When amoral, dishonest people want an equally amoral and dishonest candidate to be installed in an elected or appointed position where s/he can use public money to enrich them and their business partners and relatives, you should never assume that “…things would ever get that nasty here in CDA.” The extent of public corruption is determined by the availability of unaccountable or sloppily administered public money, not geographic placement. The environment that allows and encourages public corruption is fostered by the lack of diligent, aggressive news reporting and a public unwilling to believe there could possibly be thieves among those who have lived all their lives here. The attitude that people who appear to give generously are somehow entitled to steal from the public purse fertilizes public corruption.

Hahaha…so true! Hadn’t made the connection before but that’s dead on!

No doubt it is Jim Brannon’s moral integrity that keeps him in the running and many of you. That is why you are still here and fighting for what is right.

There was a comment some posts ago that made a remark about Jim needing bodyguards when he went to church – I guess Mike and Jim go to the same church? That is what I drew my thoughts from; I did not mean to imply that he actually had real bodyguards. I doubt if things would ever get that nasty here in CDA.

Because, I do not “mix” with many of you, what I read may be taken a bit differently even it is really just meant as a poke. However, with that said, veiled warnings in the press should not be taken lightly – because some veiled warnings or in this case ‘Letter to the Editor’ are for real and can get to you, psychologically. But then, I just got through watching Angels and Demons, so maybe it’s just the after effects of the movie getting to me.

I posted my theory why turnout is so low earlier but I’ll repost it ’cause I think it fits. Larsen and the Dems specifically DON’T want higher voter turnout because they are afraid of the outcome.

Here ’tis-

“I’ve wondered about the low percentage of voters in each election for years and I’ve recently had a ‘road to damascus’ moment.
Here’s my theory- Jury duty is determined how? By voter lists. The ordeal of jury duty is loathed by most citizens for the following reasons: it takes them away from jobs and family; it is a deep cost to them while they watch attorneys prattle and prance at $100-500 per hour; it shows that the entire system is simply there to subsidize the American Trial Lawyers Association; it has nothing to do with ‘Justice’ and they realize that the process has nothing to do with ‘good citizenship.’

Why not use the federal census and/or DMV records as well as voting records? Because then the ‘jury of peers’ would be more realistic and elections would be less “controlled.”
Every so often the term ‘tort reform’ is bandied about with no follow thru. Why not legal system reform?
Some suggestions: reduce the number of jurors to 5. Pay them what they’re paid at their day jobs. Put a 20% charge on all awards to pay for “the system”. Raise filling fees dramatically (but have a reserve for qualified “poor” people).
Allow the “peers” (aka jurors) to submit questions to the judge anout the case. Allow jurors to see any info about the case they want. Allow the jurors to determine if the loser should pay for costs (this would rapidly shrink frivolous lawsuits) and use the afformentioned federal census and/or DMV records as well as voting records.
These are just a few. Any others?”