My humble apologies fellow blogians! I have been traveling out of state as of late, and am even now adding this thread from the great state of Texas. My cell phone was very active today with calls about Senator Vitter's visit to Alexandria today as well as Bobby Jindal's visit as well.
I am sure that our city councilmen are behaving a bit more conservatively these days... they may be next. The President of the New Orleans council resigned yesterday after being indicted by the feds after being caught accepting kick backs. His "take" was less than $15,000. He should have run for Congress where you are able to take $90,000 and allow it to go unreported!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1,240 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1201 – 1240 of 1240"all Democrats are abortionist queer rights supporting yellow streaked anti-war crooks."
No, but thay have far more than their share.
Once again the point seems to escape you: it's the hypocracy of the republicans that offends. If a democrat is for gay rights and proclaims that, that's OK. When republicans express opposition to gay rights and morally condemn homosexuals and then get caught sucking dicks in an airport bathroom stall or wearing a dress a employing a male prostitute for unprotected sex, then most decent people have a problem. That you don't see that suggests that you may be somewhat ethically depraved.
Once again the point seems to escape you too!
All Republicans are not hypocrits. Do you personally know every Republican? All Republicans are not David Vitter or Royal Alexander. If you think so, also have character flaws.
Excellent point and I conceed that all republicans are not hypocrites. I like John McCain and he's cool. The problems is that the ones that are, stink up the whole party. And most of them are your bible thumping evangelical tongue-speaking abonination-hating queer-rolling anti-rock&roll preaching born-again types that seem to surface in those bathrooms and internet chat rooms and page offices.
Your efforts to justify or excuse or trivialize their conduct tells us a little about you.
Your efforts to justify or excuse or trivialize their conduct tells us a little about you.
Ah we finally got to the crux of your problem with Republicans. Never did I say I condone or try to trivialize those "bad apples". But you appear to hate anyone with true moral beliefs and that walks the walk not just talks the talk. How many Democrats do you recon are Christians with similar morals? I know many Democrats who believe that abortion is wromg, want prayer in schools, opposes same sex marriages. Are you going to kick them out of YOUR party?
"Are you going to kick them out of YOUR party?"
No they're just going to continue ignoring them.
Here we go again, Ch 5 "on your side". We sure know who Ms Goddard is pulling for, and it's dang sure not for Major Slocum. How on earth could you strong arm a deputy who upholds the law? Above all, they should just say, "No". You are grown people and don't have to sign your name to anything. The last time I knew this is still the land of the free. Some men are chicken s***.
The Town Talk has a good blog going. Seems like Chuckie Poo's brother,Ronnie, is behind all this crap.
I can't find the Town Talk blog about Godard's report on election intimidation with the Sheriff's race. Where on their web site is it?
I have to admit Maxwell has the best TV commercials this year. But since Chris has Zero charisma, it makes the difference really obvious.
Go to Town Talk Home page click on "forum" on left column..should be top two.
Thanks.
Pardon the interruption folks...
Mr Carriere', would you please squeeze it into your schedule to start a new thread? Understanding you're busy - I will not be impatient, but I'd appreciate it if you can squeeze the time out for this...
Thank You for keeping "Cenla Antics" also!!!
What I can't believe is that Michelle Goddard would put out allegations without revealing the source. If the info is correct, why blur the faces of those who are making the allegations? What are these guys afraid of? Most of the time, when someone wants to remain secret, it is because they are lying.
Besides, we all know the tight political connections between Goddard and Chuckie's mama.
On the TT forum, some one said Chuck is now married to his friend's wife. Is this true?
Wondering where Ms. Godard obtained her journalism degree. As a "news director" it is curious that she presented "witnesses" alleging improper conduct of Slocum by not showing their faces. How do we KNOW they're truly deputies and not someone being paid by Wagner or Godard to make these allegations?
Godard = Dan Rather
Would that be GodardGate
or GoddardGate?
Reports are that Media General has Chanel 5 on the sale block. Les Golmon will retire, and Goddard knows that this is her last major race to cover. New management will boot her to the curb.
She is trying to engineer a win for Chuckie in the hopes that he will name her as public information officer. The deal has been cut, she's already making plans for the move.
If this is the reasoning, logic, and deductive ability of RPSO, no wonder this is a great place to be a criminal.
Everyone of normal intelligence on this planet is aware of the pressure that Hilton and Slocum are putting on the sheriff's department employees - they openly threaten their jobs, their family's welfare, and their futures. How can anyone be surprised that some of these political victims finally came forward to ask the media for help. Who else were they going to turn to, the Sheriff.
The people who know how the sheriff operates, namely the judges and DA, all secretly hopes Slocum loses - that means that Wagner has to win.
You slocumites are showing your ass by blaming the messenger.
The people who know how the sheriff operates, namely the judges and DA, all secretly hopes Slocum loses - that means that Wagner has to win.
Show us some proof of that and we might believe it. Name some names.
If they don't feel that it is proper to go public on their wishes and concerns then far be it from me. However, if you have a personal relationship with any of the judges or felony prosecutors (except one), they will level with you.
Once again, if you want to be believed name the judges and prosecutors who hope Slocum loses.
I am believed. In fact I'm quite sure that you know it's true. You sound like one of the arm twisters. If Slocum vowed revenge and retribution on all who don't openly support him, it is not likely that people will voluntarily subject themselves to his wrath and petty revenge, and that's why the voting booth has that curtain. The judges and prosecutors know better than us. I respect their opinion.
I DO know some of the 9th JDC judges, and can name names. Tom Yeager, John Davidson, Harry Randow, Rae Swent. All are close enough personal friends to confide in me who they will support in the sheriff's race. However, because of the cannon of judicial ethics they will NEVER make their thoughts on this race known to the public. Also, they would NEVER confide in me unless they knew that I would NEVER divulge what I know about their political choices.
The fact that this lame ass:
Sunday, November 04, 2007 9:25:00 AM
says he knows these people, and injects them in conversation to bolster his opinion, shows that he's just a courthouse wannabe. Anyone who really knows would NEVER claim he did. He would just keep his mouth shut and wait. I'm posting this for one reason,in response to a liar who is trying to drag my friends into a political squabble where they have no desire to be involved.
Guys like this character are bottom feeders looking to feel self important. He's a nobody.
You left out several judges. I conclude that you really don't know those judges personally or that you are one of those judges. Several of the judges are anything but discreet and at least one of them is totally outrageous both in what he says and where, to whom, and how he says it.
The outcome of the sheriffs race is extremely important for a number of reasons including funding, jail crowding, and court security. How come you don't know that.
Well the one known witness for those of you who missed it is Major Walters, a 30 year veteran of the office. He is easily recognized and is visibly upset about all the threats and intimidation being applied against those in the sheriffs office by Slocum and Sandavol. Clearly he is the only one telling the truth about what is going on. Just look at Slocum and Sandoval can you see the yellow feathers sticking out of their mouths. Unbelieveable, that in this day in time this type of activiy goes on. I bet he is so arrogant and foolish he will run his ad with all the intimidated deputies name on it how self incriminating that will be.
I also heard that our experienced candidate after he was interviewed pouted like a little seven year old and whined that KALB was messing everything up for him and he called the sheriff and whined about it and ask the sheriff to come down to the station and stop the interview from being shown. As any one can see the sheriff did absolutely nothing and told Mike that he was not running for sheriff and it was time to grow up.
On that KALB interview did I hear one of deputies say he can not believe that any one came forward(ie thoughts to himself - I am sure those deputies understood they could lose their jobs if they did not sign the petition.) Pretty sad to think people would do this.
"one of deputies say he can not believe that any one came forward"
It's really not that hard to imagine, since it is rumored that a certain person is on tape offering a deputy money to make these accusations.
The Wagner campaign could be finished this week (along with someone's legal career and someone else's media career)
what completely desperate bullshit - if you had it you would show it - it is no secret that sherifft employees were and are bullied. Nobody that I've talked to was the least bit surprised. The real news is that they think his goose is cooked and aren't as scared as they once were back when the sheriff convinced them it was a done deal.
Stay tuned
"The Wagner campaign could be finished this week (along with someone's legal career and someone else's media career)"
Keep dreamin, suckah
Sandoval is in court right now for leaking confidential testimony in a trial with a grand jury? Who would trust that man? Sandoval is a joke. All of them are corrupt. This includes Slocum.
For you CW supporters, Mike will be calling a press conference later this week to dispell all these rumors and allegations of bribing and intimidating these officers. He is so sure of his innocence and those deputies involved innocence they will be scheduled to take a lie detector test. This will certainly put this issue to rest.
Here this moron goes popping off about his "knowlege" of the 9th JDC
Sunday, November 04, 2007 11:33:00 AM
First of all you're right, the outcome of the sheriffs race is extremely important for reasons of funding, jail crowding, and court security. Right now, the judges and DAs are pleased with how things are running. We could use more jail space, but until the voters get behind the construction of a new jail, we'll live with what we have. Second, I did leave out the Judges that I don't personally know. Unlike you, I refuse to lie about people I have no contact with.
Good ruck! Herman Walters, who knows the office best, said it best, about who is best. Now that genius, Slocum, is going to declare that Walters and all those deputies interviewed and all of those deputies who told us about the heat they are getting are liers. How about this? Let's give Slocum a lie detector test.
To the real judge expert: you forgot to address this statement-
"Several of the judges are anything but discreet and at least one of them is totally outrageous both in what he says and where, to whom, and how he says it."
I know Slocum and Sandoval would not be so stupid as to agree to take a lie detector test. You can clearly see that they are lying. Whats more important is the legal ramifications ie. bribery, intimidation, and campaigning during office hours. This clearly should be illegal. This would be ironic if Slocum and Sandavol get charged and put in prison. Where is the DA? Maybe the Attonery General that gets elected will take a long hard look at this situation. I know that one of the AG candidates stated he will not stand for public corruption.
So tell me:
Monday, November 05, 2007 6:38:00 AM
In your grand wisdom, how should I address the statement? I can only speak to the judges that I am friends with. None of them are the ones described in the statement, and deny that there are "several," more like one...
"Several of the judges are anything but discreet and at least one of them is totally outrageous both in what he says and where, to whom, and how he says it."
Do you want me to lie? Do you want me to speak for men who are quite capabile of speaking for themselves? If these judges break the cannon of judicial ethics, then they will pay the price, whatever it may be. I neither excuse or condem their uncontroled outbursts. I do, however, stand by my statement that as a group, the judges will not get involved in this race and will not endorse anyone. Any person who says otherwise is a liar.
Post a Comment