I did not mean to call Ron Edinger dumb, because I don’t think he is. What I meant to do was to point out that he often acts as if he does not understand something, when in reality he probably understands it very well. I was commenting on Ron’s behavior last night as an elected official at the city council meeting, not as a person. Here’s what I said:
“And is Ron Edinger as dumb as he seems or is it an act? He kept saying that all Brannon needed was a “SIMPLE RECOUNT”! I’m sure he must know by now that a recount would do nothing. All it would do is put the same paper ballots back through the same counting machine…no one questioned the machine’s ability to count. Brannon/Kelso were concerned about the ILLEGAL ballots, and the machine can’t tell which are legal or not.”
So, I apologize, Ron. I did not mean to be hurtful or personal in any way.
Mary,
I don’t feel you owed him an apology. He is an elected public official and has been for many years. He has a duty and responsibility to understand every official action he endorses. He also has a duty and obligation to understand the consequences of those actions. Edinger failed to perform his duty as required by his oath of office. As a City Councilman, Edinger had an obligation to the public to understand and enforce the terms of the election contract between the City and County. Had he and the other Councilmembers performed their official duties satisfactorily, the election contest would very likely have been unnecessary.
Comment by Bill — December 8, 2010 @ 1:05 pm
It was obvious to me that Ron was under a lot of pressure last night. This hasn’t been a good year for him, and I could see it and hear it during the meeting. (I watched on CDA TV 19.)
I must disagree that I don’t think he was acting as if he didn’t understand something. At minimum, it must be frustrating for the councilmen because I’m under the impression that the staff, i.e., Gridley, doesn’t tell them everything. Of course, I also fault the council because they don’t demand that staff tell them everything. They don’t ask difficult or probing questions and too often accept a staff report at face value as if the staff were Moses coming off Mt. Sinai with the tablets. That’s not good government.
Ron was in a tough spot last night. God bless him.
Comment by Dan — December 8, 2010 @ 1:57 pm
It seems Ron had problems facing manhood last night and took a pass.
Comment by WannaBe JD — December 8, 2010 @ 2:29 pm
Dan,
If Edinger has personal problems that keep him from performing the duties he swore to uphold on behalf of the residents of the City, he has a duty and an obligation to step down, temporarily if the circumstances warrant, permanently if they do not. Holding public office or public position is not an entitlement, it is an obligation to perform at the level of competence promised to his constituents.
Comment by Bill — December 8, 2010 @ 2:35 pm
Well, when Bill Gates moves into town, I bet everyone learns how to put their shorts on right.
Comment by Stebbijo — December 8, 2010 @ 2:45 pm
Edinger needs to retire. If he can’t contain his emotions over routine business then I expect that he can’t control his bladder either. He’d be right at home over at Beehive where he could be spoon fed and finally earn the title of DEPEND(s)able.
Comment by Wallypog — December 8, 2010 @ 3:15 pm
Gridley missed the point on the Bill Gates comment. Bill Gates, and those like him, don’t have to run for office. They wait, see who wins, then they buy the winner after they’re elected. Everyone on the council knows that, so I’m surprised they didn’t bother to correct Gridley.
Comment by Dan — December 8, 2010 @ 4:27 pm
It’s a mess – you have to laugh, it’s all a person can do.
It’s right in our faces – Canadian votes from people who are not available determined the city election and now our own city says we have to pay for it – and Judge Hosack declares there is not enough evidence or “foundation” to throw out those absentee ballots.
Well, you can’t get justice from a corrupt system.
This could not possibly happen in Idaho, now – could it? A federal judge at that! It will never happen in Idaho because we have a puny legislature that can’t stand up to our judical branch of government and change things – like drafting a law that says the Supreme Court needs to pick an out of town judge when the local available district judges all recuse themselves. It wouldn’t matter anyway, because they just ignore the laws they want because our legislature lets them.
Senate convicts federal judge Thomas Porteous of corruption and perjury.Among the charges was that the Louisiana judge lied to the Senate and the FBI during his 1994 appointment process.
Comment by Stebbijo — December 8, 2010 @ 6:37 pm
If there is an apology is to be made it is from Ron and the REST of the city council. What is even worse is not ONE report on the evening news. What a flipping joke!
Comment by concerned citizen — December 8, 2010 @ 6:59 pm
What’s sad is that people have overreacted to my comment about Ron Edinger, our elected city councilman who is supposed to work for the people of CdA. Instead of holding him accountable for his seeming lack of crucial information about a Recount vs. Election Contest, which Ron did not seem to know about (though I think he understands it clearly but does not want the public to know), these over-reactors attack me for even suggesting that Ron is anything but stellar in his job performance.
Let’s be clear: My comment about Ron was not meant as a personal insult, and if it was interpreted that way, I am apologizing.
But he’s a city councilman. The city was responsible for the 2009 City election that had all sorts of problems. Ron should be incredibly informed and aware of all aspects of this highly controversial situation. Come on, it’s been more than a year! Now he sits in a public meeting and spouts all kinds of erroneous information, misdirecting the public and confusing the issue? That’s not acceptable to me. I think he’s putting on a show. I think he wants the public to think Jim Brannon is evil because “all he needed was a Simple Recount!” Not true and I think Ron knows it. And the Brannon team did not draw out the process, they had NO control over it. It was the city & county, collaborating to BLOCK access to the election’s public documents. Again, something I think Ron is well aware of but wants to spin it for his buddy Mike Kennedy.
Last night’s meeting was grand theater. This is not the way I want my elected city council to act.
Comment by mary — December 8, 2010 @ 7:03 pm
I have had conversations with Ron over issues and HAD respect for him believing he was possibly the ONLY truth of/on the CdA council. I am without words.
Comment by concerned citizen — December 8, 2010 @ 7:26 pm
Ron has been council for 42 years. I do believe this will be the last year because he is tired of all the storms he has been traveling through. I wish him well.
Ron is a “Senior Woody”. He is a good man. Asks some really good questions but always seems to be a little confused not understanding the whole issue. Perhaps that is why he always gives supporting votes to the council so he does not have to defend his own beliefs. (just like Woody)
I have seen him support the council many times when his gut is saying the opposite. It is in those times, you will see a lot of pain on his face. (once again, just like Woody)
Comment by LTR — December 8, 2010 @ 8:14 pm
Woody, oh what theater. A dessert chef?
Comment by Ancientemplar — December 9, 2010 @ 4:33 pm
This article in IdahoReporter.com shows exactly why Edinger’s comment about a “SIMPLE RECOUNT” is so absurd.
For the umpteenth time: A recount counts all the pieces of paper run through the tabulator machines regardless of whether they (presumably ballots) were cast legally or illegally. A recount makes no distinction between legally and illegally cast ballots, and it makes no determination about the legality of the elector to cast a ballot.
Comment by Bill — December 10, 2010 @ 1:54 pm
Boy, That vote counting machine sure was accurate. That cleared everything up. AND good ol’ Dan watched.
Comment by Ancientemplar — December 10, 2010 @ 2:39 pm
Concerning by comment in #14 above, here is yet another article from the IdahoReporter.com that shows again why Edinger and other proponents of the “a recount would have solved everything” absurd theory are so wrong. But like Kennedy says, if you repeat a lie often enough, people will begin to believe it. And he should know.
Comment by Bill — December 13, 2010 @ 3:31 pm