Economics is not price theories. Economics is about people; the value of human beings.

Government is not legitimate unless it truly encompasses and protects the lives of people – all the people. Government needs a well-organized, well regulated money system – but the money system must be intended to meet the requirements of society’s security; as Roosevelt’s successful Social Security system typifies this.

I believe that our Founding Principles have been perverted by those whose power is challenged by our greatest Principle – the General Welfare clause of our United States Constitution. We must rise to the challenge, as Roosevelt did, of crushing those intentions.

We will never fulfill the ideals that guided our founders hands in writing our Constitution by succumbing to greed and arrogant power. We must rise to the occasion by uplifting, inspiring, and invigorating our fellow man to act truly human toward all people. The ‘advantage of the other’ must be our guiding principle.

This, I believe: I believe that this nation and its people will return to our founding principles – to government of, by, and for the people. The world is headed for a new rendezvous with destiny, for as the immortal Schiller said, “There are limits to a tyrant’s power.” We are working for a Global New Deal for all mankind.

- Carol Smith


An FDR Day Message to the Gang of Four

October 27, 2005

“They Sow the Wind, and Reap the Whirlwind”
Hosea 8:1-14


Happy 50th Birthday, Allen

October 24, 2005

I invite all and sundry to join with my bride and me as we wish Allen Howie, founder of Idealogy, Inc., a happy birthday as he reaches the mid-century mark.

Allen and wife Lisa, their three children and dozens more friends and family celebrated downtown Saturday evening. Allen is one of the good guys, and is working hard to grow his business, serve his community, and make downtown a place where we all can celebrate happy occasions.

Post your own best wishes to Allen in the comments section below and we’ll forward them to him.


What Hubris!

October 24, 2005

So, Their Man Mitch decides that a high-technology innovation and development fund is giving TOO MUCH money to our institutions of higher learning.

SO, let’s divert this taxpayer money to private firms, further strangling innovation from our most productive researchers.

How long will this go on? IU Southeast docs? Anyone?


Shall We Gather at the River?

October 20, 2005

Lacking the will to shoulder the responsibility for implementing an interim stormwater management program, and the unwelcome but necessary impact fees to fund it, New Albany’s City Council punted Thursday night, but not before bemusing the crowd with a semantic debate that reveals just how diminished is the awareness of certain elements.

In a fit of pique that infected both sides of the table, with two abstentions and a remarkably petulant “nay” from Gang of Four veteran and Strom Thurmond wannabe Larry Kochert, council decided that no, we shall not gather at the river. Instead, we shall again run from responsibility and blame the big, bad Feds when they impose daily fines of $25,000.

Volunteer Hoosier is working on developing an online calculator so readers can plug in the budget line amount for their favorite city service to discover why the Gang of Four wants to eliminate that service. I don’t know about you, but having 911 dispatchers get that ambulance to me on time is MY favorite city service!

For those of you who do not read books, here’s a primer.

SHALL is directive. WILL is predictive. MAY is permissive. – VH Glossary of Legal Terms

shall (shal) v. aux. pt. should [ME schal, pl. schullen sceal, inf. sceolan, akin to Ger sollen < IE base (s)kel-, to be indebted > inf. Lith skeliu, to owe] 1. Used in a first person to indicate simple future time [I shall probably go tomorrow] : cf. WILL (sense 1) 2. Used in the second or third person, esp. in formal speech or writing, to express determination, compulsion, obligation, or necessity [You shall listen] 3. Used in a statement of laws or regulations [The fine shall not exceed $200] 4. Used in questions about what to do [shall I invite them] 5. Used in conditional subordinate clauses [If any man shall hear, let him remember] USAGE – see usage note at WILL – Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Fourth Edition, the Official Dictionary of the Associated Press

Council’s attorney pointed out the reality-based truth (granted, a foreign concept to the opponents of responsibility) that will and shall are interchangeable in common speech, although shall is the preferred usage in legal documents, still.

Somehow, Li’l Stevie’s fan-girls define shall as some exotic weasel word. Hey girls! Maybe next time, instead of muttering “bullshit” (I kid you not) all night, you could pick up a dictionary. Some experts!

In other news, the bipartisan attempt to knee-cap $75 million in outside investment in fair, affordable housing that (wonder of wonders) meets code and complies with zoning regulations continues apace. As Cruella de Val looked on, her agents on the council came very close to torpedoing up to $600,000 in federal grants, provoking a rare flash of anger from Redevelopment Director John Rosenbarger when he was accused of lying.

One surprise was the appearance of a contingent of student journalists, on hand to cover this government meeting. They were treated to random outbursts of anger from almost every point of the council compass, and the behavior of the citizenry was only slightly more savory. Even your humble correspondent succumbed to the spirit of anarchy, but the response my “crudeness” provoked gives me a few suggestions for investigators chasing leads on the recent spate of criminal harassment toward progressive elements.

Kristallnacht any day now. We invite responsible comment.


I Guess It Wasn’t a Progressive

October 20, 2005

Baseless allegations, slander, racial epithets, slurs on personal faith, and outright homophobia, all conducted under the cover of anonymity and/or under the influence and guidance of the most regressive elements in elective office…taking sides with the slumlords and the mafia. Throwing “birds” at a man’s family as they celebrate the city’s signature moment…personal attacks, threats, libels and harassment…

Who is the diseased mind who found it appropriate to launch a brick through the window at James the Cleaner? Logic dictates who is responsible for this. There is a sickness, diagnosed or otherwise, driving a Nazi element in our fair town. If you are one who fosters this hatred, your fingerprints are on that brick, too.

My guess? It wasn’t a progressive who committed this crime.


Sense and Sensibility

October 19, 2005

Why do you read blogs? To find something interesting!

Poll: More Americans Getting Their News From Bev


Quote of the Day

October 19, 2005

I don’t trust books. They’re all about facts, not heart. And that’s what’s tearing this country apart.Stephen Colbert