The Great One Issues Another Decree
It seems that a citizens right to free speech isn't the only thing that the chosen one is threatened by.
Today an empirical decree was issued from the stately throne room high above the Suntrust Bank that there would be no more commissioner committee meetings held until after the September appointment of new committee members. It seems that the Legislative Committee had gotten out of control in their efforts to actually enforce a nuisance law passed more than ten years ago and the friend of vehicle junk yards everywhere could not allow that to happen.
So just as she stepped in and put a damper on the Adult Board when they had the gall to suggest certain beer joints on 31A comply with the law, she has cancelled the joint Legislative/Environmental Committee Meeting that was to have a member from CTAS and the solid waste officer attend.
The thing that's amazing to me is as the county executive she doesn't even have a vote on what the commission does. The chairperson of each committee sets their meetings not the county executive. Will this be the final straw that forces the commission to grow a collective backbone and actually stand up to the abuse of power being displayed by this interloper from Lincoln County? Will another invisible law be quoted justifying the suspension of reality and common sense?
posted by Allen Barrett | 3:24 PM
315 Comments:
barrett,
Please allow me to be the first to tell you that this is one of your more outrageous and despicable threads. Do you really hate Mrs. Vanzant that much? Shame, shame, shame on you!
I wonder how your followers can support you in this.
JAT says:
The CTAS manual is very explicit when it comes to the authority of a Commission Chairman’s authority. The Chairman (of the County Commissions and that of any Board and/or Committee) has the authority to set meeting's date, time and agenda. The County Executive is a non-voting member of all Committees. However, in the case of Giles County, the County Executive has assumed total authoritarian control over the Commission and its Committees. If the Chairman of any Committee had the guts to ignore our current Executive and hold whatever meeting they deem necessary for the governing and good of Giles County, they should do so. The County Executive has no say or vote. Unfortunately, our current Commission has allowed our current Executive to exercise “de facto” authority over any and all actions and functions being exercised by our elected District representatives. It seems at first view that there is no one in the current County Commission who has the temerity to stand up to Mrs. Janet Parker Vanzant. They did to Mr. Wakefield why not now?
I am wholeheartedly convinced that both Mrs. Vanzant and the Commission act in ways they believe to be in the best interests of Giles County. It's unfortunate that some would disagree, but that's their right to complain and whine.
It's amazing how much trouble and strife one unhappy man can stir up in our county. Perhaps he will move soon.
6:26 you are a sad broken record. Why don't you whine about him to his face since you have so much animosity towards him.
Postings one and two totally ignore the issue and jump on Barrett. Are you that shallow?
6:18 PM Thank you for your post.
I fully agree, she has overstepped her authority and it's way past time the commissioners put a stop to it.
This is a disgusting abuse of power.
If people would just stop worrying about who posted what and concentrate of what is being done there wouldn't be all this bickering and we might be able to actually get this county moving in a forward direction. I don't care if Barrett is a monster or Vanzant is a monster or if either are as sweet as maple syrup, start looking at what's being done. If this is true and she cancelled committee meeting there is just no way to justify it.
Allen Barrett needs to find better things to do with his time. This blog has become so rediculous that a child could see right through the hatred that he has toward our County Executive. I have seen him proven wrong very many times and he will never admit it. I have posted laws that were confirmed by lawyers and he still has too much pride to admit that he is wrong. I will never understand the logic of the people that stand behind him. It has been proven through several elections that he will not be elected and the people that he supports will not be elected. It is a cold truth, but a truth just the same. Giles County will carry on and do just fine. It is a waste of time to try and prove anything to the C.A.V.E. people. Just in case you don't know what it means, it is citizens against virtually everything. Every county has them and the results are the same. They complain and the people in government laugh at them. I have done what I could and see that logic is not an option. In the grand scheme of things he and his supported are very insignificant.
DAW
DAW,
you post opinion and I have never seen you post any law that supports that Barrett is wrong. When you are asked for fact it has come with nonsensical comments implying that one would have to be clairvoyant to speak at a called meeting as well as phrases like basically what the law says. It is ridiculous the way you take up for the government when the laws have been posted above dealing with this post.
Your hatred for Barrett has been showing through for a while and your comments are very childish.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Call me what you will, but I know the truth just as you do. You are not an attorney. I can see right through that. I know I am right and that is all that matters. You can call me names all you want, but it doesn't bother me. Keep on supporting a lost cause. We will keep laughing at you. To whom are you really trying to prove anything? The majority of citizens in this county do not agree with Barrett or any of you. That is a fact. Mrs. Vanzant got elected again despite every negative comment that could be made about her on this blog. That should tell you that you are hopeless. In the end you lose every time. Take a hint.
DAW
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DAW
Yes, he and that little band of faithfuls are quite insignificant in a sense. However, they are a consistent thorn in the side of county government. They truly are a joke even though they continue to cause trouble and division.
You mentioned the C.A.V.E people. I have heard people laughing about them myself, but they should never be taken for granted. I honestly believe these people will do what it takes to hurt those they dislike or resent. These are dangerous people, but thank God they have no power.
9:09 sounds like Forrest Gump trying to argue and " an attorney" couldn't have passed law school if he thinks the county isn't right on this one. I call B.S.
Read the subject of the post and the laws concerning the power of the executive and you can not argue that the executive over stepped her bounds.
If you argue any thing different you choose to be blind to the facts.
Barrett this BS never ends with you! Your post are not about Giles County, they are all about how much you hate Janet and the law here. It's just a shame that the man you say you are is filled with hate. How can you stand on you little space on earth, and say your a man of God and say the things you do. It is my opinion, and trust me many others that your filled with the devil and his work. No one can be filled with such hate ever do any good. Your a sad case of mental sickness, and you need help. I have one piece of advice..if you hate this county and the people of our county why don't you just leave. You do nothing but cost us money, and constantly bash our government here, tell lies non stop, and never admit when you have done wrong. We voted Janet in because WE wanted her in office. You did not get elected because WE don't want you or your kind in office. Your a trouble maker and don't have sence enough to do anything else.
The 9:20 and 9:53 post were deleted by me in an effort to ratchet down the threatening rhetoric. Both are welcome to re-post with less rancorous hostility.
One last thing on the law is simply this, the law is what is written and codified by legislation, not what someone meant for it to be or thought it should be.
If you remember Rep. Pelosi saying about the Obama health care bill, we have to pass this to know what it says. The law is what is written and trying to add to it or selectively apply it eventually harms everyone. You've seen examples of selective application right here with some going to jail and some getting probation and some getting no punishment at all, just let daddy pay, all for the same crime.
Consider the Cowbell game tonight if Lawrenceburg brought a player from some college team and GCHS lost the game. If no one realized it there would be no problem but as soon as it was known what do you think would happen?
Would the game be allowed to stand as a win for L'burg? Would this county accept the argument that the whole team shouldn't be punished because of the coach?
Do you think the TSSAA would cause the game to be forfeited or accept the coach saying "well, I thought it would be OK because I read a rule that said we had to have eleven players? You see we have come to expect that written rules and laws be applied equally and completely not selectively or incompletely.
Yes I have spoken with my attorney who has contacted the state attorney general for an opinion about TCA 5-5-105 and have been assured that nothing in it or any other TCA states a person must be listed on the agenda of a special called meeting when that announcement is made in the local newspaper. So for those who think this is over because DAW has spoken you might want to think again.
As for the comment about not getting elected and people in government laughing at me and others who are trying to simply get this government to follow and apply the rules (laws) equally, I would simply say the best person isn't always the one elected example: Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, Alexander, Steve Cohen, Vanzant. Government officials laughed at a bunch of colonist in this country in the 1770's, Saddam Hussein laughed at the people until they pulled him out of his spider hole.
You can always get a crowd if you are entertaining and elections are no longer based on truth but personalities, that's why we're in the shape we're in as a nation and a county.
8:31
I totally agree with your post. It's just a shame, amd he just keeps spewing his hatred. Let's just hope he will move soon. Apparently we are too stupid and corrupt for him here in Giles County.
Wow, 8:31 talk about hate. You don't know me or anything about me. You have simply taken on the words of a mob and with it the mentality of the mob.
If you were to really think about it you would realize the things you said about me are as totally wrong as when the mob said them about Jesus and Paul and a thousand others who acted on principle. This weekend a mighty statue of a man, who was also referred to with these same kind of words, is to be dedicated in Washington D.C. While I do not consider myself in the same category of greatness as these men and women I certainly try to hold fast to some of the same principles as they and I have no more hatred toward Mrs Vanzant than Rev. King had toward Gov. Wallace. Did Rev. King love what Wallace or Bull Conner did, of course not. I believe that he prayed for them to change and for him to be patient until that change could come but he didn't stop criticizing the bad choices and behavior. I have also prayed that prayer many times whether you believe or accept it, the truth is the truth.
wab
You said you are not in the "same" category of greatness? What a laugh!
Well barrett if you ever told the truth, little if any things might be different. Your just filled with hate, I can read and so can the rest of us who do not believe in you or anything to stand for. You in your hate blog has turned us aganist you. Can't you see what your doing or are you blinded by your hate for all the county and its people stand for. Your not going to get your way, because your way is wrong. No one will follow this hate you spill out. Have you no dignity? What on earth do you think you can accomplish with this maron behaviour? Do you honestly think the people of Giles County would follow you, hell no. I would never follow a man that says and does the things you say and do. Its insane!
Let me correct myself it's Moron, this way I can beat the game of your calling me names, threating me with hacking into my IP, stealing my identity, and person information, which by the way is copied and pasted. Which by the way is against the law! There is nothing you will do to gait some recognition even if it's unlawful. There is not limit you will sink to. You have some sickness beyond comprehensive knowledge. Reminds of history and old world Germany. If your not blonde and blue eyes your dead. You line of thinking is, if its not barretts way, your wrong. It's just insane!
DAW
Have the steroids really messed your mind up so bad that you really believe what you write or are you just being confrontational?
Maybe you didnt think anyone reads this that actually knows you.
You see "anonymous" 10:25, unlike you I am not a coward. I post my name because I have nothing to hide and stand behind what I say. I am sure there are people that know me. I also know that there will be people just like you that act like a little child and really say nothing other than to try and degrade me because you don't have enough mental acumen to debate the topic. You, like many others on this blog are no more than a punk and troublemaker who hide behind a computer screen because it is the only thing you have in life that makes you feel important.
DAW @ 11:01
Isn't that exactly what you are doing - not debating the topic?
10:21 Basrrett has not threatened with hacking into your IP, that was me offering to get it done but Barrett turned me down as he feels so strongly about free speech and even though you abuse him verbally. I don't agree with him on this one but its his blog to do with whatever he wants. By the way, what church did you say you attend?
**YAWN**
10:08 and 10:21 it seems the word moron isn't the only one you need to go back and correct. I would never try to correct anyone using such terrible misspellings and misuse of English. You don't happen to be an illegal alien do you, just wondering based on your lack of English.
DAW
I see your roid rage is going strong, by the way did grandaddy help you get out of that trouble a few years ago?
Is it not amazing how one politically impotent and insignificant man can continue to keep so much trouble stirred up in Giles County?
Is this the kind of stuff that WAB is going to allow on this blog? People accusing others of taking illegal drugs. What a complete moron to go on a public blog and make comments like that. You can get your pants sued off for making statements like that. How much more of a child can someone be. 2:01 has got a severe problem. When you are wrong you just make things personal. You are a scumbag.
I wouldn't worry about it 3:00. I have come to expect that kind of behavior from some of the folks on here. They have absolutely no morals or ethics. People want to get personal with me and not post their name. Being that big of a coward is worse than anything that I have done in my life.
DAW
3:00
Looks like 2:01 is an enabler of strife and troublemaking. It's just sad, isn't it?
What is sad is if Barrett doesn't erase the crap. He will probably leave it since it is defaming DAW.
Who's been taking drugs?
First I saw of that was 3:00's post.
Too many people on here are loosing it. Everyone of you should be a shame including Mr. Barrett, DAW and the enabler.
DAW
What is he or she talking about you didnt deny the accusations, or are they facts?
This whole thing is stupid. DAW proves Barrett wrong and suddenly the gossiping hens come out with a vengeance. You included in that 5:00. You stupid nosey hen. What does any of it have to do with the County?
Nobody cares if DAW took drugs are not but where did he prove Barrett wrong? I have still only seen opinion from DAW that is not supported when you put the law down beside it.
If DAW did have a problem a while back I do have a problem with him and that is where does he get off with his arrogance and holier than thou attitude and superior attitude to everyone else? If he has something in his past he would rather not be remembered by anyone then he is no better than anyone else posting on this blog and he needs to bring himself down off his lofty perch and realize he is no better than the rest of us.
Everyone has done something wrong in their life. Who cares. It has nothing to do with this blog. It also shows how shallow you all can be when things aren't going your way. This is why the people you support don't get elected.
1:49 you is a moron too, perhaps you should check your english, and spelling, lol your a joke. :-)
It is amazing how one resentful and hate-filled man can keep so much trouble stirred up in Giles County. Even more astonishing is that he has a small following of enablers.
6:49 Barrett had nothing to do with the posting that brought up the possible troubles in DAW's past so its wrong to blame him, but then any chance you get you will pounce on Barrett. Shame on your ugly personality.
Look, the statement about me taking steroids is false. That is defamation and it needs to stop before I rightfully take steps to find out who it was that posted it. I don't know anyone that hasn't done something stupid at some point that they regret. My record is clean.
DAW
8:42
You should likewise be ashamed of yourself for enabling his troublemaking personality.
10:47 Should I blame WAB for your silly post?
Who ever started saying things about DAW should be a shame. He is about the only one beside WAB that writes anything worth reading. They don't agree but at least they give us something to think about.
All the one called enabler post is something against WAB. Never has she/he post anything that shows WAB is wrong.
Saying he is a trouble maker don't prove anything except you are as sorry as the one that posted something about DAW.
I think you are a child.
Very hypocritical that in a past post some one threatened to find out who wrote some defaming remarks about Barrett and a few people were screaming those comments were threatening and mocked this blog as joke of a free speech platform if threats were used. And that getting some ones identity is illegal. If I'm not mistaken DAW may have done it as well, i do know that he made statements to the fact that if your going to put yourself out their in the public eye you need to have thick skin.
Now DAW has some one make a very derogatory statement about past drug use, which may or may not be true, and this has to stop or he will take legal action. This comes from the same man that calls people cowards, troublemakers, and a host of other names if they write in opposition of his opinion and he can not understand why those people use pen names or anonymous when they do not wish to open their personal lives up to attacks like that.
Although I did not write the post about his alleged drug use I do hope DAW learns a lesson from this and will tone down his name calling. but from what I have seen of DAW's and the enabler's posts only certain individuals should be guaranteed all rights and protections under the written laws.
I think it is very hypocritical but gives me an understanding of how the people on here think that have fought vehemently against every ones Constitutional rights, especially if they are not likeable or might say something that the Commission may not like, or any other weak excuse they use to find justification of his violation of rights.
They feel they are a part of the chosen group, the elite, and dare ye say nothing against the crown for fear of retribution. What a joke.
Any way does the Executive have the power to cancel committee meetings and why would she do that if she does not? Is this more examples of arbitrary rule?
12:10,
I suppose you haven't read very many posts in the past that scrutinize me and my grandfather. I suppose you haven't see all that I have been called. I have done pretty good for the most part to keep my composure. However, this will not stand. I call someone a coward when they come onto a public blog and accuse me of using steroids and will not post their name. There is a big difference in calling someone a name and breaking defamation laws. I also said that it wasn't true. So for you to say it may or not be true is just adding to the cause of the one that posted it. It also makes you have to be responsible for your words.
12:09
I think you are enabling the troublemaker.
DAW go back and read your own posts. You have called people coward for a variety of reasons other than comments on your alleged drug use.
I have also seen you take it personal and call people cowards when they made statements that your Grandfather's opinions were just that opinions, when you defended them and presented them as fact. No one was bashing your grandfather personally except to set you straight on your comments. If you have done pretty good for keeping your composure I am wandering what type of person you really are.
This blog is a joke in every ones eyes in the county any way. That has been posted many times on here. No one reads it except a few trouble makers so why is it such a big deal.
So do you think the Executive is empowered to put a halt to committee meetings and if so what law supports the opinion?
Why do you only put DAW and Enabler into a category? I have seen alot of posts on this blog that were against Barrett and all of his followers. I am neither DAW nor the Enabler. You all seem to think that just because this is WABs blog that the majority of people like what he has to say. It is easy to pick out the few that take up for him . The wording and writing style are the same. You few have shown your true colors the last few days. That is exaclty why you are labeled troublemakers.
1:16 Writing styles seem to be the same since those posters are probably better educated.
It is very easy to pick out because they always act like children. It has nothing to do with education level unless you are talking about junior high. It is especially easy to pick out Scared Teacher.
1:16
Well of course that's why they are called troublemakers. And they are the true enablers of it.
All the name calling from those in opposition of Constitutional rights and individual freedoms, unless you are popular, and you have the nerve to call any one childish. And the fact that the enabler answers so many posts when the name is mentioned is because that individual has attempted to disguise herself many times to try to pad the numbers that support her ridiculous statements that support bigotry and hatred.
So I take it that all of you think as the post states that Mrs. Vanzant had no authority to cancel the committee meetings and you are trying to change the subject because you do not have anything intelligent to write based on the facts supported by the law.
How interesting, troublemakers.
Alright Deanna,
where do you think that it states that she doesn't have the authority to cancel the meetings? Show your intelligence rather than just agreeing with Barretts vague and hateful topic.
2:45
You are one of the enablers of strife and troublemaking, and I am beginning to wonder if you even realize it.
Think. Who is the one individual in this entire county who continually keeps something stirred up? Interesting.
Stop enabling him.
3:15 I think it would be the one or ones that supersede the authority granted to them by written law. In addition i can read the laws and I do not think Barrett posted them on CTAS or Lexus Nexis. Maybe he has more power than I am aware.
If some one in our government was pushing you over a cliff and told you that it was legal would you go along with them. Some of you would to spite Barrett if Barrett was there telling them they were not following the law and were violating your rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
4:07
That's a false statement.
I read throught the TCA and couldn't find where the county mayor has authority to cancel committee meetings, but nowhere does it say she doesn't. She has the power to appoint the committee chair, so to say that she can't overide their decision about when to have the meeting might be a false statement. The TCA basically gives the county mayor power to do what she wants as long as there are 4 regular legislative body meetings per year. There isn't much written about committee meetings.
It also seems to me that it is better to wait until the new members are appointed since it is getting close to that time. What good would it do to pay the commissioners to meet, only to have different members come in with different ideas and wash the decisions from the last committee. Maybe it is to save money?
GTC says to DAW:
I have agreed with you on many of your early observations and opinions; but in this case your need to borrow your grandfather's CTAS manual and read up on the authority of Committee chairpersons.
The County Executive has no authority over any action conducted by the Commission or an individual Commissioners. Being Chairman of said Commission allows her to set the agrnda for Commission meeting only. She has no vote (unless there is a tie). Chaimen of Committees have the same authority. Only until the County Executive steps down from being Commission Chairman does the Coumty Executive have veto authority (that can be over ridden by a 2/3 vote of the Commission).
Currently Mrs. Vanzant can only recommend, suggest or ask that a Committee meeting be held, changed, or dropped. Yes, she can call a Committee meeting; but, if the Chairman of said Committee does not want to hold such a meeting; the County Executive just has to live with that decision.
It is very obvious that our current Commission has allowed her to exceed her authority and permitted her to do as she sees fit. There is no Tennessee State law or authority that provides her with such powers.
Again, ask to borrow your grandfather's CTAS manual (August 2010). If he does not have a copy (which I doubt) you can acquire your own personal copy from the UT web site. That is how I got my copy.
Regards,
GTC
Why don't all of you stop this foolishness and get down on your knees and pray for all these people Hurricane Irene is pounding?
Would be time better spent.
GTC,
I understand what you mean, but I think the committee chairmen or women must have agreed with her.
DAW
Did they agree with her or remain quiet as they did when item 3 was passed and added to the budget even though it failed?
8:49
Excellent post. I thought about posting that same idea, but I figured the quarrelsome would just call me a name or attack my belief in God.
I wonder if 8:49 and 1:38 are the same person. writing is similar and their comments have nothing to do with the subject of the post. Anything the enabler can do to try to change the subject.
Good post GTC and I agree with your research. You are not reading anything into the law that is not there.
4:02
No, I only posted the 1:38 entry. What difference does it make anyhow?
You can't see how prayer can have anything to do with the subject at hand? Please tell me you are smarter than that. I mean...you have got to be kidding, right??
I noticed the hypocrisy in your calling me an enabler when, in reality, it's those few loyal to barrett who are the true enablers of mischief and troublemaking. Think.
6:51 Move it or you will be late for church. While there you need to pray for assistance to break your obsessive hatred for Barrett.
Back to the subject at hand and the supposed canceling of committee meetings until new committee members are elected a month from now. I'm thinking the Legislative Committee was finally making some progress under the leadership of Ms Faulkner and by overstepping her bounds by canceling any further Legislative Committee meetings was the only way Vanzant could curb the efforts of the committee. You will note that a Financial Management committee was held Thursday followed by an Audit Committee. There is a Regional Planning Committee scheduled this next week. So, DAW, it is not trying to save money that caused the Legislative Committee to be stopped from meeting. Why would committees stop meeting to save money anyway when they have only just begun the new fiscal year and money is flying out from county coffers by the truck load. I wish Ms Faulker would 'defy' Vanzant and hold her committee meeting anyway. If any one of the commissioners would stand up to Vanzant its probably Ms Faulkner.
I'm 8:49 It's this bickering toward one another and not talking about the subject that bothered me and why I would like to see praying for the Hurricane victims instead.
Now I will get ready for church and pray for Giles county as well as for New England.
7:48
I happen to be 1:38 and 6:51.
Let me just say this. I am NOT the one responsible for this bickering as you call it. My plea is that it stop, and I get called a host of names for that.
I too would like to see more prayer for not only the hurricane victims but also for world peace and particularly for it to be restored to Giles County. We once had it. However, I don't see that happening as long as there's a quarrelsome man and a few enablers here who defend him in his mischief.= and troublemaking.
Hey, I'm going to church this morning as well. Let's pray for one another, shall we? There used to be a time when we all generally got along. What happened to Giles County? Who's causing this strife?Think.
I always heard it took two to start a fuss. One to start it and one to keep it up.
Amen 9:34 Very good points 7:16
I don't know how many of you have heard Mrs. Faulkner speak, but she seems lost most times. Things have to be explained to her over and over for her to understand. She is a nice lady but I don't know of her abilities as a commissioner. It the committee was having problems it is probably best it happened this way. 7:16, by you saying you are "thinking" means that theory you have is all opinion and sounds very made up. Did you actually talk to anyone and gather that information?
11:56 Yes, and I also read the reports which support my thinking.
Mrs Faulker is indeed a very nice lady but contrary to your observations she is also capable and doesn't put up with any nonsense.
5:16
What reports would that be? Please share them with us so it will be stated as fact. Thanks!
DAW
DAW
I am not 5:16 but try reading the Minutes of the last few meetings.
I don't just have a copy of the minutes laying around. That is why it would be easier if they were provided. Apparently 5:16 has them and could easily show what she is talking about.
DAW
8:10 I have lived here over sixty years and my family has been here over a hundred before that please tell us when there was all this peace and tranquility you talk about in the county.
There has always been class divisions between the privileged and everyone else, abuse of people who were powerless to fight back, people who live in fear of saying the wrong thing and losing their jobs. There has always been strife between the privileged and everyone else the problem is until recently the privileged didn't realize their was a problem because they had all the power.
8:23
Of course you are right. I should have known the people of Giles County have been oppressed for many decades.
Of course there have always been instances wherein people were in fear for one reason or another for speaking out, but that happens everywhere all the time. That's nothing peculiar to Giles County, and I do not recall any elected official threatening a citizen for having an opinion. You make it sound like we have some sort of caste system here, and that is simply not true. And resentment toward those who are in power is not productive at all.
My family has also been in Giles County for many years and we have always had jobs and our lives have improved. We are nowhere near what you would call priveledged. I have never thought of Giles County as being oppressive. It is one of the most beautiful counties in TN and has allowed people to live the quality if life that they desire. Every individual in this county and country has to work to achieve a better life.
DAW
DAW
You are right. There are many people who have moved here because Giles County is a wonderful place to live. I have lived here all my life and have never felt oppressed by our local government. Now that bunch in Washington is a different story.
Anyway, good post.
DAW
Giles county is a beautiful place to live as far as landscape is concerned, however, there are some very ugly things too.
Its great some people have jobs which enables a better way of life than say 50 years ago, but then there are hundreds of people who are unable to find work simply because it doesn't exist in Giles county and very few available in surrounding ones.
I agree Giles County is a beautiful place to live but if you think everything is just peachy keen you have only lived on one side of the road.
One writer claimed that all the trouble in the county was the result of one man. Another writer correctly said that there was problems here before that one man came here.
A judge did remove a former mayor from office, the highway department lost a very big lawsuit because of the abuses of a former superintendent, I can name several people who years back had driveways paved by the highway department free or used highway equipment on their farms. I know families whose kids have been into everything imaginable caught but never arrested because daddy took care of it with his friends in government.
There was trouble here before Mr. Barrett was even born, whites didn't think there was a problem in the thirties, forties and fifties but there was and just like then the privileged don't recognize the problem now because it don't effect them yet.
A person with a full stomach don't know what it's like until they get hungry it's the same with special privileges, those who have them don't realize what it feels like to those who don't have them.
10:00
Are you by any chance black? Just wondering. I was also wondering who said everything was just peachy in the past? It wasn't and never will be as long as humans roam the face of the earth. But we do not need a small group of complainers running around stirring up trouble.
Everywhere in TN and the Country has rich and poor. Never has there been a County that didn't have scandal. Giles County is a great place to call home and anyone that constantly complains probably needs to step back and ask what are they trying to do to help themselves rather then asking what the County is doing to hold them back. I think of life as a glass half full and alot of folks on here see it as glass half empty. Keeping trouble stirred up over little stuff isn't going to help the county one bit. Look how the great Obama has made the country more divided than ever. Land and houses are just as cheap in other states and counties. If you hate it that bad then make a new home somewhere that you will you will be treated better.
10:21
MAGNIFICENT POST!
There are comments posted on 26 August at 10:25 and 2:01 that I have been asked to remove. While I can not remove them and keep faith with my beliefs in free speech rights I would request that people please be more responsible in their speech. If you believe a statement is true give the evidence, if no evidence then post your name as a means of taking responsibility for your post. Not only is it cowardly to post such accusations without evidence or your real name it is reprehensible to make such personal attacks against private citizens. These kind of statements whether true or not are inappropriate when carrying, or attempting to carry on a dialogue. To me it’s the equivalent of saying you can’t be right because you’re fat. The person my indeed be fat but what does that have to do with their argument unless of course they are telling you how to be skinny.
I have certainly allowed much stronger and bolder lies to be posted on here about me for the very same reasons I can not censor these posts, only condemn them.
wab
I knew your above post would get back to the "me" victim role you so often assume.
Would you have deleted those posts had they been about you or one of your family members? The truth, please.
He answered that in the above post 11:55.
10:21 what does it matter the color of the skin and why is it the only answer for those who have a different opinion to fall in line, shut up, or move? I did not write the post you referred to, I am not black but I am from Giles County and I see a lot of truth to their post.
If everything is so great and our government is qualified why are we the only county in this area that cannot get good paying jobs for the masses. Our population and work force is dwindling in an effort to make this area suitable for the retirees and no one else so it makes it harder to get companies that will pay a decent wage to settle in the area. We have nothing to do unless a church or some other group decides to raise money and have an event. We have elected officials that cuss on the streets and attack citizens and your answer is to shut up or move. I can go on but I would just be repeating what you already know but choose to defend. That is a sickening attitude and proves the post in which you are so interested in the color of the authors skin. If they do tell you the color of their skin have you saved up some nasty names for them?
11:55 WAB has answered that question many time by allowing some very nasty
things about him to remain on this blog. He has been very consistent as far as the things I have read.
Stating a fact is not being a victim to most people and what he said could hardly be seen as playing a victim to anyone but the most vicious and dishonest critic.
1:15
No, I'm not into calling people names. I leave that to the enablers of strife.
I simply asked if the writer was black. Don't try to make it look that I am a racist, because I'm not. Ok?
what was your motive behind asking the question 2:31?
1:15,
Have you been out of your house in the last 10 years? Do you see how many factories are in Giles County? Also all of the Trucking Companies, fast-food restaraunts, parts houses, retail stores, grocery stores, car dealerships, gyms, pharmacies, beer distributorships, coke, sun-drop, electrical,plumbing, stockyards, lawyers, doctors offices, dentist offices, schools, daycares and a thousand other places to get a job. Sounds like the only thing holding you back is turning in an application. Everybody isn't worth $15/hr. Our county is in better shape as far as unemployment goes than the surrounding counties. There was an article in the paper about it. You might want to look around before being so negative.
3:39
I don't owe you an explanation. Ok? Just keep on enabling the strife.
3:41 exactly! read what you have written. There is nothing to retain a Martin graduate or to entice any graduate from another college to come to Giles County. If they do get one of the few management jobs available that might pay a decent wage in your eyes, even though it is still twenty five percent lower than surrounding counties for the same job(census not local paper) and that factory or restaurant shuts down then they have very few options to maintain their current level of income. In other words they are forced to leave or drive to a surrounding area to have an opportunity.
As for new businesses coming in I watch them go out as fast as they come in with these exceptions, check cashing businesses and second hand stores.
Competition and choice of selection at a competitive price is pretty much non existent in clothing stores. Where is the entertainment that would keep a person here on the weekends instead of driving to Columbia, Huntsville, Athens, Franklin, Nashville, etc. and spending their money there instead of here? It does not exist.
I do look around and you might want to read the census as opposed to the local papers. Maybe you should actually read government info instead of taking a local business word that has gotten their information from a local politician or better yet Dan Speer. What you write is a joke 3:41.
2:32 and 4:05 I think you answered the question by trying to avoid it. If your intent was honorable why do you avoid the question? We all know. There is only one reason that would be an issue with any one asking the color of ones skin who is expressing themselves on this blog. And no one has to try to make you look like a racist. You do a pretty good job of that yourself. OK?
Was your father in the KKK? I do not care but it is as valid a question as you asked the other poster.
I know a bunch of Martin College and other college graduates that work and live in Giles County. That attitude is what is holding you back 4:39. If you want more entertainment, you are going to have to convince the citizens to come out of their pockets and pay more taxes to finance it. Please post the site where you are getting your numbers? Thanks
5:41
If I were into name-calling, I would call you a complete imbecile. You enablers just never cease to amaze me. You just can't stand it that anyone sees things differently, and you seem totally intolerant of anyone who isn't in agreement with you guys. Well, tough!
My father is an honorable man(you should try it) who would never have had any part with the KKK, and calling me a racist is a low-down lie! That's right...a low-down lie from your lips.
I'm ashamed that there are people like you in Giles County. Thank God there are very few.
You're just a shame and mad that anyone but you and your little group of government elitist happen to live here.
I wish you would give some names of the ones you call elitist? I keep hearing this over and over again from you, but I never see any evidence of it. I want to know how you feel some people are oppressed and give some examples. It just sounds like troublemaking to me. That is directed toward 7:58
What? You're ashamed that some one would question your intentions when you bring the color of some one's skin into a conversation that has nothing to do with that. You should be ashamed but you are disillusioned as to why you should be ashamed. In all my thinking I can not see why if a person is black it would matter any more than if your father were a klan member. The other post you attacked talked nothing of race. As far as calling you a racist, you never heard those words from my lips so in fact you lied. I simply asked you to clarify what your posts seem to imply. But continue to try to turn your self into a victim here, no one is buying it.
8:29
No, I meant exactly what I said. I am ashamed that there are people who think like you living here...or anywhere else for that matter. Furthermore, I am ashamed that you think I am ashamed, because I am not ashamed of myself but rather am ashamed of your attitude. You see, I was ashamed of you before you thought to be ashamed of me.
Yes, you called me a racist when you said I was doing a pretty good job of it. Remember?
9:54 Your statements speak for themselves. I don't need to call you anything, as I stated in writing, did not come from my lips, that your posts would not lead any one to believe other wise. If a person like you is ashamed I live any where it only tells me that I am living right. And just so you know when I read your post I was ashamed that I grew up in a place that would breed some one like you.
1:00
Look, you may not have uttered the words, but you DID call me a racist in your post. You guys just never stop, do you?
You say you are living right? I don't think so, but I'm not the judge. However, if you are sincere about that, you will repent and turn from being an enabler of trouble and strife. Actually, you are the one who should be ashamed...of yourself.
Why is it that at the begining of a blog people stay on subject? Then, two people beging to take pot shots at eachother and all conversation goes to hell?
How about the authors of the last dozen or so comments go off into the middle of a field and yell at eachother?
I got information today that Mrs. Vanzant was in Nasville dealing with the lawsuit that Mr. Barrett filed the day that the Legislative Committee meeting was canceled. It was the chairperson that made the decision to cancel the meeting. Mrs. Vanzant had nothing to do with it. So WAB has given you false information on this one.
DAW
Daw you need to check your facts a whole lot better than that. First of all I have not filed any lawsuit that would have required Mrs Vanzant to appear in Nashville. Second, Don't you think if there was such a lawsuit that I would have been there also?
If Mrs Vanzant was in Nashville it absolutely was not because she was required to be there for anything involving me.
Sooner or later you are going to have to look at the reality that Mrs Vanzant is a liar with absolutely no concern for the truth.
By the way what was the lawsuit I filed that required her to be in Nashville or is it another one of those with out a TCA number or Case Number?
If the chairperson cancelled the Legislative meeting then why is it that Mrs Vanzant's secretary has told people the cancellation was done by the County Executive?
Anyone can have the wool pulled over their eyes but they are trying to turn you into a sheep.
The information came from the Executive and her secretary. If Vanzant cancelled the meeting, it was at the request of the Chairperson. I am sure it is involving the commissioner seat case. Isn't that the one that has been appealed in Nashville? I am sure that she has business to take care of regarding the case that doesn't require you be there. I believe you are the one trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes. My gut instinct tells me that I should believe Mrs. Vanzant before I would believe you. Lately your posts have proven to be a bit misleading. Especially since all, in some way, have attacked the County Executive. You are turning into a skipping record.
DAW
There is no business in a legal case that requires only one side to appear in court and not the other. If it's in the appeal court nobody is required to be there but the attorneys. If I remember right Vanzant isn't even the one sued it was the commissioner and the election people.
I don't care who you believe but in this case somebody ain't truthing.
wab
Mrs. Vanzant WAS in Nashville because of your lawsuit. And you have the nerve to call her a liar?
DAW
If the information came from Mrs Vanzant and her secretary then its a good assumption the poster of 11:45 a.m. is the secretary (as has been thought all the way along).
11:57
Have you ever heard of what it means to assume anything? I don't even have a job, but I DO know Mrs. Vanzant went to Nashville because of the pending lawsuit. Thank you.
To DAW and WAB,
We have a lot of differing opinions and statements made concerning the laws. Since both of you have done legal research and consulted attorneys, I would like to invite both of you to present your findings in a friendly debate to be taped and posted on Pulaskionline.blogspot.com
I know that if accepted both parties will be on their best behavior and I ask that in the debate the facts are presented in the form of verifiable documentation.
This is not to take sides but to have forward discussion and alleviate bothersome rhetoric by those that wish to throw a cog in civilized discussion.
I do ask that if lawyer opinions are presented the identity of the lawyer is disclosed for verification purposes.
Pulaski Online,
Anything that I have to say regarding any issue in the county can be done on this blog. I have no desire to be filmed while debating someone. And with a small child, I rarely have time to eat. Thanks for the offer.
Sincerely,
DAW
11:45,
The correct information has been given. What you think and what is the truth isn't the same in this case.
11:57,
I wouldn't make too many assumptions about anything. That is gossip and "hearsay". It really doesn't matter who posted it as long as it is the truth. I hope people are starting to see that the Executive has been thrown under the bus one too many times on here.
DAW
DAW,
isn't this statement from your post an assumption? "If Vanzant cancelled the meeting, it was at the request of the Chairperson." maybe it is alright for you to make assumptions, just no one else.
That is how it happened. It was requested by the commissioner to cancel the meeting.
DAW
DAW
You should have been a comedian!
For sure you would lose any debate with WAB. Then you say you hardly have time to eat since you have a child, yet you find plenty of time to chat with Mrs Vanzant and constantly post on this blog. What a worm!
A Citizen who looks for FACTS to DAW:
If Ms. Faulkner decided to cancell the committee meeting she can do so on her own authority. There is no reason to ask for or get permission from the County Executive. However, not wanting to take your or anyone else's word; I decided to call Ms. Faulkner and ask the person who should know......
Ms. Faulkner went to the County Executive's office to announce that the Legislative Committee was going to have a meeting. Ms. Faulkner was told by the County Executive's secretary that Mrs. Janet P. Vanzant had decreed that no Commission Committee meetings (with the current assigned members)could be held after 1 September 2011. That the Commission and its Committees were in session from 1 September to 1 September the next year. Since the 2010-2011 Legislative Committee members term would "expire" 1 September 2011; a meeting could not be held until after 18 September when new Committee members were selected.
Therefore Ms. Faulkner did not cancell the Committee meeting as you so adamently voice. It was the ruling of the County Executive, through her secretary, who cancelled the meeting.
If by chance you do not believe me; please take the time and call Ms. Faulkner.
Respectfully,
A Citizen who takes the time to get facts
3:20 Thanks.
If that is the case then it is legal and Barrett got upset over nothing. Either way it happened, it was just more rhetoric to throw the Executive under the bus. Readers should see that by now. Also, the committees run from Oct. 1st until Sept. 1st. That is in the Rules of Order Of The Board of County Commissioners Of Giles County TN.
3:17,
Dear Child,
I can have all the fun that I want debating WAB on this blog. You can't accurately say that Barrett would beat me in a debate. It is foolish to make that comment.
DAW
3:20 I'll add my thanks to you, too.
I believe wholeheartedly what you post. However, here's the strange thing about the reason you were given for the cancelation: the commissioners serve on committees from the 3rd Monday in September of any given year until the 3rd Monday of the following year when the new committees are formed. Then we have a meeting advertised for September 8th and commissioners are serving on that committee. Weighing these facts, I don't believe Mrs. Faulkner canceled the meeting but it was decided by Vanzant because 1) She didn't want A. Barrett to have another chance to raise his unanswered question. 2) The committee under Mrs Faulkner's guidance was beginning to make progress on implementing the Nuisance Law which was passed in 2003, and 3) a member of tha legislative committee had brought up the subject of too many members on the Planning Commission which is made up from Vanzant's favorite cronnies. (Read all about it in last Tuesday's paper).
To Pulaski Online,
I greatly appreciate your offer to a set down with DAW for a debate, conversation or what ever. I have absolutely no objections. Just name the time and place and I'll be there.
To DAW
As I stated earlier, "If Mrs Vanzant was in Nashville it absolutely was not because she was required to be there for anything involving me".
She isn't even part of the suit filed against the Election Commission as far as any active participation was involved.
To a Citizen Who Looks for Facts.
Thanks for the factual information.
I am having a problem with the statement given you and Mrs Faulkner "That the Commission and its Committees were in session from 1 September to 1 September the next year. Since the 2010-2011 Legislative Committee members term would "expire" 1 September 2011; a meeting could not be held until after 18 September when new Committee members were selected". It also would mean that no authority could be exerted by the commissioners between the 1st and the 18th of September. Does that sound reasonable?
Where is the authority for that statement? The CTAS Manual only states "The County Legislative body at it's first session on or after September 1 of each year elects..."
According to that statement by Mrs Vanzant there is no business that can be conducted between the 1st of September and 18th of September.
If you look at the minutes from last years first Legislative Body you will see that it was held on the 20th of September and appointments were made for a year not until 1 September. Traditionally people have been on the committees and conducted business of that committee until the first meeting in September. There is no requirement for everything to change on the 1st of September and in fact there is no way possible for everything to change on the 1st as that statement
indicates. This appears to be just another example of the County Executive making a wrong decision then trying to find a way to justify it. She has clearly demonstrated that she has no interest in the enforcement of any nuisance laws or of following the law or any established procedure when it proves to be inconvenient
DAW You have tried to find out things and tell us, which I appreciate, but now you began to throw in a few things that sounds like the enabler.
I know some have said things about you they should never have said.
Ignore them and they want think they upset you.
I beg of you don't try the enablers way.
I misread the information that was given to me. It did not indicate that Mrs. Faulkner cancelled the meeting. It indicated that she was there when the decision was made outside of the presence of Mrs Vanzant that no committee could meet after Sept. 1st. I don't think any of you read the statement made that the committees ran from Oct. 1st.of 2010 until Sept. 1st of 2011. That is written in the Rules Of Order of The Board of County Commissioners. Therefore no committee meetings can be held after Sept. 1st until the new committees are formed. So rather you like it or not, the wrong decision was not made.
DAW
I think Barrett would get mad and cry if he had to debate DAW. DAW has been shooting him down since he started posting on this blog. What is funny is that you all are scrambling now. DAW is not dumb or stupid. He really debates the issues and it leaves you in a position to call him names. I applaud him for uncovering the conspiracy that you goofballs have against Mrs. Vanzant. We will be watching when none of you get elected next time.
DAW
Then tell us why there is a meeting of the county Planning Commission scheduled for Sept. 8th and other committees are not 'allowed' to meet.
When was the rule made that states no meeting until after Sept 1.
I'm not disputing, just wondering if it has been in effect for several years or just one year.
DAW
So you are saying the county shuts down for a month each year?
Anyways, last year a committee was required by law to meet within 5 days of it being formed. Whats your answer to that?
5:08
The true enablers are those one or two individuals who get their marching orders from the chief troublemaker. They insist on keeping as much trouble stirred up as they can while he sits back and lets them carry it out.
The pot calls the kettle black
I was stating the rules that were laid out for 2010 and 2011. From what I read on those rules, a committee can meet after it has been selected after the first full legislative body meeting. The first full legislative body meeting for the year will be in September to select the committees. So no, the commission is not shut down for a month. I have a list of all committees and don't see the Planning Commission as being listed and comprised of County Commissioners. I could be wrong.
DAW
To set the record straight. I (Louise Faulkner) went to Janet's office to schedule a Legislative meeting on September 13th and was told by Angela Jerrigan that no meetings could be scheduled untill after the full commission met in September. That is what happened and I don't know where everyone got all the information but this is fact. If you need to verify this please call me and I will be glad to talk to you. Thanks, Louise Faulkner
Thanks Mrs. Faulkner. That is just proof that Barrett is trying to paint a bad portrait of Janet Vanzant. She is only following the rules that were drawn out. I appreciate you taking the time to post.
DAW
Thank you Mrs. Faulkner for coming on here and telling it the way it is.
I don't understand why that wasn't told instead of trying to say Mrs. Vanzant had to go to Nashville about a law suit is why the meeting had to be canceled. Things like that is what causes trouble.
Mrs. Vanzant may have gone to Nashville and it been about a law suit but that wasn't why the meeting was canceled.
We all need to think about this:
In order to do all that God wants you to do, you must learn how to be criticized, misunderstood, rejected and be able to forgive those who are behind it.
Thanks Mrs. Faulkner. Seems like the topic as written by WAB says the same thing but more elaborately. What I would like to see is that written rule/law stating no committees will meet between Aug. 31 and until new committees are formed.
Sept. committee meeting is listed under Upcoming Meetings on WKSR webpage.
11:16
Yes, and I do hope those who are enabling and promoting all this strife and trouble will think about that. Good post.
The topic written by Barrett does not say the same thing. How can you sit there and pretend it does? Are you folks that oblivious to the truth? There is not a post on here that says that Vanzant cancelled the meeting because she was in Nashville. It says that Vanzant was in Nashville regarding the Barrett case when the decision was made to not have the meeting because of the rule. If you want to see the rule, get a copy of the Rules of Order of The Board of County Commissioners. I can email you a copy. It is too many pages to try and put on here.
DAW
11:16 Good post. We all need to think about that, Barrett, the ones for him, Janet, commissioners and the ones for them. Also DAW and the one called enabler. I've seen things posted about them. I know it's hard to forgive, but we've got to learn too.
At the end of the few committee meetings I've been able to attend, the members usually decide when they want to meet again. What concerns me is why didnt any of the committee members speak up about this 'rule' of no meetings. Then someone tell my why there is a meeting scheduled for Sept 8, Sara Flacy chairperson.
wab and the enablers of strife:
Please read Romans 12: 9-21 and make the proper application. Thank you.
10:03 Good reading, you need to read it again if you are the one WAB called an enabler. It also applies to you.
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
If you think WAB is evil and you post evil back to him, makes you no better.
11:12
Wrong. I don't post evil back to that guy. I'm just trying to get him to see what the Scriptures have to say about the haughty and high-minded. What's wrong with that? I always believed that good will overcome the evil in a man's heart.
Yes, my opinion of him is pretty low, but we are all sinners and yet salvageable if we repent.
PART ONE OF TWO
I greatly appreciate Commissioner Faulkner “sitting the record straight” as she completely confirms what I had reported in the thread subject. So what did Commissioner Faulkner say, “I (Louise Faulkner) went to Janet's office to schedule a Legislative meeting on September 13th and was told by Angela Jerrigan that no meetings could be scheduled untill after the full commission met in September.”
There was never any question on my part that this is exactly what happened. The problem arises in why it happened and by what authority it happened.
This is what I wrote in the thread topic, “Today an empirical decree was issued from the stately throne room high above the Suntrust Bank that there would be no more commissioner committee meetings held until after the September appointment of new committee members. It seems that the Legislative Committee had gotten out of control in their efforts to actually enforce a nuisance law passed more than ten years ago and the friend of vehicle junk yards everywhere could not allow that to happen.”
The response to that information has run the gambit from outright denial to absurd efforts to change the subject and refocus the conversation on everything from what a private citizen did years ago to what color a posters skin happened to be. .
DAW wrote on 27 Aug. at 5:35 in an apparent effort to justify Mrs Vanzant’s actions, “I read throught the TCA and couldn't find where the county mayor has authority to cancel committee meetings, but nowhere does it say she doesn't. She has the power to appoint the committee chair, so to say that she can't overide their decision about when to have the meeting might be a false statement. The TCA basically gives the county mayor power to do what she wants as long as there are 4 regular legislative body meetings per year. There isn't much written about committee meetings.”
This is at best the worst interpretation of a written procedure or at worst a complete effort to mislead and spread an untruth. To say, “I read throught the TCA and couldn't find where the county mayor has authority to cancel committee meetings, but nowhere does it say she doesn't”, is the equivalent of saying the CTAS manual doesn’t say that she can’t steal money from Suntrust Bank therefore she’s free to do it anytime. If the CTAS manual had actually been read through DAW would have seen a number of things the County Executive can not do that I’ll cover later in this post.
DAW makes the statement. “She has the power to appoint the committee chair, so to say that she can't overide their decision about when to have the meeting might be a false statement.”
Well, hold the presses just where does it say she appoints the chair or even appoints the committee? Your statement is simply false. While there are Boards that the County Executive has the power to appoint, it is the Legislative Body of the County that appoints their committees through election and each committee is then free to elect a chair, vice chair and recoding secretary. CTAS has at least two long paragraphs on the matter of Committees. The majority of committees including the Legislative Committee are elected by the Legislative Body of the County and while the Chairperson of the Legislative Body may be a member if the chairperson happens to be the County Executive they have no vote on that committee.
PART TWO OF TWO
DAW goes on to say, “The TCA basically gives the county mayor power to do what she wants as long as there are 4 regular legislative body meetings per year. There isn't much written about committee meetings.”
Folks that is not only a false statement it is totally and completely absurd. First of all the “state requires a minimum of four full commission meetings each year and the time and place is established by resolution of the county legislative body” not the county executive. The County Executive does not have any authority in this matter. There is actually more written in the CTAS manual about the responsibilities and duties of the Legislative Body than there is about the County Executive.
GTC tried to explain this to the readers but DAW responded with “GTC, I understand what you mean, but I think the committee chairmen or women must have agreed with her.” DAW Saturday, August 27, 2011 9:18:00 PM
Well that sure isn’t what Commissioner Faulkner wrote when she said, “I (Louise Faulkner) went to Janet's office to schedule a Legislative meeting on September 13th and was told by Angela Jerrigan that no meetings could be scheduled untill after the full commission met in September”
In order to have agreed with someone it would have required an exchange of ideas. Had Commissioner Faulkner agreed with the decision , since she had gone to the office to schedule a meeting and the County Executive wasn’t there just whom did she agree with?
From what Commissioner Faulkner wrote it seems she was told what was to be and she felt there was no choice for her.
ON 30 Aug at 9:12 DAW posted this statement. “I got information today that Mrs. Vanzant was in Nasville dealing with the lawsuit that Mr. Barrett filed the day that the Legislative Committee meeting was canceled. It was the chairperson that made the decision to cancel the meeting. Mrs. Vanzant had nothing to do with it. So WAB has given you false information on this one”.
I will repeat that Mrs. Vanzant had absolutely no requirement to be in Nashville to deal with anything involving me or any lawsuit that exist involving me. If she was in Nashville it was at her own choosing and by her own will.
DAW seems incredibly sure of his statement when he says, “It was the chairperson that made the decision to cancel the meeting. Mrs. Vanzant had nothing to do with it.”
That certainly seems to fly in the face of what Commissioner Faulkner wrote and even what DAW wrote just an hour later when he said, “The information came from the Executive and her secretary. If Vanzant cancelled the meeting, it was at the request of the Chairperson”.
Again I ask, if Commissioner Faulkner had requested the meeting be cancelled then why in the world would she have gone to the County Executives’ office to schedule it.
DAW states, “ My gut instinct tells me that I should believe Mrs. Vanzant before I would believe you. Lately your posts have proven to be a bit misleading. Especially since all, in some way, have attacked the County Executive”.
I would suggest you take an Alka-Seltzer burger and wash it down with a tall glass of creamy Pepto-Bismo and focus less on your gut and more on the facts.
If it seems that the County Executive has been under attack by me perhaps you need to
re-read the topic of this thread. Why would I write about the cool waters of the springs in Campbellsville if the topic is the actions and misconduct of the County Executive?
Barrett sure does get nasty and upset when he has been proven wrong. DAW has gotten him two times in a row, and Barrett writes a book about it to try and make people confused about the whole thing. Vanzant was in Nashville regarding the Barrett case. She is the County Executive, it does affect her. Barrett seems to be losing his sanity. DAW explained that he misread some information and stated what really happened. What I see from DAW is someone that can admit when he is wrong or has given the wrong information. Barrett, you are not getting anywhere with this. You are becoming a liar to try and cover up the truth. That whole last spill of a post shows how out of touch you are. You are a very sore loser!
barrett
You ask "if it seems the county executive has been under attack by me"? Are you insane? You have called her a liar on more than one occasion as well as incompetent and dishonest. Just what would you consider an attack? And please lie or deny this. When you find yourself in a hole as you so often do, stop digging.
It is now clear that Barrett had rather make up stuff than admit he is wrong. I am enjoying seeing DAW put him in his place.
It is not a question that I agree with Barrett or not; many times I do not agree with what he has posted or the manner in which his blog posting have been presented.
However; sorry to say that Barrett is correct in what the TCA states and what the CTAS handbook states. It is the County Commission that appoints Committees, the County Executive may make recommendations but it is the domaine of the County Commission to vote members onto a Committee. The memebres of an appointed Committee then select their respective Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The County Executive has no authority or right (defacto or De jour) in this matter; only the County Commissioners.
The County Executive has no authority over any Committee; they are a defacto member and are non-voting. Period. That is stated very clearly in the TCA.
Having said all of this .... if our County Commission wish to allow our County Executive to exercise authority beyond what is provided in the TCA; that is their business. I do not agree with this, I believe that the Commission is (or should be)a separate and apart branch of government over which the County Executive has no authority.
I agree about that part 12:50. The part of this whole mess where Barrett is wrong is that he blamed the County Executive as if she had done something wrong. He seems to think that she does as she pleases. The fact is that the meeting wasn't allowed to happen because of the Sept. 1st rule. That is what the whole topic was about. The other fact is that he lied about her being in Nashville regarding the lawsuit that he has against the county. He knows that but can't admit it.
She does do as she pleases and what she did was wrong. There is no Sept 1 rule as you say and there is nothing that keeps a committe from meeting right up to the time the commissioners are changed. If you read what Barret said he didn't lie he didn't said she wasn't in Nashville but that she was not required to be there. Big difference 12:59.
Did I miss something in these postings. Barrett gave some very convincing reasons why DAW was wrong even used DAW own words to prove the contridictions but somehow Barrett lost the debate and is a liar?
I think that DAW really whimped out on the idea of a debate between him and Barrett. Come on DAW it's time to man up or shut up.
Post your name 1:33 or shut up. You are a punk and a troublemaker. You sound like a little kid that got picked on in school. Now you are a real stud sitting behind that computer screen. Why would DAW want to debate WAB when all that would happen is the WAB would get mad and yell and scream. DAW probably would not put up with that. DAW admitted where he was wrong on this. But in the end, the main premise of Barretts topic was refuted and proven to be untrue.
N.F.
At the very bottom of the Rules of Order it states that All Committees will serve a one year term from Oct. 1 2010 until Sept. 1 2011. So you are very wrong 1:19. You also need to stop telling the lie about her not being in Nashville because of Barrett. I don't think you all know how bad you look by agreeing with him just to do it. He has made alot of false statements lately.
Boy Noel or Leon 1:54 something sure got your pork chop. 1:33 just made an observation the same one I made and you get your panties all in a wad.
As for the debate I could care less but it does seem like a mighty weak excuse given by DAW.
Where did DAW say he was wrong all I read was how he proved Barrett was wrong. Anybody can say what they want to on here but Barrett seems to be more knowledgeable by putting things on here that he backs up with more than gossip or opinion.
The thing that bothers me is when it's written one way but is made out to be something different because somebody don't like the way it was written. The reason I thought laws and rules was written down was so everyone would know what they was and they could apply to everybody equal.
12:59
Here's what I think about barrett. In my opinion, he can't stand women in power. Notice the women he seems to attack. And I think he is really angry because Vicki Coleman beat him miserably in the last election. It's just sad.
If the meeting wasn't allowed to happen because of the Sept. 1st rule why does wksr have the below posted?
The Giles County Region Planning Commission will meet Thursday, September 8th to conduct their regular monthly business. The 5pm meeting will be held in the Basement Boardroom of the Giles County Courthouse Annex Building.
Are there different rules for different committees just like there are differing rules for each citizen?
If Barrett believes in the old school style of government and religion, than he definitely doesn't like for women to be in power. 3:31, name one case where there are different rules for each citizen.
I'm mad about the way Coleman was elected the whole county should be made about the way Coleman got elected. She lied and committed a felony to get on the ballot and from what I hear she never would have got on that ballot without the help of Basham breaking the law. Basham needs to be fired.
2:02 posts "committee members serve for ONE YEAR Oct. 1 to Sept 1!" Come on now, thats 11 months in my book.
4:30
Well, you may as well get over your anger, because Mrs. Coleman beat barrett badly in an election BY THE PEOPLE, which is THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to vote for and elect whomever they please. Sorry, but they did not want barrett.
You claim Mrs. Coleman committed a felony and that the election commission helped her? Don't you find it odd that the courts did not see it like you do? Had a felony been committed, I think the court would be smart enough to know it. Or would you say there was some sort of conspiracy against barrett or that the court itself was just as corrupt as the elected officials here in Giles County? Laughable indeed!
Why don't you start thinking for yourself and stop listening to a troublemaker?
5:04,
It is stated in the rules. The committees are elected in Sept. Get a copy of the rules. I am sure that Barrett has one. If not, give me your email address and I will send it to you or anyone else that wants it.
DAW
I thought it was funny that a judge would admit that she should have not been on the ballot but decided to say the voters wanted her so he would not over turn the decision. Funny that the judge condoned an illegal act. If a person signs a contract and that contract has provisions that are against the law the contract is non binding. Did the judge set precedent for any one else that comes along and takes short cuts or defrauds the voters and gets on the ballot. What other criteria will a judge over look. Does a person even have to reside in the county to run for office now. All these things are open to challenge in a court of law now that precedent has been set. If some one falsely states any thing and wins the election we have no power to do any thing. And some of you applaud this because you do not support what is best for the county. You only support any thing in opposition to WAB..
1:03
I knew it! The judge was just as corrupt as are most elected officials here in Giles County. What a laugh.
There was no felony committed, and your candidate lost by an OVERWHELMING margin...for the second time I might add.
You people just never stop. That's fine. There will always be those like me to challenge you. The Bible teaches us that, inasmuch as possible, we ought to live peacefully with our fellow man, but you guys make that so difficult. AND FOR WHAT? Exactly what do you accomplish other than the creation of bitterness, distrust, and division that doesn't need to be a part of people's lives.
Didn't we have this conversation in reverse last year because committees met at the last minute and made decisions just before the new committees were appointed? I think we did and WAB pitched a fit because one of the committee did something he did not like then. You cannot win with WAB because he is always right.
Always right, yet always wrong! He should put that on his campaign T-Shirts. He has proven that he is not scared to stretch the truth over the last few days. This is great!
Yes, it's just a shame that he's about the only one who, outside his few supporters, does not see how he really is. I often wonder what his close family members think of his behavior.
Maybe he will run for the position of Hypocrite At Large.
The position of Hypocrite at large is already filled by the enabler who has added liar in chief to its resume.
Explain an instance where the enabler has lied. Is it true that Barrett was fighting the opposite side if this issue last year? If so, he needs to shut down the blog and find something better to do with his time. I see more false statements from WAB then anybody else on here. He is also the biggest hypocrite in Giles County.
I hate that DAW turned down the offer to debate WAB on Pulaski Online. I do understand that not every one is up tho the challenge of a debate.
I do appreciate WAB for his acceptance and since the goal of any debate is to present at least two opposing view points, I extend the offer to any one that believes WAB is wrong to bring your evidence and sit down and show the facts.
I personally extend the offer to the authors of the above posts 9:14, 9:08, 8:14, 6:04, 6:28
Since every time I read this blog I see statements like yours that do nothing to add to the conversation and never have I seen a fact presented. If you do have any facts to present then please bring them to debate WAB. Certainly there has to be one brave sole that will answer the challenge.
This is the golden opportunity to leave all the bashing behind and only discuss the facts and the issues at hand. I await to see if their are any takers.
In addition if there are no takers to the opposing side of WAB's opinions, then I would like to extend the offer yo WAB to sit down with me for a discussion of some of the past posts.
So as WAB has already accepted is there any one that can bring facts to the table in opposition to WAB's view points?
Pulaski Online is the poster of the above post.
To DAW I already posted that the committees were "elected" in September by the commissioners not appointed by Mrs Vanzant as you claimed. You had claimed in several posts that Mrs Vanzant didn't cancel the Legislative meeting; that if she cancelled the meeting it was only after Mrs Faulkner had requested it be cancelled; that Mrs Vanzant appointed the committees and chose the chairman therefore Mrs Vanzant could do as she pleased with those committees; they were appointed by Mrs Vanzant and ran from 1 Oct to 1 Sept. It's getting harder to understand just what you are saying since you keep changing your "facts".
To 11:14 It would be a much easier task to list the number of times the enabler has told the truth.
To 6:28 I don't have a clue what you are talking about. I have never had an issue with the committees meeting in September, as they have since I have been attending meetings, until this month when meetings were cancelled because they did not fit the Vanzant agenda. I guess one should expect when you run out of sleazy gossip to spread you begin to just make up things, you are an excellent pharisee.
Pulaski Online and Allen Barrett are one in the same. Don't let that crap confuse anyone. The rhetoric sounds the same and they are posted very close together. Coincidence, I think not. Why would anyone want to be filmed for a blog that has no members. Just another bully tactic by Barrett to try and make people look bad and bloat his ego. This blog gets more rediculous as every day passes. Name an instance where the enabler lied about you. DAW never said they were appointed. He said they could be appointed. You need to learn to read thoroughly rather than make it what you want it to be.
I love it. "Pulaski Online and Allen Barrett are one IN the same."
It can be used either way. Read about it. All the truth that was said and that is all you come back with. Genius.
The genius is the enabler who is always right. Take it to the English Professor.
You need to go back and read Allen. I never said she did appoint them. I said that she has the power to do so. And that is as long as the commissioners do not object with a vote. You should stick to topics that do not backfire on you. You were wrong on this and the last topic. Admit it and create another topic. You have nowhere else to go with it. Unless you want to dig further into the hole.
DAW
Pulaski Online is not associated, administered or moderated in any way by Allen Barrett.
The posts from 12:15 and 12:30 are libel and seeks to defame Pulaski Online in the eyes of certain citizens. According to law Pulaski Online has one year to file a complaint. If the false statements continue in an attempt to hinder Pulaski Online's development legal action will take place.
As far as the discussion of the topic DAW was invited because he claims to have spoken with two attorneys and claims Barrett is wrong on his last two posts. Barrett says he spoke to an attorney who says he is right. Pulaski Online has questions for both sides.
Pulaski Online says sit down for thirty minutes to an hour and let's discuss it with all evidence presented from both sides with out all the drivel that has nothing to do with the posts or are out right fraudulent statements like 12:15 and 12:30
The invitation is open to any one so their should be no complaints when I broadcast only Allen Barrett's views, provided no one steps up to the plate.
12:15 ridiculous
Should it be IN the same or And the same?
Hey DAW, you said "I also know that there will be people just like you that act like a little child and really say nothing other than to try and degrade me because you don't have enough mental acumen to debate the topic. You, like many others on this blog are no more than a punk and troublemaker who hide behind a computer screen because it is the only thing you have in life that makes you feel important." Friday, August 26, 2011 11:01:00 AM
Guess we all know who don't have the "mental acumen to debate the topic" now that you wimped out on a face to face debate with WAB. What a pansy.
I put you in the same category as the statement you posted from me because you will not post your name. I wouldn't call anyone a pansy, because obviously you don't want me to know who you are. That is brave. Get over it. I don't care enough to have a debate be videotaped. Everything I needed to say has been said on here. I promise you wouldn't say these things to me face-to-face. And as far as Pulaski Online goes, they should stop stirring the pot. They can post a reality show of Barrett if they want, but they need to quit trying to put me in the mix.
DAW
DAW,
Posting facts and having a debate around the facts as opposed to opinion is far from stirring the pot and I do not know why you choose to attack something that is openly giving both sides an opportunity to to voice their opinion. Maybe that is the reason. Both sides will have a voice and the citizens will be able to view who is right and who is wrong. I'm sorry you feel the need to take pot shots, but as you are acting like an authority in statements you have posted on the subject I thought you might want to back up your statements. The invitation was extended, you turned it down but keep stating your opinions on this blog so I think it is funny you don't want to be involved but continue to involve yourself.
As far as giving ideas to what Pulaski Online should produce you would fare well to stay out Pulaski Online's business especially when you choose not to back up what you say and answer any questions concerning your, so called legal knowledge.
Dear P.O.,
I posted the proof that caused me to come to the conclusion on the last two topics. If you want me to stay out of your business, then I suggest you stop mentioning my name. I am sorry that you are bothered by the fact that I don't want to be filmed for your blog. You should be professional and act in a reasonable manner rather than keep coming at me. You or no other person has been forced to believe anything that I have posted on here.
Thanks,
DAW
wab
I wish you would stop telling that lie that the oine you call the enabler goes along with and turns a blind eye to wrongdoings. It was a lie when you said it and it still is.
Part One of Two
Here’s the problem DAW, while you say I’m not telling the truth you have given nothing to disprove anything I have stated as fact, what you have done is continually change your statements in an apparent effort to hide the wrongness of your original statements. I have remained consistent in my claims while you have gone from the specific claim that Mrs Vanzant “has the power to appoint the committee chair, so to say that she can't overide their decision about when to have the meeting might be a false statement.” Which is totally and completely untrue.
Also you stated that, “The TCA basically gives the county mayor power to do what she wants as long as there are 4 regular legislative body meetings per year. There isn't much written about committee meetings”.
This also is absolutely and completely untrue. In fact there is almost as much space given to Committee’s as is given the County Executive in the CTAS manual.
Your statement from 27 August at 4:22 PM
“I read throught the TCA and couldn't find where the county mayor has authority to cancel committee meetings, but nowhere does it say she doesn't. She has the power to appoint the committee chair, so to say that she can't overide their decision about when to have the meeting might be a false statement. The TCA basically gives the county mayor power to do what she wants as long as there are 4 regular legislative body meetings per year. There isn't much written about committee meetings.
On 30 August at 9:12 AM you stated you had been given information that Mrs Vanzant was in Nashville dealing with the lawsuit that Mr. Barrett filed the day that the Legislative Committee was cancelled. It was the chairperson that made the decision to cancel the meeting. Mrs. Vanzant had nothing to do with it. So WAB has given you false information on this one”.
I have told you that I did not file any lawsuit the day the Legislative Committee meeting was cancelled. That there is absolutely nothing concerning me or any lawsuit that required Mrs. Vanzant to be in Nashville on that day or any other day as far as that goes.
You didn’t suggest or suppose that the chairperson cancelled the meeting you stated emphatically that she did and Mrs. Vanzant had nothing to do with it.
I tried to tell you this was untrue but you preferred to say I was giving false information rather than admit that you had been fed untrue information. So after Commissioner Faulkner came forth and made it very clear that not only did she not cancel the meeting but that Mrs. Vanzant had indeed cancelled it, do you still stand by that statement and will you admit that what I had posted about the meeting being cancelled was indeed the truth?
Part Two Of Two
On 30 August at 5:19 you posted this, “I misread the information that was given to me. It did not indicate that Mrs. Faulkner cancelled the meeting. It indicated that she was there when the decision was made outside of the presence of Mrs Vanzant that no committee could meet after Sept. 1st. I don't think any of you read the statement made that the committees ran from Oct. 1st.of 2010 until Sept. 1st of 2011. That is written in the Rules Of Order of The Board of County Commissioners. Therefore no committee meetings can be held after Sept. 1st until the new committees are formed. So rather you like it or not, the wrong decision was not made.”
It is now obvious based at least in part on Commissioner Faulkner’s statement that no decision was made “outside the presence of Mrs Vanzant” and every one including me are waiting to the specific “Rules of Order of the Board of County Commissioners”. A hint if it’s an official government document wouldn’t it refer to the County Legislative Body which is the official title of the County Commission?
There have been committee meetings held in September for as long as I have been attending meetings. In 2010 the Commission did not meet until the 20th of Sept. at 9AM but the County Beer Board met that same day at 8:15AM. So just when did the new rule become active and when was it voted on by the County Legislative Body?On 30 Aug at 10:41 you posted this very bizarre statement, “Thanks Mrs. Faulkner. That is just proof that Barrett is trying to paint a bad portrait of Janet Vanzant. She is only following the rules that were drawn out. I appreciate you taking the time to post.
I would certainly appreciate if you would tell me what Commissioner Faulkner wrote that was not directly in line with what I had reported?
On 31 Aug. at 7:43 you posted, “The topic written by Barrett does not say the same thing. How can you sit there and pretend it does? Are you folks that oblivious to the truth? There is not a post on here that says that Vanzant cancelled the meeting because she was in Nashville. It says that Vanzant was in Nashville regarding the Barrett case when the decision was made to not have the meeting because of the rule.”
You posted that Mrs Vanzant did not cancel the committee meeting, “Mrs Vanzant was in Nashville dealing with the lawsuit that Mr. Barrett filed the day that the Legislative Committee was cancelled. It was the chairperson that made the decision to cancel the meeting. Mrs.Vanzant had nothing to do with it.” DAW 30 Aug 2011 9:12 AM
On 1 Sept. at 2:50 PM you posted, “You need to go back and read Allen. I never said she did appoint them. I said that she has the power to do so. And that is as long as the commissioners do not object with a vote. You should stick to topics that do not backfire on you. You were wrong on this and the last topic. Admit it and create another topic. You have nowhere else to go with it. Unless you want to dig further into the hole.
I did go back and re-read the post and this posting is the result. You have contradicted yourself, posted what you gave as fact that proved to be false, made accusations without anything to support it and simply confirmed what many have posted that you shoot off your mouth before you have the facts, that you rely on untrustworthy people for your information, and you post that information without having it validated by reliable sources. It’s no surprise that you turned down the opportunity to debate with me, so I’ll try to make it easier for you. Agree to the debate and I’ll not object to you bringing several friends to help you.
So I would suggest that instead of challenging me you do some intellectual digging and fix your own shortcomings, particularly your weakness for trusting those who have such dismal records for truthfulness.
DAW,
I do not care one bit if you do not want to be filmed for my sites. I think it for the better. I do not think you set a good example to tell any one to act professionally when you have a hard time acting civilly when any one has an opposing opinion to you. I have seen as much name calling from you as I have from any one on this blog.
If you do not want your name mentioned or invitations to discuss the issues quit promoting your self as an expert. The fact is the only reason I extended the invitation was because you stated that you had spoken to two attorneys, which I did have my doubts to the truthfulness of the statement. I would much rather have the attorneys debate Allen Barrett.
Does Barrett and Pulaski Online know how childish and rediculous they sound? What a joke! They posted at the exact same time.
I will email a copy of the Rules Of Order of The Giles County Commission for WAB to post on the blog. I am not going to be a part of this nonsense anymore. I came on here to have some fun and debate some of the topics. It has turned into an attack on me because I have posted information that refuted the accusations that WAB has made against our County Executive and our government. I don't wish to participate in childish behavior. I have called people names when they got out of line and tried to make things personal. When someone debates the issues and does it respectfully, I return the favor. What I have found is that you can't tell the truth to someone that will not accept it. I am done with this blog. I know that Giles County is going to be just fine.
God Bless,
Daniel A. Woodard
OH NO without the all knowing DAW to correct everyone this blog will have to shut down.BYE BYE DAW, tell paw paw we said hi.
DAW
Hang in there, and don't let these people run you off. That's what they want to do...discourage and attack anyone who is in disagreement with them. Don't forget that this is a very small segment of our community. However, they should NOT be allowed to go unchallenged when they call names, and try to hurt people they dislike or resent.
Please reconsider and stand up to them.
Pulaski Online could be Bob Hughes. I understand that he and barrett are thick as thieves.
If Barrett used my own words to make me look so stupid and out of touch I'd leave to.
Seems that while DAW says he came on here to debate when the subject of an actual debate came up he is ready to vanish. So much for the integrity factor, bet he don't send anything to Barrett either.
Howard,
I think I remember DAW calling you out on a topic a couple weeks ago and you wait until now to post anything. And you still didn't post regarding the issue. You sound like a real winner. Where was you bravery to stand up to DAW. That's right, you didn't have any. DAW was right on all of this.
I think DAW served his purpose. He came on here and proved Barrett wrong with laws and facts and common sense. I think the people that were on the fence about Barrett have a good reason to jump to the other side. Barrett turned into the enabler. Funny how that works.
Seems like wab thinks he is Mark Antony. Did you see his ridiculous letter to the editor? Brutus was an honorable man. LOL.
7:41 AM No DAW was not right on many things. As I recall he started out commenting the proposed county charter wasn't any different than the one we already have! Well, as we all know Giles county does not yet have a charter. Then when he was called on it DAW confessed he had been reading the Pulaski charter. One of too many mistakes he has made snf been caught on, on this blog. Don't know the kid but he comes across as a know it all who pops off at people before he fully understands anything then tries to cover his mistakes. I for one am glad we won't be hearing from him again if he sticks to his statement, although I doubt that. I predict he'll be back but won't use his initials in future postings.
Post a Comment
<< Home