Hope everyone has a great 2004!
Good luck to new Findlay mayor Tony Iriti who begins his first day in charge.
Saddam didn’t attack the World Trade Center
Ok. One more time. There has been NO evidence that Saddam Hussein helped in the planning or execution of the 9/11 attacks on the United States.
I am gobsmacked when I continue to see polls here in the states that report people think he had something to do with the attacks. It simply has not been proven.
The idea that he did have anything to do with the attacks of 9/11 was one of the ruses used by the administration of President George Bush Jr. to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The other ruses being that Saddam was an immediate threat to the US and that he had tons of weapons of mass destruction to use or sell. Those have also not been proven.
The typical knee jerk rebuttal to my comments include “then you must have wanted Saddam to stay in power. He was an evildoer and we helped rid the Iraqi people of a ruthless dictator.” This rebuttal is a simple red-herring trying to distract one from the illogical conclusion.
I agree that Saddam was a butcher and didn’t deserve to remain in power. That doesn’t mean that taking him out with a full scale invasion based on a false premises was the correct action to take at the time.
My comments peak to the outright falsehoods spun by our President and his cabinet to mislead us into supporting his strong arm tactics.
The removal of Saddam didn’t make the US any safer nor was it a blow against terrorism. Meanwhile the Taliban (remember them) are regrouping in Afghanistan as we try to loot the commercial interests in Iraq. I argue that was the REAL reason Bush et al lied to the US people.
Bush and the neo-conservatives who dreamed up the BIG LIE have the blood of over 500 brave soldiers on their hands, most killed AFTER Saddam was removed from power. The week of Christmas the Terror Threat was raised to Orange – the 2nd highest level – and we are now safer?
When will the President stop lying to us? Maybe when he is removed in the 2004 elections. I hope the rest of the country gets a clue by then.
Oh where oh where are the candidates?
It is the time of year for prospective candidates to indicate their intentions in running for elective office. They must submit their names for the ballot at least 100 days before the March primary.
Lori Miller, director of the Hancock County Board of Elections lamented the lack of candidates in the 12/19 edition of The Courier.
“The same people have been on and I don’t know why people don’t run against them,” Miller said. “You would think with all of interest in the commissioners’ race that someone might file for some of the other seats.”
As of December 19, the only contested county races were for 2 spots on the County Commissioners. All the other elective offices up for a vote in 2004 had just incumbents running.
Miller’s question was answered in another story in the same edition.
“It’s very difficult to get Democrats to run for office in Hancock County,” said Mary Jane Roberts, interim chairwoman of the Hancock County Democratic Party. “They don’t feel they have a chance to win.
“We are trying to encourage more Democrats to get involved so we can have more support,” she said.
There you have it. People won’t run if they think they won’t win. But it is also true that you can’t win if you don’t run.
What the issue is, is the power of the incumbent and machine politics. There is a machine at the heart of Hancock county politics and the Republicans run it. They hold all the offices and with that they decide who runs and who can win.
Hancock county is a hard place for a new person to break into the politics. Mike Oxley wouldn’t have become the power he has become in the 4th District if he hadn’t been appointed to the House seat in 1981 upon the death of Tennyson Guyer. Oxley barely won the run-off election against the Democratic candidate who was better connected. The fact that Oxley was the incumbent made up for his lack of experience.
The reason the same people run for the same office year after year isn’t only about the lack of an opponent. It also speaks to how nothing changes in Hancock county. It wouldn’t matter which party was dominate as long as the status quo was maintained and in Hancock county it has.
What that means is the party affiliation has had no bearing on the success, or rather lack of problems, of the county.
John Sausser has been on the Findlay city council for years and served as Mayor in the 1970’s. He use to be a Democrat but now claims to be an independent. He had success as a Democrat because he worked hard to get elected and had views on the issues.
If a person has a choice of candidates and they each had views on maintaining the status quo then of course the incumbent is going to win for the simple fact that people won’t change their elected officials unless they have to. In Frankin county, the clerk of courts, a Republican, was caught stealing money. The voters voted in a Democrat to the job.
The problem with incumbents with no opposition is that it disenfranchises the voter. Why vote if Joe Smoe is going to win anyway?
The lack of participation leads to more races with no challengers which leads to less participation. It is in fact a threat to Democracy because we move the power of the offices into the hands of the Party rather than the voter. We go back to the days of the political machines, where it was who you knew and not what you would do that decided if you got elected to office.
Sad indeed.
Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”
Kudos to the Toledo Blade on Oxley articles
Hope you all had a chance to read the Toledo Blade series on Rep. Mike Oxley (R-Findlay) who “represents” the 4th Congressional District.
A majority of the evidence against Oxley has been known, at least to me, for many years yet reading the totality of it makes me wonder how he keeps getting re-elected every time.
Oxley is like so many other elected officials in “safe” districts. Instead of representing all the people in their district, they become the tool for outside interests or advance their own agenda.
Oxley doesn’t represent all the people in the 4th district. It seems he only represents the members of the Findlay Chamber of Commerce and special business interests who “donate” millions of dollars to his campaign in hopes of influencing Oxley’s vote. It seems to have worked.
The fraud perpetrated by Enron, Worldcom, and other corporations who used relaxed rules to enrich themselves, can be laid at the feet of Oxley.
It is true that Oxley labels all criticism of his work as rants of liberals. That is the only rebuttal he can use. His record doesn’t help him.
Oxley is a sad example of the disintegration of our democracy. It isn’t a good thing.
Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”
Toledo Blade Investigates Rep. Oxley
Well it had to happen. After Enron and Worldcom and the other multibillion dollar busts brought on by deregulation and greed, it seems that the focus is moving onto the people in govt. who let it happen.
One person is Rep. Mike Oxley (R-Findlay) who is chair of the House committee that helped Enron and others steal billions from investors and customers.
The Toledo Blade is doing a three day series on Oxley and how much of a tool he really is. (pun intended..)
The Price of Power Politics
BLADE INVESTIGATION
DAY ONE: Resistance to business regulation paved way for accounting scandals
Oxley rejected calls for safeguards before major corporations collapsed
By DAVE MURRAY and JOE MAHR
BLADE STAFF WRITERS
WASHINGTON – Arthur Levitt knew there was a problem – one that could drain the savings of millions of Americans.
The government’s top Wall Street watchdog had cut his teeth as a stockbroker in New York – a place where executives always tried to make their profits look big, and where accountants tried to keep them honest.
But by the 1990s, the lines were blurring. Accountants were now making more money on corporate consulting than on corporate auditing.
As chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mr. Levitt saw a clear conflict of interest, and in 2000 he decided to try to stop the practice.
He didn’t get far.
Standing in his way was the accounting industry and some of its best friends in Congress – including Mike Oxley, chairman of a subcommittee that oversaw the SEC. The industry showered Mr. Oxley and other congressmen with campaign cash. They beat back Mr. Levitt’s attempts at reform.
A year later Enron would become a household name – the first in a series of dramatic corporate collapses caused by the failure of accountants, executives, and bankers.
As investors lost billions, reformers demanded changes.
Mr. Levitt had been right.
Click Here for the full series!
Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”