| Judeo-Christian values are dreams our great nation, the United States of America, was founded upon. I support these principled values. Throughout the history of America and the practicing values in the lives of the great founding fathers of our “U.S. Constitution”, each must conclude that these men obtained their “Wisdom” from God above. Each, who has any interest in US History, should study and really learn our founding father’s writings, by pages, and literally by each sentence; maybe, by each phrase. Entering life, most of us are endowed by God the senses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling. These senses are a part of learning in life used of what I usually refer to as our “everyday’’ education. As a newborn, we learn the love by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling from our loved ones, our families, natural and/or adopted. We learn things as simple as when an object is dropped, by the science of gravity, the object falls to the floor, ground, etc. We go throughout life continuing to learn from our God-given senses. As we develop a little older, we enter into our “intelligence” education through our elementary and/or grammar schools, high schools, our colleges and universities, and/or perhaps other specialty schools. While each and all of these forms of learning in life are very important, we have every opportunity to expand by entering into the “Wisdom” education. Each must remember, “Wisdom” is a form of education, which comes only from our “God” above. “Wisdom” also has a history from Old English Law, which is just good old “common sense”. Each one of us has the opportunity to learn, to receive, to share, and to practice “Wisdom”. To do so, each must “Humble” himself/herself before God, discover our Holy Bible, read it, get to know it, practice it, and live your own life by the Biblical teachings. Remember, when you are not humble, you are more likely to tumble. In sharing your knowledge with others, follow the “K.I.S.S.” system (Keep It Simple Stupid) and maintain the good old “common sense” approach. Another old saying is: “People don’t care how much you know, until they know how much you care”! As an added written example of “Wisdom”, read and really study, by phrase, a document as simple as our “Pledge of Allegiance”. Almost all know these words. However, have you studied the real meaning in each word, each phrase, each entire sentence, and the entire masterpiece itself? While we fail our own expectations almost daily and throughout life, it is imperative for each of us to make every effort to improve ourselves, keeping our life wholesome and pure. We must follow our own life the same as if we were being watched by our Father, because He is. He is also watching over each and every one of us. As you climb the ladder in life, it is easier to fall off the rung than to climb to the top. |
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Education In Life
Monday, July 23, 2007
Commentary: Rep. Gibson (D-Anson), Tell The Truth!
| In 1965, in Swann vs. the Charlotte Mecklenburg, NC Public Schools, a suit over desegregation was brought into US District Court in Charlotte, NC. In 1969 after many battles in the Democrat Party controlled NC General Assembly, the NC Democrat Party controlled NC Courts, and US Federal Courts, US District Judge James McMillan, Jr. ruled there was a dual system, based on race, in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg, NC Public Schools system. With the assistance of Dr. John Finger from Rhode Island, a new plan was ordered to desegregate Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. The plan became known as the “Finger Plan”, not only based on the assistance of Dr. Finger, but because of the geographical layout of an open hand. Should you place your own hand onto the map of the downtown City of Charlotte and extend your fingers outward, the picture would very much look like your hand palm representing predominately black school students in the intercity. Each of the extended fingers would represent predominately white students; each finger reaching into the communities and busing white students into the intercity previous predominantly all black city schools. I present this as an analogy that Rep. Pryor Gibson’s (D-Anson) plan with his supporting map looks somewhat like another different “Finger Plan”. Rep. Gibson is proposing legislation in the NC General Assembly for the Union County, NC Commissioners to be elected by districts as he, himself chooses, regardless of the fact that the UC Commissioners nor any of the three UC members of the NC General Assembly has ask him for this legislation. They unanimously oppose his legislation. By my description of “geography only”, you could place your hand palm on the downtown City of Monroe, NC and extend your middle finger East down US Highway 74 through the town of Wingate, NC and with two smaller takeoffs to the left. The map then appears to continue to represent US Highway 74 East, to the Town of Marshville, NC. There, and with one of a snake’s forked tongue takes off to the left side which appears to represent the Marshville-Olive Branch Road area. The right fork of the tongue appears to go to the right side going outside of the south Town of Marshville city limits area. Nothing in Rep. Gibson’s legislation will present more elected representation from Marshville or any other on the East side of Union County. Mr. Gibson, how will your new plan prevent a representative from being elected from downtown Monroe? If you want representation from Marshville, why not include the entire Town of Marshville in your new legislation? Huh? I hope the NC General Assembly and/or Union County voters will reject the “Finger Plan” as Rep. Gibson is presenting. Just as Rep. Gibson’s map appears to represent the extended middle finger of a hand to the citizens of Union County, NC, do not be surprised that he may present you with an extended middle finger at any time his aspiration may advance his personal objective. Tell the truth! "It is not honorable to take mere legal advantage, when it happens to be contrary to justice." --Thomas Jefferson Oscar Y. Harward - oharward@carolina.rr.com |
Monday, July 16, 2007
Editorial: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Editorial: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors? Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.?
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes.
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors? Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.?
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes.
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Commentary: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Commentary: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on. Some legislators on Capitol Hill hear from these listeners and now hear what some of our elected officials are doing. Americans are responding. So many elected officials do not want you, as Americans, to know what is going on, and what we as citizens, are responding to.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together. Fact is, Rush has some fifty (50%) percent more listeners at any given time than the listed liberal talkers all totaled together. Americans turn to talk radio because they hunger for more of the conservative message, which is unavailable otherwise. The TV network news and the major print medias block the same conservative messages as it is in opposition to their more liberal view.
That is the problem with most Democrats and a few Republicans. While Americans are listening to talk radio, America is tuning in and listening to the more conservative message while turning their back on the liberal messages in the network TV news and the major print medias. Americans rejects the liberal “empty message”.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject. Their legislation would adjust “freedom of speech” to meets their own political goals, although it is in violation of our US Constitution.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors in lieu of ones’ with liberal views? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.? I doubt that. When will NBC-TV news employ 50%, or 25%, or even 10% of conservative TV news reporters? When will NBC-TV news utilize just one (1) conservative news reporter? Fox News Channel is the single source in TV network news offering an alternative conservative news view.
I ask these questions, as it appears some of our legislators on Capitol Hill do not like what you are listening to and responding to. Many of these legislators, in their own mind, truly believe they are so much more well informed than you and I. With that thought, these legislators are attempting to decide what and whom you can listen to, what you must think, and what you must believe in.
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it. Some of their messages are very much similar to inviting your best friend for dinner in your home, only for your guest to find your refrigerator and your cupboards are both totally empty.
This issue called the “Fairness Doctrine” is directed at conservative talk radio hosts and America’s radio listeners. You and I must not become a victim to this newly proposed and unconstitutional legislation.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes. I will bet that will not happen!
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on. Some legislators on Capitol Hill hear from these listeners and now hear what some of our elected officials are doing. Americans are responding. So many elected officials do not want you, as Americans, to know what is going on, and what we as citizens, are responding to.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together. Fact is, Rush has some fifty (50%) percent more listeners at any given time than the listed liberal talkers all totaled together. Americans turn to talk radio because they hunger for more of the conservative message, which is unavailable otherwise. The TV network news and the major print medias block the same conservative messages as it is in opposition to their more liberal view.
That is the problem with most Democrats and a few Republicans. While Americans are listening to talk radio, America is tuning in and listening to the more conservative message while turning their back on the liberal messages in the network TV news and the major print medias. Americans rejects the liberal “empty message”.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject. Their legislation would adjust “freedom of speech” to meets their own political goals, although it is in violation of our US Constitution.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors in lieu of ones’ with liberal views? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.? I doubt that. When will NBC-TV news employ 50%, or 25%, or even 10% of conservative TV news reporters? When will NBC-TV news utilize just one (1) conservative news reporter? Fox News Channel is the single source in TV network news offering an alternative conservative news view.
I ask these questions, as it appears some of our legislators on Capitol Hill do not like what you are listening to and responding to. Many of these legislators, in their own mind, truly believe they are so much more well informed than you and I. With that thought, these legislators are attempting to decide what and whom you can listen to, what you must think, and what you must believe in.
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it. Some of their messages are very much similar to inviting your best friend for dinner in your home, only for your guest to find your refrigerator and your cupboards are both totally empty.
This issue called the “Fairness Doctrine” is directed at conservative talk radio hosts and America’s radio listeners. You and I must not become a victim to this newly proposed and unconstitutional legislation.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes. I will bet that will not happen!
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Commentary: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on. Some legislators on Capitol Hill hear from these listeners and now hear what some of our elected officials are doing. Americans are responding. So many elected officials do not want you, as Americans, to know what is going on, and what we as citizens, are responding to.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together. Fact is, Rush has some fifty (50%) percent more listeners at any given time than the listed liberal talkers all totaled together. Americans turn to talk radio because they hunger for more of the conservative message, which is unavailable otherwise. The TV network news and the major print medias block the same conservative messages as it is in opposition to their more liberal view.
That is the problem with most Democrats and a few Republicans. While Americans are listening to talk radio, America is tuning in and listening to the more conservative message while turning their back on the liberal messages in the network TV news and the major print medias. Americans rejects the liberal “empty message”.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject. Their legislation would adjust “freedom of speech” to meets their own political goals, although it is in violation of our US Constitution.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors in lieu of ones’ with liberal views? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.? I doubt that. When will NBC-TV news employ 50%, or 25%, or even 10% of conservative TV news reporters? When will NBC-TV news utilize just one (1) conservative news reporter? Fox News Channel is the single source in TV network news offering an alternative conservative news view.
I ask these questions, as it appears some of our legislators on Capitol Hill do not like what you are listening to and responding to. Many of these legislators, in their own mind, truly believe they are so much more well informed than you and I. With that thought, these legislators are attempting to decide what and whom you can listen to, what you must think, and what you must believe in.
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it. Some of their messages are very much similar to inviting your best friend for dinner in your home, only for your guest to find your refrigerator and your cupboards are both totally empty.
This issue called the “Fairness Doctrine” is directed at conservative talk radio hosts and America’s radio listeners. You and I must not become a victim to this newly proposed and unconstitutional legislation.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes. I will bet that will not happen!
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on. Some legislators on Capitol Hill hear from these listeners and now hear what some of our elected officials are doing. Americans are responding. So many elected officials do not want you, as Americans, to know what is going on, and what we as citizens, are responding to.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together. Fact is, Rush has some fifty (50%) percent more listeners at any given time than the listed liberal talkers all totaled together. Americans turn to talk radio because they hunger for more of the conservative message, which is unavailable otherwise. The TV network news and the major print medias block the same conservative messages as it is in opposition to their more liberal view.
That is the problem with most Democrats and a few Republicans. While Americans are listening to talk radio, America is tuning in and listening to the more conservative message while turning their back on the liberal messages in the network TV news and the major print medias. Americans rejects the liberal “empty message”.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject. Their legislation would adjust “freedom of speech” to meets their own political goals, although it is in violation of our US Constitution.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors in lieu of ones’ with liberal views? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? I doubt that.
Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.? I doubt that. When will NBC-TV news employ 50%, or 25%, or even 10% of conservative TV news reporters? When will NBC-TV news utilize just one (1) conservative news reporter? Fox News Channel is the single source in TV network news offering an alternative conservative news view.
I ask these questions, as it appears some of our legislators on Capitol Hill do not like what you are listening to and responding to. Many of these legislators, in their own mind, truly believe they are so much more well informed than you and I. With that thought, these legislators are attempting to decide what and whom you can listen to, what you must think, and what you must believe in.
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it. Some of their messages are very much similar to inviting your best friend for dinner in your home, only for your guest to find your refrigerator and your cupboards are both totally empty.
This issue called the “Fairness Doctrine” is directed at conservative talk radio hosts and America’s radio listeners. You and I must not become a victim to this newly proposed and unconstitutional legislation.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes. I will bet that will not happen!
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Editorial: “Fairness Doctrine” - Forcing An Empty Message?
Many Democrats and a few Republicans on Capitol Hill name and call it the “Fairness Doctrine”. The name itself sounds as refreshing as a large glass full of ice water on a hot, oppressive, summer day. Oh, how wrongly directed this representation really is!
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors? Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.?
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes.
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Do not be fooled! The majority Democrats and some of the Republicans on Capitol Hill know that America is tuned into, listening to, and responding to so many radio talk show hosts alike to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Reagan, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, and the list goes on.
Conservative talk radio is growing while liberal talk radio is dying. Rush Limbaugh has more listeners alone than most popular liberal talkers Al Franken, Ed Schultz, and Jerry Springer all together.
Members on Capitol Hill are now considering legislation, the “Fairness Doctrine”, to require conservative talk show personalities to share half of their radio airtime to the liberal views, which the listeners reject.
Will their legislation require College and University administrations to hire conservative professors? Will their legislation require liberal print media to hire conservative writers, editors, and/or other news analysts? Will their legislation require TV network (NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN) news to hire conservative news’ anchors, reporters, editors, etc.?
When some politicians fail to win their political arguments and they are in a majority, they choose to legislate it.
It is essential for our legislators on Capitol Hill to allow the “free market” to decide this issue, or require Colleges and Universities to hire conservative professors, require newspapers and magazines to hire conservative editors and writers, require TV networks to hire conservative news anchors, reporters, and editors to bring a true “Fairness Doctrine” into our American homes.
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Monday, July 9, 2007
Rep. Gibson Must Tell The Truth
Commentary: Rep. Gibson Must Tell The Truth About Elective Representation!
Some short time ago after a “formal complaint” with the NC Bar Association and by a single majority vote, the NC Bar decided to investigate Durham County, NC District Attorney Mike Nifong’s illegal and/or improper activity and/or his handing of evidence in his investigation of four Duke University Lacrosse team members who had been falsely charged for rape.
In the NC Bar v. D.A. Nifong hearing, findings were among other issues, disclosed that District Attorney Nifong did in fact falsely testify in the Durham County Courtroom to the presiding Judge. Now, Mike Nifong’s legal career and his personal life is destroyed for his illegal activity. The NC Bar is to be commended for their investigation, their finding, and their penalties.
As an analogy follow-up to that investigation, where is the NC General Assembly’s “Ethics’ Committee” concerning the improper rules, activity, and/or devious representations with Rep. Pryor Gibson (D-Anson)? While as a legislator, it seems as though he is free to do as he pleases and the Democratic Party leadership in the NC General Assembly ignores as to whether he is abiding by the Rules and/or promoting honor within the NC General Assembly.
The NC General Assembly’s Ethics’ Committee have standing complaint(s), at least one against Rep. Gibson, and the General Assembly seems not to be investigating anything. Is the Democrat majority in the NC General Assembly going to just “pass” on General Assembly ethics? Do they care so long as they are in the majority? The US Justice Department did investigate and convict Rep. Jim Black.
Now, Rep. Gibson is proposing legislation for the Union County, NC Commissioners to be elected by district as he, himself chooses, regardless of the fact that the UC Commissioners nor any of the three UC members of the NC General Assembly has ask him for help. They oppose his legislation. Furthermore and even worse, Rep. Gibson is “consciously misleading” the residents of eastern Union County that he can provide them with more representation, when in fact; any constitutional district legislation would lead to less representation. The majority of Union County residents live anywhere other than the eastern part of our county.
Why is Rep. Gibson misrepresenting the facts? Why is Rep. Gibson deceitful to the citizens of all the people; especially the honorable working people he represents in eastern Union County? When will he stop? Why not the truth on this issue, Rep. Gibson? Why?
Will or when will the NC General Assembly investigate Rep. Gibson’s false representative claims and establish the true facts? Is Rep. Gibson going to continue to pursue his illegal legislation for his own personal gain regardless of the fact that his legislation will not pass a Constitutional test? Will it take a US Department of Justice Investigation on this matter into Rep. Gibson and/or the NC General Assembly’s Ethics’ Committee to determine the facts?
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Some short time ago after a “formal complaint” with the NC Bar Association and by a single majority vote, the NC Bar decided to investigate Durham County, NC District Attorney Mike Nifong’s illegal and/or improper activity and/or his handing of evidence in his investigation of four Duke University Lacrosse team members who had been falsely charged for rape.
In the NC Bar v. D.A. Nifong hearing, findings were among other issues, disclosed that District Attorney Nifong did in fact falsely testify in the Durham County Courtroom to the presiding Judge. Now, Mike Nifong’s legal career and his personal life is destroyed for his illegal activity. The NC Bar is to be commended for their investigation, their finding, and their penalties.
As an analogy follow-up to that investigation, where is the NC General Assembly’s “Ethics’ Committee” concerning the improper rules, activity, and/or devious representations with Rep. Pryor Gibson (D-Anson)? While as a legislator, it seems as though he is free to do as he pleases and the Democratic Party leadership in the NC General Assembly ignores as to whether he is abiding by the Rules and/or promoting honor within the NC General Assembly.
The NC General Assembly’s Ethics’ Committee have standing complaint(s), at least one against Rep. Gibson, and the General Assembly seems not to be investigating anything. Is the Democrat majority in the NC General Assembly going to just “pass” on General Assembly ethics? Do they care so long as they are in the majority? The US Justice Department did investigate and convict Rep. Jim Black.
Now, Rep. Gibson is proposing legislation for the Union County, NC Commissioners to be elected by district as he, himself chooses, regardless of the fact that the UC Commissioners nor any of the three UC members of the NC General Assembly has ask him for help. They oppose his legislation. Furthermore and even worse, Rep. Gibson is “consciously misleading” the residents of eastern Union County that he can provide them with more representation, when in fact; any constitutional district legislation would lead to less representation. The majority of Union County residents live anywhere other than the eastern part of our county.
Why is Rep. Gibson misrepresenting the facts? Why is Rep. Gibson deceitful to the citizens of all the people; especially the honorable working people he represents in eastern Union County? When will he stop? Why not the truth on this issue, Rep. Gibson? Why?
Will or when will the NC General Assembly investigate Rep. Gibson’s false representative claims and establish the true facts? Is Rep. Gibson going to continue to pursue his illegal legislation for his own personal gain regardless of the fact that his legislation will not pass a Constitutional test? Will it take a US Department of Justice Investigation on this matter into Rep. Gibson and/or the NC General Assembly’s Ethics’ Committee to determine the facts?
Oscar Y. Harward
oharward@carolina.rr.com
Monday, July 2, 2007
Allow Labor Union Members Vote On All Political Issues
H.R. 800 - (Employee Free Choice Act of 2007): A bill to amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish and efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organization efforts, and for other purposes.
“Employee Free Choice Act of 2007” is the name of this legislation. Doesn’t it sound so good? Doesn’t it sound so positive? How clever by the Democrats in our US Congress in their wordings! How misrepresentative is their wordings! On this vote #227, 49 of 50 Senate Democrats voted for closure and they question why their voters’ approval ratings are now down to the teens. Could this type of legislation be a cause as to why higher paying manufacturing jobs are leaving our communities, our states, and/or our USA; relocating to other countries? All 48 Senate Republicans voted against this unwise legislation.
Remember now, in the US Congress, this legislation is called the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007”. What this legislation is exactly the opposite from “Free Choice” as worded in this legislation (H.R. 800). Passage of this legislation PREVENTS working employees from voting by “secret ballot” election “for or against” labor union representation.
Presently, and under current labor law, and with labor union new representation in question, each and all qualified working employees receive a card allowing each qualified employee to sign up for labor representation. Each working employee may sign, or choose not to sign, a card for labor union representation. As a majority of qualified employees sign-up for representation, an election is ordered. The employees then may vote “for or against” labor union representation by “secret ballot”. Now, that is fair. Secret ballot elections prevent intimidation from both sides of the issue.
Why do the Democrat leaders on Capitol Hill want to write and promote legislation which will deny working employees from voting on any “secret ballot” issues? Why do the Democrats leaders on Capitol Hill need to cram labor union representation down the throats of all employees whether the majority of employees choose that representation or not? Could it be that the Washington Democrats are just so out of touch with working employees? Working employees are fed up with labor union representatives who take their union dues, then refuse to listen to and/or represent employee workers’ views. Labor unions need reforming from within. Working employees want their own union dues to be specified to candidates and issues who represent their own personal views.
“Employee Free Choice Act of 2007” is the name of this legislation. Doesn’t it sound so good? Doesn’t it sound so positive? How clever by the Democrats in our US Congress in their wordings! How misrepresentative is their wordings! On this vote #227, 49 of 50 Senate Democrats voted for closure and they question why their voters’ approval ratings are now down to the teens. Could this type of legislation be a cause as to why higher paying manufacturing jobs are leaving our communities, our states, and/or our USA; relocating to other countries? All 48 Senate Republicans voted against this unwise legislation.
Remember now, in the US Congress, this legislation is called the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007”. What this legislation is exactly the opposite from “Free Choice” as worded in this legislation (H.R. 800). Passage of this legislation PREVENTS working employees from voting by “secret ballot” election “for or against” labor union representation.
Presently, and under current labor law, and with labor union new representation in question, each and all qualified working employees receive a card allowing each qualified employee to sign up for labor representation. Each working employee may sign, or choose not to sign, a card for labor union representation. As a majority of qualified employees sign-up for representation, an election is ordered. The employees then may vote “for or against” labor union representation by “secret ballot”. Now, that is fair. Secret ballot elections prevent intimidation from both sides of the issue.
Why do the Democrat leaders on Capitol Hill want to write and promote legislation which will deny working employees from voting on any “secret ballot” issues? Why do the Democrats leaders on Capitol Hill need to cram labor union representation down the throats of all employees whether the majority of employees choose that representation or not? Could it be that the Washington Democrats are just so out of touch with working employees? Working employees are fed up with labor union representatives who take their union dues, then refuse to listen to and/or represent employee workers’ views. Labor unions need reforming from within. Working employees want their own union dues to be specified to candidates and issues who represent their own personal views.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)