Loading
614 views
RIOTS ?
ri·ot
1. a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons, as by a crowd protesting against another group, a government policy, etc., in the streets.
2. Law. a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons acting together in a disrupting and tumultuous manner in carrying out their private purposes.
3. violent or wild disorder or confusion.
“We’re going to have riots. There are already people rioting because they’re losing their jobs when everybody else is being bailed out,” said Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina.
Exactly where, Senator ?
dra-ma
Pronunciation: \ˈdrä-mə, ˈdra-\
Colloq. making a big deal over something unnecessarily.
“We’re going to have riots. There are already people rioting because they’re losing their jobs when everybody else is being bailed out,” said Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina.
PAPPY, I think you just defined the average hip-hop/rap group. 
Demint may have overdramatized the issue, but I think he's talking about what happens when other industries that are struggling ask the Federal government for help and are turned down.
Right now, by way of example, the newspaper industry is struggling. Could you envision thousands of out-of-work reporters and other journalists marching in the streets demanding that Congress step in and help them? I can. I'll be the one at the front of the line with the big sign that says "OBAMA UNFAIR TO NEWSPAPER UNIONS" standing in front of the guy with the "CONGRESS HATES THE 1ST AMENDMENT" sign. It could be peaceful at first, until they got permission to protest in front of the White House only to find out they have to pay a per-column inch fee for the sidewalk space they use. Then ... the riot begins.
Speaking of hip-hop/rap groups, the music industry itself is struggling lately. That industry affects a lot of people, you know. It's the backbone of the Nashville, TN, economy (not to mention Muscle Shoals, AL, and a few other places) and affects small music stores on Main Streets everywhere. Would we not expect to have thousands of rock, hip-hop/rap and country musicisians and singers marching for a Congressional bailout? Totally peaceful at first, until those journalists across the street demand they all speak English and then realize that most of them can't. Then ... the riot begins.
I can see it coming. Since when does the Federal government get to pick which industries MUST survive and which can go down in flames? That's a scary thought, don't you think?
By the way, I had a thought yesterday (that's scary, too) when I read that all "non-essential" government workers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in those areas affected by that big ice storm, were being asked not to report to work. What ALL governments should do - from Federal on down - is note, during the next general emergency, which employees fall under that "non-essential" designation. Eliminate those positions. Budget problems solved. 
If word leaks out early, EVERYBODY will show up during the next snowstorm. It'll be like that "Call In Gay" day they had earlier this week. I'd bet you there were guys crawling out of their deathbeds to show up at the office that day just to avoid calling in. I mean, even I went to work, even though I had a great excuse for calling in and going shopping for new shoes. How much more effective would a "Call In As a Non-essential Worker Day" be during a tight budget year? 
PAPPY, I think you just defined the average hip-hop/rap group. [image]
Demint may have overdramatized the issue, but I think he's talking about what happens when other industries that are struggling ask the Federal government for help and are turned down.
Right now, by way of example, the newspaper industry is struggling. Could you envision thousands of out-of-work reporters and other journalists marching in the streets demanding that Congress step in and help them? I can. I'll be the one at the front of the line with the big sign that says "OBAMA UNFAIR TO NEWSPAPER UNIONS" standing in front of the guy with the "CONGRESS HATES THE 1ST AMENDMENT" sign. It could be peaceful at first, until they got permission to protest in front of the White House only to find out they have to pay a per-column inch fee for the sidewalk space they use. Then ... the riot begins.
Speaking of hip-hop/rap groups, the music industry itself is struggling lately. That industry affects a lot of people, you know. It's the backbone of the Nashville, TN, economy (not to mention Muscle Shoals, AL, and a few other places) and affects small music stores on Main Streets everywhere. Would we not expect to have thousands of rock, hip-hop/rap and country musicisians and singers marching for a Congressional bailout? Totally peaceful at first, until those journalists across the street demand they all speak English and then realize that most of them can't. Then ... the riot begins.
I can see it coming. Since when does the Federal government get to pick which industries MUST survive and which can go down in flames? That's a scary thought, don't you think?
By the way, I had a thought yesterday (that's scary, too) when I read that all "non-essential" government workers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in those areas affected by that big ice storm, were being asked not to report to work. What ALL governments should do - from Federal on down - is note, during the next general emergency, which employees fall under that "non-essential" designation. Eliminate those positions. Budget problems solved. [image]
If word leaks out early, EVERYBODY will show up during the next snowstorm. It'll be like that "Call In Gay" day they had earlier this week. I'd bet you there were guys crawling out of their deathbeds to show up at the office that day just to avoid calling in. I mean, even I went to work, even though I had a great excuse for calling in and going shopping for new shoes. How much more effective would a "Call In As a Non-essential Worker Day" be during a tight budget year? [image]
-jdtippett
Now that's a riot !
in one post, you assaulted the urban music industry, effective reductions to counteract budget shortfalls, and homosexuals. Very neutral of you. Now THATS a riot.
-1
permalink
I can easily envision riots in downtown Anderson. Believe it or not but there are many upset, angry, disgruntled and mad taxpayers with just cause to be. The unlawful 'buyout' given to Joey Ray Preston and the unlawful 'hiring' of Michael Cunningham within minutes of each other aroused many who are otherwise willing to accept the 'whatever-will-be-will-be' concept...and they are very mad. The crimes of December 2 by Bill McAbee, Michael Thompson, Larry Greer, Ron Wilson and Gracie Floyd will keep the kettle hot long after they retreat to points beyond.
Add that to the far left liberals and Chicago criminals that bought the Office of the President for Hussein Obama and you can see the steam rising from the boiling water.
Anderson and America are angry and it's going to take more than Hussein Obama with his misguided followers or Bill McAbee with his Point of Order to cool us down.
Please stay on topic, Prevail.
For what it's worth, the buyout of Preston and the hiring of Cunningham remain totally lawful until and unless someone in a position of higher authority - or a judge and jury - deem otherwise. You're repeating that they were "unlawful" does not make it so.
Angel, Prevail's post represents the kind of rhetoric I was pointing to when I talked about the credibility of this forum being undermined - by BOTH sides of the issue. Slash-and-burn politics. They'll call something "unlawful" then repeat that in subsequent posts over and over, convincing themselves it's true and hoping everybody else will accept it as truth without a shred of evidence. When, ultimately, nothing comes of it from a legal standpoint, they move on to something else and pretend they were right anyway.
For now, the buyout of Preston and the hiring of Cunningham were all perfectly legal and lawful. The passage of time may or may not change that fact, but, for now, it is a fact.
As for my satirical post, I also disparaged country music, newspaper reporters, rock and pop singers and myself. How much fairer could I possibly be? And as for the "gay" gaiety, Leno used a modification of that same joke on "The Tonight Show" this week. My friends who are gay have a great sense of humor. Don't yours?
There is a tendancy to change topics in midstream, as I have often done myself.
But let's return to my original question of the Senator.
I agree the possibility, even probability, of a riot over who gets bailed out exists. But DeMint said, " There are already people rioting because they’re losing their jobs when everybody else is being bailed out,”
All I expect from my state's Senator is the truth. So, I ask again, where is this happening, Sir ?
-1
permalink
JDTippett, seems to me that I can say unlawful as easily as you can say lawful about the unlawful happenings at the last council meeting. Since neither of us are attornies, what our opinion is remains our opinion only. It's the Democrats that keep repeating lies over and over to their uninformed masses until the lies are accepted as truth. You know that. Look at the last election. How do you think Hussein Obama got elected?
-1
permalink
JDTippett said to me, "Please stay on topic, Prevail."
JD, read what the topic title is: RIOTS?
That's exactly what I wrote about.
Looks like JDTippett is as confused as I am on this Saturday with no college football games on.
The buyout of Preston was not illegal, it was stupid and an unnecessary expense that those five should be made to answer for. Lawyers (contract lawyers) have all ready said it was unnecessary. The hiring of Cunningham as anything other than interim failed to allow the usual application process to go through. What everyone fails to grasp is that the Council was told they had no need to buy Preston out as no breech had occurred. That is why despite the county rules that any member of Council may attend a committee meeting Waldrep & C Wilson were banned from the second one Personnel Committee meeting. The three morons that constituted that committee wanted to figure out how to give Preston a million dollars, as Preston had instructed them to do.
Cunningham's contract according to the Supreme Court is not valid after midnight December 31, 2008. That has all ready been ruled on so there is no reason to worry about buying him out. On top of that, he chose a very unwise course of action and continued the law suit and the contentious relationship with Council. A few back steps on the Ordinances and the Council will have more say so in how the Administrator works and his culpability to them, and of course the county.
Cunningham was not offered the same salary because he was not worth the same salary. Preston has served as a County Administrator before and had been allowed to have large pay increases as he gained more power with the Council. The man was over paid.
What riots, there are no google riots in the US as of now.
Cunningham's contract according to the Supreme Court is not valid after midnight December 31, 2008. That has all ready been ruled on so there is no reason to worry about buying him out. On top of that, he chose a very unwise course of action and continued the law suit and the contentious relationship with Council. A few back steps on the Ordinances and the Council will have more say so in how the Administrator works and his culpability to them, and of course the county.
Cunningham was not offered the same salary because he was not worth the same salary. Preston has served as a County Administrator before and had been allowed to have large pay increases as he gained more power with the Council. The man was over paid.
What riots, there are no google riots in the US as of now.
-1
permalink
1-opinion, lots of good and accurate points. You mentioned that "The buyout of Preston was not illegal, it was stupid." Maybe you are correct on that but illegal and stupid are double first cousins and I believe the words are interchangeable in most cases. Both seem to fit the Gang of Shame to me.
-1
permalink
Cunningham's contract according to the Supreme Court is not valid after midnight December 31, 2008. That has all ready been ruled on so there is no reason to worry about buying him out.-1-opinion
WRONG, WRONG, A THOUSAND TIMES WRONG.
I STRONGLY suggest you go back and review the actual text of Piedmont Pub. Serv. Dist. v. Cowart and not wait for some disc jockey to spoon-feed the portions of the ruling YOU WANT TO HEAR. There is more to that ruling than you think. In fact, Ricky Dribble keeps OMITTING a portion of that ruling every time he reads/references it. In addition, I would STRONGLY suggest you look at rulings made by the SC Supreme Court AFTER Piedmont Pub. Serv. Dist. v. Cowart and how the court used that case to create ... wait for it ... a precedent.
Specifically, look into Quality Towing, Inc. v. City of Myrtle Beach for said precendent.
Heck, I all ready have you on one witch hunt ... let me help you with the other ...
Justice Pleicones (from the aforementioned Myrtle Beach Case):
"Although the committee may not have conducted its activities in the most exemplary manner, the fact remains that its role was merely advisory. The contract was awarded by the City Manager and approved by the City Council. I can find no allegations or evidence of improprieties under those codes on their part. Finally, this three year contract is not impermissibly long. Piedmont Pub. Serv. Dist. v. Cowart, 319 S.C. 124, 459 S.E.2d 876 (Ct. App. 1995), aff'd 324 S.C. 239, 478 S.E.2d 836 (1996). I would affirm the referee's rulings on these issues."
Remember kids ... Piedmont dealt with a VERY LONG contract ... a TWENTY YEAR CONTRACT. In Quality Towing, Inc. v. City of Myrtle Beach, the SC Supreme Court, using Piedmont Pub. Serv. Dist. v Cowart as a precedent, clarified what REASONABLE LENGTH OF CONTRACT IS.
THREE YEARS IS REASONABLE, PER THE SC SUPREME COURT ... MR. CUNNINGHAM'S CONTRACT IS THREE YEARS.
CHECKMATE. AGAIN.
... stupid ...
- SSHM
And your opinion is based on what stupid? Mine is based on two contract attorneys opinions. I'll take their advise before you lame spin. LOL
Cunningham is going to be gone. He made the choice to continue the Preston contentious relationship and try to establish himself as the new ruling Czar. It was a huge mistake. I wonder if God told him to sue his bosses or if was merely Preston is disguise?
It's kind or warped that you revel in the county getting screwed and being forced into these unwindable situations. I guess you like us in the dark ages where pettiness and heavy handed politics rule. With people like you pushing for more corruption we really are doomed to remaining the laughing stock of the state.
Interesting if what you wrote is true, you just admitted Preston every renewing contract was void come December and there was no need for a buyout. Guess you missed that. D'oh
Cunningham is going to be gone. He made the choice to continue the Preston contentious relationship and try to establish himself as the new ruling Czar. It was a huge mistake. I wonder if God told him to sue his bosses or if was merely Preston is disguise?
It's kind or warped that you revel in the county getting screwed and being forced into these unwindable situations. I guess you like us in the dark ages where pettiness and heavy handed politics rule. With people like you pushing for more corruption we really are doomed to remaining the laughing stock of the state.
Interesting if what you wrote is true, you just admitted Preston every renewing contract was void come December and there was no need for a buyout. Guess you missed that. D'oh
Yes, the way the Preston/Cunningham affair was handled was very shabby at best, but probably not illegal in and of itself. The collusion that occurred to make it all happen is the illegal part. Anyone viewing the meeting couldn't help but see that some type of collusion had to occur for all of those pre-written legal documents to fall into place. There is where the court case comes in.
-1
permalink
Kilkenny said "The collusion that occurred to make it all happen is the illegal part." How true that is.
Also, per Stan Welch, section 2-366 of the county code of ordinances was not followed. This addresses the furnishing of committee recommendations to all members of council.
Also Stan said the personnel committee meeting that did not allow Waldrep and C. Wilson to attend did not follow section 2-362, whereas any council member may attend any committee meeting. There were other infractions also which will come out in court if necessary.
Incoming council member Eddie Moore sent AG McMaster a letter saying it was obvious that there had been collusion and other illegal acts by certain members of council. Moore also referred to McMaster's friendship with council member Bill McAbee and expressed his hope that the personal relationship between the two men would not prevent McMaster from performing his duties as attorney general.
Now, does anyone question why McMaster has not been interested in hearing our complaints about Preston, including McAbee?
I'll question it, Prevail. Are you implying that if McMaster does not find enough evidence to proceed with involving the AG's office in this case, the ONLY possible reason would be his friendship with Bill McAbee? Do you totally discount the possibility that there may be no legal basis for involvement by the Attorney General?
If you are saying Henry McMaster would thwart an investigation into wrongdoing only because of a friendship with one of the possible targets of such an investigation, then you are accusing the Attorney General of the State of South Carolina of a possible felony. I would go so far as to say that, if Eddie Moore's letter actually referenced the issue in the terms you used, the Attorney General probably isn't overly happy with Mr. Moore right now and quite possibly would consider it an attempt to intimidate an officer of the court. Uh oh! That's a no-no in this state, and most states.
Perhaps Angel was right about your level of intelligence. I don't know that I would accuse the chief law enforcement officer of the state of a felony unless I had all my ducks in a row, and right now most of yours are still quacking all over Cater's Lake.. 
-1
permalink
JDTippett, please be advised that I was quoting from The Journal of 12/3/2008 and Stan Welch's article on the front page titled 'Attorney General asked to look into Preston buyout.' From all I read I concluded that could be why McMaster has given us a cold look every time Preston was involved. You should take The Journal and you will read much more than you will ever see in the Anderson Independent/Mail. If McMaster runs for governor, he will lose in the Upstate.
I find it appalling that you would quote Angel concerning my intelligence when you said "Perhaps Angel was right about your level of intelligence." That is not very honorable of the top administrator of this site, now is it??
And, BTW, when did Angel question my intelligence? I must have missed it and would appreciate it if you would furnish the post for me. Thanks, JD.
Well There is a certain group who think they can accuse anyone of anything.like I have said a thousand times Show it to me in BLACK & WHITE then I will believe it. I have also heard that it is not a wise thing to be accusing certain people in high level positions of being a pedaphile. Then these people wonder why nobody wants to hear their X-Files script. I see can the headlines now Tinfoil gang arrested on their mystery bus to nowhere
I do not believe a word out of Stan Welch as we all know what group he hangs out with. Maybe the AG has already looked at the garbage that was dumped at his office and figured out that it was nothing but a waste of his time. Also WAIM had the trip planned for over a week,didnt any of you think to call and make an appointment? Of course not you all thought you could just walk in there and demand to see the AG & govener.JDTippett, please be advised that I was quoting from The Journal of 12/3/2008 and Stan Welch's article on the front page titled 'Attorney General asked to look into Preston buyout.' From all I read I concluded that could be why McMaster has given us a cold look every time Preston was involved. You should take The Journal and you will read much more than you will ever see in the Anderson Independent/Mail. If McMaster runs for governor, he will lose in the Upstate.
I find it appalling that you would quote Angel concerning my intelligence when you said "Perhaps Angel was right about your level of intelligence." That is not very honorable of the top administrator of this site, now is it??-prevail
