Guarino

Rush at CPAC (in ten parts)

Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina Delivers Weekly Republican Address

Barack Obama's weekly Saturday radio address included a firm statement of determination to continue pursuing his massive, socialistic, welfare state agenda.  The Republican response was delivered by North Carolina's Richard Burr, who states that Washington is in a state of denial:

The Next Installment of My Novel on Cops, DA's and PAC's

I had shared with readers recently my idea for writing a novel about "Cops, DA's and PAC's"; and later also related my concept for another chapter in that novel. 

Inspiration has struck once again, and I believe I have another chapter welling up within me.  I would like to share with you a broad outline to obtain your reaction.  And once again, this account is fictional, and any resemblance to real places or events or persons is purely coincidental.

The medium-sized southern town under discussion has a reputation far and wide as being a Politically Virtuous City (PVC).  It did not earn this reputation, however, based on traditional indications of virtue-- sobriety, honesty, integrity, chastity, and the like.  Instead, its virtue was established by granting minorities a place at the table politically. 

The city's politics consisted of the adoption of poses of smug moral righteousness based on a certain vision of racial enlightenment.  In reality, however, its power structure was a very small group of community and business leaders, together with a corrupt black political machine, that jointly ruled the city.  It was an oligarchy of sorts.

After the city finds cause to throw out all the white leadership of its police department over alleged discrimination, and other alleged violations of the law, the DA refers the whole matter to the state investigative agency.  The investigation drags on for quite some time, because the agency could find little to prosecute. 

The mayor of the politically virtuous city, whom we shall call Heath, becomes concerned because the police department controversy is heating to the level of a boil, and city council elections are upcoming.  He is concerned the controversy will affect the election results, and upset the preexisting political arrangement that had been in place for a couple of decades.

The mayor calls the state attorney general, whom we shall call Toy Luper.  Luper is in charge of the state investigative agency.  The mayor tells him there were some very nefarious activities that occurred in the police department, and that justice needed to be served.  The city council elections were forthcoming, and indictments were needed as soon as possible.

Only weeks before the election, indictments are delivered against two lower-ranking officers-- not the department's command staff.  The mayor and city manager hold a widely covered news conference, and proclaim these indictments are an indication of the horrible things that were happening within the department.

Many of the black officers who had claimed victimization had been members of a statewide union composed of minority officers.  One of their buddies in that organization, whom we shall call Kerry, is employed with the state investigative agency.  The leadership of that agency makes it a point to assure Kerry is assigned to the investigation of the police department case.

Well over a year elapses.  The state attorney general's office postpones bringing the matter to trial because they do not have anything.  The political situation in the city erupts because of the controversy.  Exasperated local political leaders begin to see their world collapse around them, and know they must act.

A changing national political environment renders a sitting US Senator, whom we shall call Richard Furr, more vulnerable to a future challenge.  The opposing party begins to brainstorm regarding a possible opponent for Furr; and Attorney General Luper is prominently mentioned.

An official affiliated with the PAC, whom we shall call Earlie McAdams, speaks with Luper.  The PAC official tells Luper that everyone knew of his interest in the nomination for U.S. Senate, and that the PAC would like to be in a position to help him.  And oh, by the way, we need the police department matter brought to trial.  We need at least one conviction.

Finally, after numerous delays, one of the officers is brought to trial.  The state attorney general's top gun prosecutor, whom we shall call Slim Loman, is assigned to the case.  He is fairly well-known in the Politically Virtuous City; and his reputation is discussed in almost reverential tones.  But he ultimately had to do what Luper wanted him to do.

In due course, one of the charged officers, whose name is Flanders, is tried over a picayune, petty matter that ordinarily would never receive high level attention.  The defense attorney during the trial calls one of the new command staff of the police department to testify.  The name of the commander called to testify is Tastings.  It is revealed that, on another matter, this commander did precisely the same thing that Flanders had done.  Flanders ultimately is acquitted.

Loman had previously told the two officers that the other charges would not be brought to trial.  And those other charges are ultimately dropped.  One of the officers had been kept on unpaid leave for well over a year by the Politically Virtuous City even though he would never even be brought to trial.  Neither of the two charged officers had any incriminating statements to make about their command staff, as Luper had hoped.

And shortly after Flanders' acquittal, Luper announces he has no plans to run for U.S. Senate.

In the wake of the trial, a reporter/columnist for the local daily, who had previously gotten much of the story wrong, resurrects a side show to the controversy.  The police chief, and the officer who had been tried, are alleged to have driven a mentally ill woman from the apartment complex where the chief had lived.  But the allegation is completely debunked.

The EEOC complaint, and the lawsuit that arose from it, however, are still active.  Ren Flea is the attorney representing the group of black officers who sued the city.  But it turns out that Flea is also sued-- in connection with an unrelated real estate transaction that appears a bit shady. 

Lyin' Dames is the name of one of the black officers represented by Ren Flea in the EEOC matter.  Soon after Flanders'  trial ends, it is reported that the police department promotes officer Dames to the position of Captain.  He is promoted in spite of the fact that he was suing the city. 

There had been another attorney who had previously represented some of the black officers.  His name was Falter Bones.  Interestingly, Bones had written a letter alleging that the former city attorney seemed to be primarily interested in hurting the police chief.  Bones subsequently went to work for the DA in an adjoining city located immediately to the south-- a city which is arguably less politically virtuous. 

Hell Hath No Greater Fury...

... than the media when government is being downsized.

Some Buyers' Remorse Regarding Kay Hagan?

From Tom Campbell of NC Spin:

North Carolina's Junior Senator Kay Hagan is experiencing a bumpy take-off, to say the least. She is still occupying a two-room temporary office in the Senate basement, we're told. Cramped, hidden, and living out of boxes is not a good way to start a new job.

But she has staffing problems and has made some tactical mistakes in her first few weeks, especially among African Americans, one group that provided major support in her election. They are upset over two firings of staff African Americans. Fred Aikens, who stumped the state on her behalf during the campaign, was hired and fired after a day and a half on the job. Aikens, you might remember, was a candidate for State Auditor in last year's primaries. He is a former DOT Deputy Secretary, longtime legislative staffer, and former Colonel in the NC National Guard. Many are speculating that NC National Guard Adjutant General William Ingram had something to do with his firing.

Ingram and Aikens have a long history and it is contentious. It began several years ago when Aikens, then on active duty in Iraq with the Guard, sent a personal e-mail to a friend that was critical of top leadership in the Guard, only to find out his message had been intercepted and given to the AG. Aikens contends his rights of privacy and First Amendment rights were breached. Aikens was later relieved of his duties with the Guard and initiated a lawsuit which is now in the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

But not only was Aikens fired from Hagan's staff but so was Muthoni Wambu, Hagan's state director. Chief of staff Crystal King didn't tell either of them why they were fired. The speculation is that Aikens' hiring has something to do with the state director's firing. The fact that two black staffers were summarily fired has set off a firestorm among African American leadership in the state. We understand that the Legislative Black Caucus and NAACP are looking into the firings. 

Perhaps all these angry, concerned parties are unaware of the $2,500 donation to the Simkins PAC.

But another separate issue is Hagan's support of union card-check (HT:Keith).  This is inconsistent with the "pro-business progressive" culture within the local media, and within some influential portions of the North Carolina Democratic establishment.   Some of these folks are going to find Hagan's position a bit difficult to reconcile. 

And some illusions regarding Hagan perhaps are being shattered.

The Superintendent's Tax Burden; Down the Toilet

Tony Wilkins notes that GCS Superintendent Mo Green offered to forego his annual pay hike.  And Tony wonders whether Mo was concerned that a pay hike would be a taxable event.

And Mike Baron demonstrates how attending to toilet-related issues can interfere with a municipality's designs to sell water.

Hammer on the Sanders Trial

John Hammer had some interesting observations regarding last week's trial of Scott Sanders on the charge of searching a government computer without proper authorization.  It should be noted that Sanders and Tom Fox also had been indicted on charges of conspiracy and obstruction of justice, but these charges are now being dismissed.  Think about the implications of the following statement Hammer made:

According to an impeccable source, those charges were going to be dropped whether Sanders was found guilty or not guilty.

What this means is that Tom Fox was being strung along by the state attorney general's office for nearly eighteen months even though there was no intention to prosecute him.  Consider the ethics of that kind of decision-making, and what the motives may have been.

Hammer continues regarding the politics surrounding the trial:

Coman is a tough prosecutor, which is precisely why he is the top prosecutor in the Attorney General's Office and why he was sent to handle the Duke lacrosse mess. Coman said Sanders was being treated just like anyone else accused of a crime, but the state doesn't, except in very special cases such as this one, send its top prosecutor out to prosecute class H felonies.

This was all about politics and the battle for the soul of Greensboro, and the administration of City Manager Mitch Johnson lost and lost big...

Coman's very presence in the courtroom is proof that this was selective prosecution. Coman is not sent around the state to prosecute people for stealing pine straw or misbranding cattle. He handles the cases in North Carolina that Attorney General Roy Cooper considers the most important, and the trial of Sanders fell into that category...

The state never intended to bring this case to court. Sanders and Fox were supposed to roll over on someone higher up and then hopefully they would roll over on someone even higher up until they got something against Wray, or at least a member of his command staff. The problem with that plan was twofold, first of all Sanders and Fox are honorable men and secondly they didn't have anything to roll over about. Look at all the other investigations. Assuming that the SBI knows how to investigate, in 16 months this is all they could find.

When the charges were filed against Sanders and Fox, then Mayor Keith Holliday and Mitch Johnson made statements about how grievous these charges were. But they weren't and it turned out the guys were not guilty of any wrongdoing.   It would be shocking to see Mitch Johnson apologize for what he said, but Holliday certainly should.

I suspect there is much more to learn about the political influence and manipulation that affected the state Attorney General's office and the SBI.  But it appears to me from Hammer's reporting that Tom Fox, even though he was not the focus of the trial, was done a terrible disservice.  There may not have been a genuine intention to bring him to trial.  Hammer felt Roy Cooper was hoping to get to Wray and his command staff through Fox and Sanders. 

How will these two officers be compensated for what they were put through?  It is increasingly obvious that they were the objects of politically motivated investigations, indictments-- and in Sanders' case, an absurd trial. 

GPD Quick Hits

Some bits of news regarding the GPD fiasco:

1. Attorney Ken Free is representing the 40 officers suing the city of Greensboro in connection with the EEOC complaint.  The Rhino Times reports that Free is being sued over an unrelated matter involving his alleged actions in a real estate deal.  Ben has posted the actual papers filed.

2. The News and Record reports this morning that an officer named "B.L. James" is being promoted to captain.  Recall that someone named Brian James was one of the featured officers in the Bledsoe series; and is one of the parties to the lawsuit Free has brought against the city.

Cops in Black and White, Part 71

Jerry Bledsoe continues his series in the Rhino Times with a discussion of Lorraine Ahearn's column Sunday regarding Peggy Barker.  The following represents a summary.  We had discussed Ahearn's column in a lengthy thread here several days ago. 

Ms. Barker was the mentally ill woman who harassed David Wray at his townhome complex.  It turns out that Jim Coman, the assistant Attorney General, attempted to use the Barker incident against Scott Sanders in court last week.

Former Chief David Wray had received a phone call from Ms. Barker, who was staying in the unit beside him, 3:30 one morning.  He had not met her previously.  Ms Barker was displaying some psychotic manifestations on the telephone.  Wray met her outside at her door.  The woman claimed to have some information for the FBI about David Wray, and wanted to give it to him, assuming he was from the FBI.  When she learned he was David Wray, she slammed the door in his face.

It turns out Barker had in the past been an informant when the FBI had been investigating a local business.  And and FBI agent soon told Wray she had been making wild accusations about him.  She accused him of having sex with 8-10 women every night.  The FBI agent felt she was unstable, and demonstrated that she had been stalking Wray.

Randall Brady felt, based on what he heard, that Barker was irrational and unpredictable; and that it could become a safety issue.  He took control of the matter so that Wray did not have to be directly involved.  It turns out Barker had made false accusations against another police officer in the past.

Bledsoe then quoted the entry that Matt Lojko made at this blog several days ago.

Barker was known to several others in Greensboro who had encounters with her as well.  She once threatened to place a curse on a News and Record editor.  Wray advised Ed Kitchen of the situation, and advised him he was going to "get intelligence to look into it".  Special Intelligence had a role in investigating threats against public officials.

Wray informed his landlord of the situation.  Scott Sanders was assigned to the case.  He interviewed people at locations where she previously lived-- and there were problems there also.  She had been forced to leave another apartment only recently. 

Sanders found out that Barker had been permitted to stay in the townhouse by the owners of the unit for a few days; but would have to leave because they were planning to use the unit themselves.   The investigation ended.  There was nothing Sanders or Brady or Wray did that precipitated her being thrown out of the complex.  The owners of the unit had only planned to house her temporarily; and Barker left about two weeks later.

Mitchell Johnson later used Sanders' tapes Sanders to make the role played by Brady and Sanders appear evil.  Brady felt that Johnson retaliated against him because he had just won his suit for his retirement benefits.

Bledsoe pointed out other errors and omissions in Ahearn's column:

1. She focused on Brady's verbal bluster instead of the way the case was handled.

2. Mitchell Johnson did not share the parts of the tapes that revealed the problems Barker was creating.

3. Ahearn indicated the unit was sublet by Barker, but it was not.

4. Ahearn said Sanders spoke with Wray's neighbors and visited the neighborhood, but he had not.

5. Ahearn said Barker was "put out" of the condo, implying Sanders was responsible.

6. Ahearn made it appear it should have been obvious to the men she would be immediately homeless, but in fact she left driving a Volvo.  Bledsoe said Wray offered to help her, but they had no reason to believe she would become homeless (if she did).

7. Ahearn reported Barker later became afraid police were checking her PO Box, but Wray's men had not been doing that.

8. Ahearn referred to Barker as Wray's neighbor, but she was not.

Bledsoe concluded: "As Ahearn's column illustrates, violating truth also violates common decency."

How Obama Will Pay for Health Care

We are now beginning to see the early rough confines of the plans Barack Obama and the congressional Democrats have to pay for the massive new health care entitlement they envision; and for the rescue of Medicare, which otherwise would bankrupt the nation on its current path.

These financial undertakings are going to be attempted after having already expanded health care entitlements with the SCHIPS that was recently passed; and the Medicaid expansion under the stimulus bill.  And we need to remain mindful that we are simultaneously seeing huge bailouts of financial industries, the automobile industry and certain mortgage holders; the horrendous spending in the stimulus bill;  and other massive expansions of the welfare state.  With apologies to the late Everett Dirksen, a trillion here, a trillion there, and sooner or later it adds up to real money. 

In any case, how are we going to pay for all Obama wants to do with health care?  Here are some pieces of information now coming into focus:

1. We are going to see the income tax rate for those with incomes above $250,000 rise to 39.6%.

2. Upper income Medicare beneficiaries would have to pay more for prescription drug coverage.

3. Itemized deductions are going to be reduced for higher income taxpayers for things like charitable deductions, local taxes and the like.

4. And ultimately, it seems likely there will be higher payroll taxes as well.  This will likely include all taxpayers; but will disproportionately affect those with higher income once again, because there will be an enormous temptation to eliminate any income cap on payroll taxes.

The sum total of all these changes to pay for health care is that taxes will likely be increased on most Americans; and there will be very steep net tax increases on Americans with incomes greater than $250,000.  The problem, of course, is that these tax increases will be much greater than what Obama disclosed during the presidential debates, when most Americans were paying attention.  The net effect is a massive redistribution of income.

Obama did not disclose what his tax policies would be because he wanted to win the election.  But he also felt the need to obscure his tendencies toward socialistic approaches.

Many of the people who will be paying sharply higher taxes are not really "rich".  Instead, they are upper middle class.  They are working people, and small business owners, who create jobs and give generously to charity.  Some might not have huge amounts of assets.  And many already pay a hefty burden in combined federal, state and local taxes, which causes their real net income to be much less than it might otherwise appear.  Weakening this class of Americans economically by redistributing their income might be politically tempting, but will ultimately backfire, because less jobs will be created by small business-- the dynamic incubator of new job creation in the modern economy-- and less will be saved and invested. The stock market seems to agree with my assessment. It has done very poorly since Obama has had the opportunity to announce all his plans.

And taking even 100% of the income of higher income taxpayers will not be sufficient to eradicate all the deficits caused by the current bailouts, and all the current and future spending.  It will not pay for all the health care schemes we are witnessing.

On Tuesday night, Barack Obama invoked themes of responsibility repeatedly to persuade those listening to his speech.  But in fact, his plans for health care and the welfare state suggest to me he should be claiming the converse:

Rush Better In Opposition

The events of the last month have made one thing crystal clear.

Rush Limbaugh, to whom I have been listening since around 1990, is at his very best when he is the Leader of the Opposition.  He does better substantively-- and also from an entertainment standpoint-- when his own party is not in control. 

Some of us recall the amazing work he did from 1993-1994 when Bill Clinton was president.  We are now seeing a reprise with the presidency of Barack Obama.

I think it would be great if we had a Rush-equivalent to discuss local and state-wide issues in North Carolina.  Some significant counterweight to the hegemony that exists would be helpful.

Marc Basnight, Joe Hackney and Gay Marriage

An article by Mark Binker reveals the response of our two illustrious North Carolina legislative leaders when a bill was introduced to allow for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in our state:

There is, however, a North Carolina state law that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, something that legislative leaders say has proved sufficient thus far.

“There’s no reason to think that’s going to change,” said House Speaker Joe Hackney, an Orange County Democrat. “What I think you see happening with these news conferences is the advancement of a partisan agenda.”

In 2007, Hackney used his power as Speaker to kill a similar bill in the House that had managed to pass its first committee hearing. When asked if he would do the same again this year, Hackney said, “I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it.”

Senate leader Marc Basnight also was skeptical about the need for such a bill. When asked if he worried North Carolina’s marriage law could be overturned, Basnight said, “No one has shown me that could occur.”

Asked Tuesday afternoon if Forrester’s bill would be doomed to the same fate as in previous years, Basnight was noncommittal.

“Will it come up? I can’t say,” Basnight said.

But he assigned the bill to Ways and Means, a committee that has not met since 2001 and is controlled by one of Basnight’s chief deputies. Assigning a bill there is viewed as an efficient way to kill legislation.

I think this demonstrates the degree to which both Basnight and Hackney are completely disingenuous on this issue.  Hackney dismisses the constitutional amendment as a "partisan agenda", when in fact it is a serious proposal that addresses concerns regarding the future of marriage law in this state. 

Basnight pretends that the state's marriage law cannot be overturned in court.  He also makes it appear the issue might be addressed in the Senate, but assigns it to a committee in a manner that assures it will not be.

Both men appear to question the need for the constitutional amendment. 

Hackney and Basnight are both very intelligent.  They know state courts can overturn our marriage law, and make gay marriage legal in our state nearly in an instance.  When these two estimable legislative leaders pretend otherwise, they are being intellectually dishonest. 

If they are against the proposed constitutional amendment, they should merely state what is obviously true.  They should state that they are willing to allow the judiciary to make gay marriage legal in our state.  When they fudge--  and essentially lie-- on this question, they do themselves, and the citizens of our state, a grave disservice.

Governor Perdue in a Terrible Fix

First, she wins plaudits with some shrewd moves on matters regarding transportation and education.  Then, upon learning about the state's serious budget shortfalls, she expresses fervent hope that Barack Obama's stimulus package will bail out the state of North Carolina.

And then she goes on vacation for a week, only a month or so after assuming the office of the governor, in the midst of a budget crisis.

When she returns from vacation, she learns that Barack's stimulus is not going to be nearly as much help as she had hoped.  Now Beverly Perdue is in a terrible fix.

John Hood reveals that budget shortfalls for the next three years in the state of North Carolina will be $2.2 billion, $3.6 billion and $3.3 billion, respectively.  He attributes this to overspending and incurring of excessive obligations during times of plenty.  And Red Clay reveals that spending in our state, adjusted for inflation, has increased 95% over the last 25 years.   That is a near doubling over that time frame.

In retrospect, Governor Perdue's excitement at cashing in on the stimulus package seems to have been a bit naive.  Her eagerness to feed at the federal trough was fairly unappealing.  Yes, she got to mix with some important folks in Washington.  But ultimately, she bought into an economic approach germinating there that was ill-conceived from the outset.  And that does not enhance our confidence in her.

A recent article reminds us of the notable contributions of the Austrian school of economics which included such notables as Ludwig von Mises and Friedrick Hayek.  Hayek was described as the antithesis of John Maynard Keynes:

Crucial elements in Hayek’s thought are that (1) prices are the signals of worldwide supply and demand for various goods and services, (2) interest rates are vital in guiding production decisions, (3) profits guide resources to those who use them most effectively, and (4) the smaller government is, the better. It could hardly be said that any of these insights informs current policy. Hayek’s wisdom is being ignored, a fact that does not bode well for the future of the economy...

Keynesian ideas of expansive and activist government are prominent now, but it is unlikely that they will provide the right antidote to the maladies that confront the global economy. Hayek’s prescription — free markets, limited government, a stable monetary policy, low taxes, and light but appropriate regulation — is more likely to produce lasting prosperity in the long run. 
 
Now Governor Perdue and the Democratic leadership in Raleigh, after having placed all their hopes in a misguided economic stimulus package, must get back to work and fix the problem they created.  They will have to cut spending, increase taxes, borrow creatively or perhaps do some combination of the three. 

Let's hope they begin to exhibit some wisdom when they make their choices. 

Merging Our Local Planning Departments: Is This a Good Idea?

The Rhino Times reported this week that Skip Alston is moving rapidly on the matter of merging the planning department for Guilford County with those from Greensboro and High Point:

(Commissioner Bruce) Davis looked shocked – and he laughed out loud – when Alston spoke about combining the planning departments of Guilford County, Greensboro and High Point by July 1.

Davis, stunned, said he felt as though he was way out of the loop.

"They've got this thing worked out," he said to the audience.

Davis said, "That may not be bad," but he added that clearly there were talks going on that he didn't know about.

Commissioner Mike Winstead didn't seem quite sure he was hearing things correctly either.

"There's a lot of questions," Winstead said. "To hurry through this is not the way to do this."

Winstead compared the talk of consolidating the area's planning departments to discussions on the Heart of the Triad project, which, Winstead said, everyone was trying to push forward quickly a couple of years ago, but now, he said, he doesn't hear much discussion about that initiative.

Winstead said merging the departments by July was unreasonable.

"I think we ought to be realistic," Winstead said.

After the meeting, Alston said he realized the July 1 goal for combining the planning operations was highly optimistic, and perhaps unrealistic, but he said it was important to be aggressive in plans of this sort or nothing ever gets done.

Forgive me for beating a dead horse, but this move by Alston leads me to remember the $5,000 donation that Action Greensboro gave to the Simkins PAC.

Is consolidating the planning departments a good idea?  In the eyes of some, it might help provide a uniform, integrated approach to planning that emphasizes the best interests of the entire region, and to serve some predetermined notion of "quality".  And it might enable certain efficiencies to take place.

But will these efficiencies actually occur?  We need to look at the outcome when local school systems merged to become Guilford County Schools.  It created a mess from which we still have not recovered.  And any anticipated efficiencies were entirely illusory.

Another consideration is that this could potentially lead to fewer genuine residential choices for area residents.  There could potentially be pressure to move all jurisdictions toward a uniform manner of development, instead of each possessing its own unique character.  The local population would then have fewer real opportunities to "escape" any given approach.

I am not a planning expert.  But which political interests are going to be most likely served by merging the planning departments?  And why would Winstead-- a developer-- seem to be disagreeing with Alston?

Matt Lojko Explains Wray/Sanders Neighbor Incident

Matt Lojko had sent me an e-mail with a request that I post the below information on his behalf.  It is in response to our previous thread from yesterday on Lorraine Ahearn's column in the News and Record.  He was part of David Wray's command staff:

As Chief Wray’s Executive Officer in late 2003 or early 2004, I had an interaction with the lady in question.  She came in without an appointment to discuss a matter with the Chief.  As was customary in such situations, I intervened on his behalf to see if I could assist her.

She was well dressed and neatly groomed.  As we talked, I initially
found her to be friendly, intelligent and articulate.  However, only
minutes into the conversation, her thinking became completely
irrational and her demeanor became extremely argumentative and
confrontational.  She began making farfetched and wild accusations that
I knew from my training and experience indicated probable symptoms of a
mental disorder.   After nearly an hour of speaking with her, I was
unable to make any headway.  Her disturbing behavior continued to
escalate to the point I asked her to leave my office.  When she refused
to leave after numerous requests, I had to personally escort her from
the building under threat of arrest for trespassing.  After she left, I
never heard from her again.

In my career as a police administrator, I have dealt with numerous
individuals like this.  Because of their incessant phone calls, visits
and wild accusations, they can be extremely disruptive to the
day-to-day operations of the Chief’s Office.  Regrettably, little can
be done with them from a law enforcement perspective unless they
constitute a threat to themselves or others.

In the past I have attempted personally and through staff to determine
if they have family or caretakers that can assist in getting assistance
for these individuals.  However, in most of these situations, family
and friends have limited if any ties with these individuals out of
utter frustration.  Because of HIPAA legislation, medical information
surrounding these individuals is confidential and unavailable to law
enforcement.  This severely limits law enforcement’s abilities to
intervene in such matters.

It is sad that these individuals seem to fall through the cracks. 
Regrettably, the bottom line is they are too ill to function well in
society but they are too well for existing laws to apply to allow law
enforcement to intervene to get them medical help without their
approval.  In cases like this, law enforcement is left with little
option other than to treat them no differently than someone without
suspected mental problems.

With that said, I don’t know what Detective Sanders said or did in
relation to the matter in question.  I can only speculate that he
simply told the owner of the condo what she was doing and saying about
the chief and the owner took action as he would with any other tenant
that exhibited such behavior.  The decision to ask her to leave the
condo didn’t rest with Detective Sanders.  The owner made that
decision.

Update; Sam Hieb has more.

A New City Council Candidate, Ethnic Stereotyping, and "Guido's"

The Inside Scoop has a post about a new candidate for City Council who has deployed a creative YouTube strategy flaunting his altruistic impulses.  While this approach, which is fairly new for our local politics, has been highlighted on other blogs, there has not been any discussion of one glaring issue.  Each of the two YouTubes utilizes ethnic stereotypes that could be interpreted as disparaging Americans of Italian descent.

It was interesting to note that, in a town like Greensboro which is governed by the dictates of political correctness, such a strategy would fail to cause a derisive stir.  But then I remembered a point I had made previously-- that a group must be sanctioned by the left as having attained victim status before being accorded protection by the political left.  Americans of Italian descent-- unlike certain other groups-- do not possess victim status, and therefore are not protected.

Of course, some ethnic stereotypes have a basis in reality, and that is one of the reasons they exist.  But for protected groups, it is politically impermissible to utilize stereotypes to elicit humor or otherwise entertain, even if they have a basis in reality.

It turns out there is another stereotype this particular City Council candidate could have used.  Where I was born and raised, there was a typology commonly referred to as a "Guido".  In fact, for a short time when I was about 18 years old, I probably aspired to be a Guido;  but truth be told, I was not very good at it.  The best explanation I can offer is that a Guido is the New York-area equivalent of a stereotypical redneck.

So in any case, for this particular City Council candidate highlighted at the Inside Scoop, there is at least one other stereotype he can feature on YouTube during the course of his campaign-- the Guido.  It will overlap somewhat with those he has already done, but not to any major extent. 

And there are probably a number of other stereotypes that he could probably draw from my particular ethnic group.  The sky is the limit.

Robbie Perkins Watch, Part 7

Keith Brown has an interesting post over at Triad Watch regarding Robbie Perkins (and secondarily, Zack Matheny).

Some highlights of Keith's post:

1. Perkins had to recuse himself four times from votes during the last council meeting because of conflicts.

2. He was acting as the leasing agent on a downtown project, and had to ask the city attorney whether voting on the project would represent a conflict.

3. Resolutions brought before the council would approve bringing water and sewer to the new airport campus of GTCC-- a vicinity in which Perkins and Matheny had recently made real estate investments.

And when other council members had attempted to bring proposals before the City Council regarding the Greensboro Police Department recently, what was Robbie's response?

"Frankly, I'm fed up with the waste of time."

     

Ahearn Attempts Parting Shot At Wray, Brady, Sanders

Incredibly, this morning's N&R has a column from Lorraine Ahearn that attempts to take what appears to be a final parting shot at David Wray, Randall Brady and Scott Sanders.

The technique? Understate the nuisance that the woman was creating for Wray where he lived, and the appropriateness of police responding to it; and overplay the degree to which it is the responsibility of the police to act as social worker.  Act as the moral arbiter of police having to deal with a very difficult situation, at convenient arm's length.

Amazing.  This has every appearance of an attempt at self-vindication, and at harming Sanders during the moment he is being placed back within the GPD.

Update: Roch calls the column a diversion, and points out how the reader cannot comment on it.

Update II: Sam Spagnola has a pretty tough post on the subject.

Jerry Bledsoe Reveals New Potential Set of Problems for Sanders and Fox

Jerry Bledsoe just posted the following on another thread here:

Scott Sanders’ acquittal doesn’t mean that troubles are over for him and his former sergeant, Tom Fox. Both are still facing internal investigations that have gone on now for more than three years. Tim Bellamy inserted a hand-picked black detective, Trey Davis, back into Internal Affairs to be involved in the resolution of these investigations.

Davis was the IA detective who put Cathy Vance through an ordeal in an attempt to get her to admit that Sanders had forced her to record black community leaders for malicious purposes. During that inquisition he asked her what was wrong with an officer or police department employee supplying confidential documents or information to a friend or acquaintance, even if that person is boasting of associations with drug dealers. At the time Davis was putting Vance through this ordeal, Bellamy and Capt. Gary Hastings (now asst. chief) knew that no black community leaders had been under surveillance or deliberately recorded.

It is normal for an IA detective to attend all criminal trials of police officers. The IA sergeant sat in on portions of Sanders’ trial, as did another IA detective. But Davis was in the courtroom all week.

Don’t be surprised if Sanders and Fox are fired within a few weeks and forced to go to court to try to get their back pay.

We have seen that there is no limit to the depths to which these forces will stoop.  The people of the city of Greensboro, and its leaders, cannot allow to happen what Jerry Bledsoe describes. 

GPD Officer Reacts to Sanders Verdict, Dropping of Charges

I received an e-mail this morning from an officer within the Greensboro Police Department who wanted to share with me some thoughts regarding yesterday's events:

I have never doubted from day one that Scott Sanders was innocent and the criminal charges were a travesty of justice.

It is said in homicide cases that for every death five people are affected. I have often wondered in this case how many people were affected by this divide created over politics and the death of the truth. Now that things are over, what happens? I hope that somehow the people of this town will find someway to expect the truth, and not statements of "trust us" or "if you only knew what we know".

The truth means being open and honest, and not secrecy.

What makes this country the greatest in the world is our justice system. It might have some problems here and there, but by far is the best one around. Our justice system allows a man to enter a courtroom and present evidence, testimony and facts. Both sides for the defense and prosecution are given this chance, and in the end twelve strangers decide amongst themselves what the truth is and what is relevant. Twelve people who are made up of the citizens of this community who are representatives of all walks of life all have a vested interest to see that the right thing is done.

Is that not what happened here? Twelve people looked at the facts and decided on an issue that has divided this city over three years. Twelve people did what no city government and no amount of talking heads could do-- and that is make a decision. Twelve people from this community have shown us that if one seeks the truth then it shall be known. Maybe now we take the example these twelve people have shown us, and now reach across the divide and seek the truth, and maybe-- just maybe-- find some way to heal this town and put an end to this sad chapter in the city’s history.