A Simple Mistake?
Why did the vote to add over $72,000.00 to the budget state on the Tally Board that it required a 2/3 majority to pass and that Item 3 failed with 10 no's and 11 yes's but the County Executive announced that it passed? If this was a mistake why wasn't it pointed out at the time? Why didn't a single commissioner question the conflict? With such a discrepancy should the vote be re-taken in order to remove any question as to what was being voted on and what was required?
posted by Allen Barrett | 9:09 AM
134 Comments:
When watching the video on that I wondered how it passed with just one vote difference.
Oh well I thought this is Giles County.
GTC says:
Come on folks!!! You all have to know by now that if the County Executive makes a mistake, honest or otherwise, she will never admit that a mistake has been made. She would rather fall on her sword than admit to having made a mistake. So was the tally board mistaken in stating that a 2/3 majority was required? Or, did the County Executive make a mistake by stating that a simple majority was needed to pass this legislative item????
Either way Mrs. Janet Vanzant will never admit, especially in public, that she made a mistake or that a mistake was made by her government. What is really astounding is that not a single Commissioner questioned this incident or questioned the County Executives’ remarks. Is our County Commission so out of touch that they do not pay attention to what is going on? Lord knows that if a private citizen would not such an anomaly they would not be permitted to speak out even if to announce the error.
What has been done is now done. Let us move onto the next embarrassment.
The tally board is not left on the wall long enough to read. Just ask anyone in attendance at these meetings. I'm sure Mr. Barrett did not notice the mistake on that day either but maybe saw it on the video. And besides, Mrs. Vanzant don't control that board, Carol Wade does.
Is GTC psychic? How did they know there would be a denial of responsibility and Vanzant would blame this mess on someone else. Check the whereabouts of obama me thinks he is in the courthouse annex.
Every body needs to watch the video again. Who said 10 nos and 11 yes. It passed?
I guess all the no's really didn't give a flip or wasn't about to complain.
They have learned you don't cross the queen obama even if you are right 9:01.
The (Large) mistake has been blamed on Carol Wade.
Blame it on Carol Wade who did not make the announcement are anyone else who happens to be convenient. Anyone will do as long as Vanzant doesn't have to take any responsibility.
9;35 Good post. Carol just happen to be the one closest.
Does it matter who saw the board, someone said 10 no's and 11 yes'. Does someone need hearing aid?
Maybe Barrett was waiting for someone else to ask that question.
Can you imagine what would have happened if Barrett had asked anything much less a question about the accuracy of the queens decision?
Those four cops weren't in that room for decorations.
How many police are usually in the meetings?
Doesn't matter what the board said at the bottom, the votes were cast and the budget passed. State law states it only takes a simple majority to pass a budget. Only a mistake that has been blown out of proportion.
5:49 which state law do you refer? It seems that if an item that was included in the budget even though it failed would negate the budget and therefore could not be brought up for vote. The budget that passed according to the commissioners votes does not include the three employee positions and if it is included then it opens our county up to further litigation and I am sure that no one wants that. So can you post the code you reference?
Wasn't the budget pasted at the first July meeting and if it was doesn't that mean any changes to the budget in the later meeting would have been amendments to the original budget unless that original budget was voided by a vote of the commission which did not happen. Don't monetary amendments to the budget have to be by a 2/3 vote. Just asking.
Only a mistake that has been blown out of proportion.
Saturday, August 13, 2011 5:49:00 PM
What was the mistake?
So the commissioners votes do not even count in this county. Why pay them, just let Janet do all the decision making. Our citizens are not represented any way.
4:04
That's simply not true.
4:04 Why? If the commissioners vote one way on an item and it fails and that decision is ignored by the executive as is what happened at the meeting then it is true. The voters were not represented by there elected officials because although this has been called to the attention,nothing will be done about it because Janet wanted the third employee added back in the budget. The commissioners voted not to put the three employees back in the budget but they are so only one person made that decision. The very one that said it passed. But when you have such alert commissioners as Giles County does that not one of the commissioners staring right at the board could read that it failed. But I'm sure some new laws have been concocted in our County Attorneys office that no one but our County Executive and County Attorney will be privy to.
More sour grapes and kool-aid?
Another example of the commissioners votes not counting is the votes taken last year to change the distance between places that sell alcohol and churches, public gathering places, schools etc.
If you remember in reference to that vote the County Executive in a letter published in the 2 March 2010 "Pulaski Citizen" stated “I always follow the law as laid out by local, state and federal government.” Wonderful words with apparently no meaning to the County Executive.
By her actions she vetoed the actions of the County Legislative Body.
In her letter she claimed it was a simple mistake, ever notice how often violations of the law by the County Executive, the Election Office, etc are brushed away as simple mistakes. The County Executive claimed that the vote would require a two thirds majority then declared that the measure had failed to change the distance.
Now maybe that that was a simple mistake but the rest of her actions were deliberate and calculated abuses of power. When the County Executive, correctly or incorrectly, announced that the resolution had failed and it was recorded in the minutes as having failed with no objection from any Commissioner or other authority in the room that became officially the end of the issue.
But she stated “later during the week” she was told she had been incorrect. Legally the only way those minutes and that action could be changed was by another vote by the County Legislative Body, the only one authorized to pass or fail a resolution.
Mrs. Vanzant stated, “I did not take it upon myself to make the correction, which I would never do except to follow the advice of the attorney and follow the law and protect our county”.
When challenged to produce any statements where an attorney, either from CTAS, or any other source, authorized her to overturn the decision of the Commissioners, I was told by Mrs Vanzant and agreed to by the County Attorney Mrs Henson that the information would be provided to me. Three letters of request later and still no response from the County Executive of Attorney, sound familiar.
Since the decision of the Legislative Body was recorded in the minutes it could only legally have been undone by another vote of the Commissioners. No vote has been taken.
Understand the County Attorney had advised against issuing a beer permit to anyone until after the State Attorney General had issued an opinion about the legality of the actions but Mrs. Vanzant personally directed the Beer Board members to approve the permit immediately and gave the order to Carol Wade to issue the permit.
Later the State Attorney General issued a strong statement condemning the action and requiring alterations to avoid a lawsuit.
Now one can speculate about why the County Executive acted as she did but the one thing that stands out and can not be disputed is that she exceeded her authority as County Executive by vetoing the Commissioners and ordering a beer permit to be issued before the matter was cleared up. This was inexcusable behavior from anyone and especially from someone who had been the County Executive for over seven years but it has become the pattern of behavior by this County Executive.
Since this permit was issued, can anyone under the same conditions, sue the county if they are denied a permit?
Maybe we need a new county attorney. Who is responsible for hiring the county attorney?
10:26
Why don't you go ask Mrs. Vanzant?
10:30 I probably would not be allowed to speak to ask her.
10:52
Oh, for crying out loud. Would you stop mtrying to stir up trouble? Isn't one troublemaker enough for Giles County? Will you step up and take his place when he moves?
Who hires the County Attorney? - The County Executive
Who Chages the Commission Vote? - The County Executive
Fact or Fiction?
I think someone is trying to enable troublemaking and strife.
8:47 it looks like it is you or why would you make a comment like that? Are you scared to answer 3:15. Don't answer that we all know you will just try to change the subject by acting like every one that believes The Constitution is designed to protect all citizens from oppressive government are troublemakers.
But more importantly, is Janet's voice the only voice that counts in this county? That is what I saw at the meeting.
And where is that crafty little law that is able to avoid every one except the County Attorney and Executive? Man that is a magic bullet in their gun to silence all citizens that wish to address the commission.Very convenient.
I wonder if the County Attorney's comment would be the same to a judge if he asks her to produce it? I can't see why the attorney or executive would want to cost the taxpayers more money with a lawsuit when all they have to do is produce the code. This concerns me.
9:21
No, I'm not afraid to answer any of you guys. I don't know who hires the city attorney, and am not the least bit troubled by it. However, I did suggest that you go ask Mrs. Vanzant if you need to know. Will there be a petition going around in the near future that would demand Ms. Henson's head? I wonder.
Are you one of the enablers of trouble? You guys just never stop, and it doesn't appear to register with you who the main source of all this strife and hate really is. Think. Go help him pack.
6:29 you remain true to form. If you don't know that Vanzant is the one who appoints the county attorney and the spineless commission approves then you don't know Jack about county politics but then you have proven that point many times in the past.
People have tried, including me, to get the code numbers from Vanzant but every call is met with, "she's not in can I have her call you back". Would you suggest that someone sit and wait for her in the lobby to ask about the code number, it was already done and her response was "you have to check with the county attorney".
I think your idea of a petition is a very good one and will start on it after the next Legislative Committee meets. Thanks
You idiots don't seem to understand that you are never going to get anywhere. You are not respected and everyone knows the same old few that stir up trouble every chance they get. Even the Enabler should sit back and laugh at how pitiful you all can be. The phony king and his phony court have no power. They are just jealous. It really is funny. NOBODY HAS ANY RESPECT FOR ANY OF YOU THAT FOLLOW BARRETT.
8:31
I totally agree with you. They are the true enablers of the troublemaking and strife, the seeds being sown by the chief troublemaker.
8:31 and 8:40 I have to laugh at you. After all the proof that has been shown as well as the proof of the lies told to citizens by our government you still defend them. The fact that you are too stupid to see that Barrett and all that believe government has a responsibility to its citizens and that we do not give them our check books to do with as they wish without following the correct procedures. If a commissioners voice is not listened to then whose voice is? In this county apparently it is only the Executive.
It amazes me how morons continue to defend those totalitarian actions and that we saw how spineless our commissioners are.
10:44
Are you enabling the troublemaker who has never spoken at a meeting? What a laugh.
10:58 your comment makes no sense? I am supporting all citizens to have the right to redress their grievances. As it has been shown by so many on here the government is only willing to speak to certain citizens whether it be in regular office hours or at the meetings. Why do fall right in line and enable the bigotry that is so obvious in our government. We need good government and less bigotry.
Maybe Barret and some others don't have the respect of some in charge but they still breathe the air of freedom while you may have the respect of those politicians you'll never have the opportunity to breath the air of freedom because where you have your head there are only a few lumps and some obnoxious odors.
12:23
You continue to be an enabler of strife and trouble. Hasn't barrett spoken at plenty of meetings?
1:09 I think 12:23 is dead on you enable prejudice and bigotry. I'm glad some one is exposing the government's actions. The more people view these actions of our government the more they are empowered to make change. And ask around on the street, it is coming.
1:24
Oh trust me, I do ask around, and what I am hearing is that a small group of enablers are trying to cause all the trouble they can in Giles County. Have you not "exposed" the local officials enough?
3:53 as they continue the same prejudice practices the exposure will continue.
Because enablers like you that wish to sweep the wrong doings of our public officials under the rug, no one in their right mind will ever trust you.
And no that was no lie started by Barrett, your statements attest to it being truth.
4:14
No, it was a lie when he told it and it still is. The real enablers are people like you who insist on defending troublemaking and strife.
5:17 so predictable. How was I to know that was even you except for the hatred and bigotry you spread. What some one posted about you is completely true. You claim the moniker of enabler with pride. I was just taking a stab but hit the nail on the head.lol
By the way, do you think the commissioners votes should count when voting on items to be included in the budget? Guess what? They don't matter to the Executive any more than Allen Barrett's or any citizen's concerns do and we have proof of it with picture on this post.
The difference is that Barrett is not afraid to voice his concerns even when not popular but our commissioners sleep and don't pay attention to the business at hand. Let's not rock the boat and let's continue with business as usual. Let's continue to lose our citizens and growth opportunities. Let's make this area so bigoted and unattractive to outsiders that no one will ever want to move in here and we can have it all to our self.(sinister laugh) But go on and write in defense of the totalitarian regime and its puppets.
6:25
I think you are one of the chief enaqblers of troublemaking and strife.
6:25
Excuse me, that would be enablers.
8:10 I thought you would be afraid to answer the question. You never answer any questions with facts. But thank you, you prove my point once again. You will die in defense of wrong because it only benefits you and your friends.
If the citizens of Giles County don't pay attention to how their Commissioner votes and vote them out they deserve what they get.
Commissioners in my Ditrict that voted this last budget in will not get my vote and I will remind everyone about it election time.
to the 8:57 enabler of trouble and strife:
You have a point? I wonder if you wouldn't die in defense of a troublemaker?
Your accusation that I would tolerate and even go along with something wrong to benefit myself and my friends is nothing more than a lie. You really need a hobby.
If you don't tolerate wrongdoing then I should expect your next post will request that Vanzant make a public statement telling the TCA number that prevented Barret from speaking.
This is the most simple issue that Vanzant has been caught in, if she can identify the appropriate law then Barret lied if she can't or if there was any other reason for not allowing Barret to speak then she lied.
Since you "don't tolerate wrongdoing" then I'm sure you will request the truth be told and this issue settled?
6:46 Absolutely not, I would not die in defense of you, I don't agree with your opinions. I base my opinions by studying the facts however I would die for the protection of my civil liberties and to not live under oppressive government.
great comment 9:26 Has Daw had any luck finding out the code?
9:32
I've lived here all my life and don't feel the least oppressed. Who is oppressing you? We all have the same civil liberties, so please stop enabling the troublemaker.
11:46 When one citizens rights are oppressed all citizens rights are oppressed although some are to stupid to see it or are in league with the ones doing the oppression. In short our local government.
Why is sometimes it takes 3/4 of the commissioners to approve or pass, then again it only takes one vote different?
1:44
Who was oppressed? Did you read DAW's explanation as to why the "oppressed one" wasn't allowed to speak at the meeting in question?
I still have not seen the exact code referenced and was Mr. Barrett's letter mailed? I am finding this out and if it was there is the Postal Acceptance Rule so I am waiting to find out. In addition did the notice in the paper specifically state business days or days. All these factor in but the letter stated state law so with DAW's ambiguous reply it may or may not hold water. All I saw was an opinion but still no fact.
And still very interesting that it has come to this to even get a response. If the question was so "easy" to answer then why the delay in getting the answer? Looking forward to Mr. Barrett's response in regard to this.
8:35,
I put in the code.
11:08,
Today was the first time I called anyone. It took five minutes to get the answer. In that respect, I would say that it was pretty easy. The rest of the time I was searching through the T.C.A. myself.
DAW
Gee DAW I sure must have missed where you put the code number in that stated I could not speak at the commission meeting.
To 8:35 the letter was placed in Mrs Vanzant's hand in the presence of Commissioner Campbell, Mr. Vanzant and the secretary. The letter was handed to the secretary by Mrs Vanzant and I requested that it be time stamped which the secretary did.
The hold matter of the time is nothing but a "red herring", The letter of rejection states "I have consulted the county attorney concerning this matter and the request must be denied. In accordance with Tennessee law. There has never been any question about the request being in on time.
If Mrs Vanzant didn't get my request until the day before the meeting how is it that her letter of rejection was dated 22 July six days before the meeting? The subject, as usual, is trying to be altered because they have absolutely no TCA number that supports their rejection.
Thank you Mr Barrett for stating facts.
Mr Barrett
Please turn this over to some formal agency that can look into the matter. And a report of this needs to go in the Pulaski Citizen and not the Ardmore Shopper which is not a 'newspaper' but an ads flyer.
barrett
Why can't you just stop whining about this? Have you not been given space to speak at many meetings? Of course you have.
The post at 5:24 made sense. If you know of a misdeed or a crime that has been committed, why don't you turn it over to the proper authorities?
I think it's a shame that Giles County has had to endure you this long. It is my sincere hope that you will soon be departing. And I don't say that to hurt your feelings.
I don't consider "ONE" as many. That is the total number of times I have been allowed to address the full commission without them being told they could leave without penalty by the county executive.
Boy have you changed your opinion or have you just become more comfortable in your hypocrisy. When I have taken evidence of wrong doing to the proper authorities you criticized me as costing the county money so now you criticize me for not taking it to the proper authorities. Your consistency seems about as firm as jello.
I tell you what since you want me to leave so badly I'll sell you my house and property for $225,000.00 and be gone within thirty days after closing. So now you can as the saying goes, either put up or shut up.
wab
Is it still your house?
Just found out today that Janet Vanzant WILL be running again in 2014. THANK GOODNESS. Just wandering who will be running for second place. Maybe WAB could run for forth place. That is if only three are running.
6:36
Oh make no mistake about it, this little group will be running their horse, whoever that may be. However, I really don't think Mrs. Vanzant will be running again. If she does, I will be out there campaigning for her just as I did this past election. These unhappy people cannot themselves get elected and blame that on the ignorance and apathy of Giles Countians. Or they would say we knowingly go along with evil and wrong.
What if Mrs. Vanzant doesn't run again? What should we do? In my opinion, we shave to upport and vote for the candidate that wab and his crew are campaigning against. That seems the safe thing to do.
Perhaps I need to proof my posts before they go in. Let me re-type my last paragraph.
What if Mrs. Vanzant doesn't run again? What should we do? In my opinion, we should support and vote for the candidate that wab and his crew are campaigning against. That seems the safe thing to do.
This is why we need to see that the charter is defeated soundly. The same bunch is behind it as well.
6:24 There you go again bragging that you can read. It doesn't matter if you proof read your dribble it still makes no sense. If you really want to impress people try learning to think and write something intelligent for a change.
I thought the county voted for the charter. Are the people against it still trying to suppress the wishes of the majority?
What county does Mrs. VanZant live in now?
wab
There you go again with your smart-aleck and condescending remarks. That's exactly why people can't stand you. By the way, let's compare IQ and education. Shall we?
8:52
No, the people pushing the charter are, in my opinion, the ones you'd better watch. They can't get themselves or their candidates elected, so this is part of a plan to get those "undesirable, corrupt, and incompetent" elected officials out of their way. We need to stop it, and I vow to do everything within my power to see it go down in defeat.
9:12 Of course I could tell you what my education is and in what disciplines I studied but since you can't be trusted and you wouldn't believe it anyway I'll gladly post my transcripts as soon as you post yours.
wab
You are absolutel unbelievable. And I suppose you are trustworthy?
Thanks 1:47, Just when I was losing hope that you were ever going to be right about anything you come on real strong and finally you get something right. This is so exciting it renews my hope that you will eventually have an original idea instead of just repeating unsubstantiated gossip.
wab
Your condescension and smart remarks are why a LOT of people can't seem to stand the very sight of you.
I hope all this is worth it to you.
WAB,
keep up the good work, there are a lot of people out here that support your efforts and they are not as few as the enabler would have you think.
WAB
Referencing 6:24 AM, please name your 'crew' and is this a rowing, sailing, racing pit crew or what?
Wednesday, August 24, 2011 6:23:00 PM
Do you know what you are talking about?
I looked at 6:24 AM's post and it wasn't Barrett. I'm trying to find what was said about a crew.
6:23
Cheerleading crew.
5:40
I think you are an enabler of trouble and strife by encouraging it.
10:12
You post 6:23 cheer leading crew. Who is that person cheer leading? They put WAB like they were talking to Barrett.
Do you really call this cheer leading?
Anonymous said...
WAB
Referencing 6:24 AM, please name your 'crew' and is this a rowing, sailing, racing pit crew or what?
Wednesday, August 24, 2011 6:23:00 PM
Don't sound like cheer leading to me.
12:27
Cheerleading or enabling crew.
How about disciples, converts, devotees, loyalists, followers, kool-aid drinkers, proselytes, cheerleaders, or enablers?
I can't find post 12:27.
6:27
How about cronies, cohorts, colleagues, comrades, etc?
The Enabler spoke of WAB's 'crew'
on August 24, 6:24 AM
12:43
Are you not an enabler of strife and troublemaking?
12:43 Thank you! That was what I thought, but someone is trying to say Barrett said that.
1:31 Just ignore them. Its that Enabler trying to attibute Barrett to the comment. You are correct it was not him. But did you notice Enabler still hasnt answered the question as to who the 'crew' is and what kind of 'crew' they are talking about?
to the enabler 8:49
Have another refreshing glass of the hate and jealousy kool-aid and relax.
10:50 Sounds like someone drinking something beside kool-aid and too jealous.
Wonder what he would do for entertainment if the blog was closed.
12:12
Sounds like one of the enablers of troublemaking and strife. So much jealousy and hatred is shameful.
12:40 Just described the enabler of Janet.
8:16
Wrong. I was describing those who enable a troublemaking and quasrrelsome man to hurt others and spread strife. Notice that I said man.
1:45 You really don't see you are quarrelsome and spreading strife also do you? laughable Try thinking.
7:52
No; I don't see that at all. I am trying to get the enablers of strife to stop it.
Quarrelsome? I'm afraid you are wrong again. But I do take issue with the quarrelsome one and his enablers. This needs to stop, and you don't need to be a part of it anymore. Think.
I'm thinking as long as 8:19 is posting the quarrelsome will continue between 8:19 and others. You think!
12:29
I think you are absolutely correct. The enablers of troublemaking, though few in number, aren't likely to stop.
I was just wondering if Barrett is responsible for all this strife what was the cause before he came here. Didn't a former mayor get thrown out of office by a judge or was that Barrett too.
I also noticed that Barrett hasn't posted anything on here in several days so how does he stir up so much childish trouble when he isn't even posting? Just asking because it's confusing to me.
8:39
You asked some questions, so please allow me to share my opinions about barrett and his antics.
I don't blame barrett for things that happened here at some point in the distant past, and I don't blame him for all of the unrest and strife that's going on here today. But having said that, it is my opinion that he is the chief source of troublemaking that we see going on today with respect to elected officials and certain agencies he so aptly criticizes. It is further my opinion that he is a very jealous and angry man who refuses to accept the fact that he can't get his way here and that he is left out of the decision making process. I believe that's entirely his fault.
As for why barrett hasn't posted anything on here lately is open to speculation. But he has posted more recently than several days back.
As for troublemaking, it is also my opinion that he gets things rolling and then sits back to watch the drama unfold. He doesn't have to post everyday or even very often to keep something stirred up.
9:11 No he doesn't have to post often because you keep stirring it up.
How many times did you post Saturday and Sunday? Think!
7:16
Why don't you go back and count the posts since you want to know? I speak the truth, and it's unfortunate that you can't (or won't) see it. I think we all know who the real troublemaker is around here and who his enablers are. Think!
Looks like the last time WAB posted was 3:13 on August the 24th. Even that was more humor than troublemaking. Seems you have had a stream of postings during that time.
Who are his enablers by the way?
10:08
All I have been doing is responding to the sarcastic remarks, name-calling, etc. You know...tit for tat.
As for who his enablers are, I don't know. But I suspect there's maybe two at the most of this blog.
To 10:26 your post reveal you as such a reprehensible liar and hypocrite that I can not understand how you even post without falling over under the weight of your contradictions.
wab
I speak the truth, and I believe(my opinion) you are describing yourself perfectly in the names you just called me.
Isn't it ironic; it took me quite awhile to figure out who the true enablers are. They are those who called someone else that very name.
It took you so long 11:59 because no one would tell you what the word meant then you had to wait till your gossip group explained it to you. Looking just at your writings I have to say there is no reason to believe you speak the truth or hold an opinion worth considering. You are a loser.
2:33
Of course. Why didn't I think of that? Anyone who disagrees with you guys gets called a name. What a joke.
Barrett is a hypocrite. He is allowed to call names because he knows the exact meaning of them. He is useless to the county. The county knows that, why can't he get the hint?
3:45
But it appears that he thinks nobody should call him names. I agree with your post. We do not need his expertise.
It seems to me that Barrett has been called more names than anyone on this blog.
3:45 you really show your ignorance when you try to insult a person and end up actually complimenting them.
Saying, "He is allowed to call names because he knows the exact meaning of them" not only tells about your lack of vocabulary but shows a great need to learn how to use those few words you seem to know. Maybe if you could learn a few more words and their proper meaning you could also call people names without looking so stupid.
8:05
Would you be so kind as to tell me where there are any grammatical errors in that statement? Maybe it is too complex for you to understand? By him knowing the exact meaning of them references him being those words himself. When reading, you must look for context clues that will allow you to understand what is being written. Still sound stupid to you?
I showed your sentence to the asst. professor of English to see if I was as wrong as you claim.
She laughed and said at best it was very ambivalent and at worst it made no sense. I showed her the whole statement and her response was, "it's totally out of place in the paragraph. "Based on the wording, either way I would take it as more a complement than a slam".
Sorry 8:24 looks like you lose again.
11:39,
Why must you tell a lie?
Who lies, the great one or the enabler of Vanzant?
I bet if someone got on the square in Pulaski and yelled enabler, enabler, you would see her come out of the courthouse yelling "that's a lie."
9:15
No, the term enabler is the lie allen barrett started on me out of a little hissy fit of anger. But you and I both know the true enablers are those like you who keep perpetuating the lie.
You people just never give up. Well guess what? I don't either in this case.
8:01 I think everyone knows you want give up, to much fun having your hissy fits.
9:45
Wrong, my enabling friend. I respond to hissy fits.
Why do you respond to enabler?
7:50
Because he is one of the two at most enablers who keep perpetuating a lie. You may be the other one....or perhaps the same person.....laughable.
11:45's post is what is laughable.
12:00
Laughable only to you and to your alter ego. Seek professional help while the two of you can still be reconciled into one mind.
Would someone please tell me what post 12:00 said. I can't find it. Does that mean needs professional help because they get so upset they can't see?
9:09
That post was meant for 10:12. Is that person you?
Wasn't me, but I think whoever it was loves seeing you get upset. I will tell them to go for it.
11:05
Go for it. I will be here. the Lord willing, to offer rebuttal to the name-calling and smart-aleck remarks. Do what you got to do.
As long as the enablers keep stirring, I will be asking them to stop.
Why don't all of you stop? Somebody has to be first, who will it be?
1:37
I have made that plea myself, but they wouldn't stop. I'm the one the lie was started on that I willingly go along with wrong and corruption. I have asked them to stop calling me that name (enabler) at which time I will not say anything further in defense of myself.
2:15 How many post have there been since you were called a name?
12:53 said: As long as the enablers keep stirring, I will be asking them to stop.
Wasn't that you calling someone an enabler? Think about it.
4:37
I did indeed call those who keep perpetuating that lie enablers of strife. When they stop it, I will be glad to do the same.
5:22 It's ok for you to call anyone an enabler but they can't call you one.
This is crazy, I don't know who you are or who you called an enabler.
I don't think anyone else does either, can't you both stop it.
7:33
Oh, I would be glad to stop it, but they just keep on perpetuating the lie started by allen barrett. Neither he nor those who keep calling that name will stop.Therein lies the irony. They call me an enabler of wrongdoings when it is they who the true enablers...of strife. Why can't they just stop it?
When was you last called an enabler?
Post a Comment
<< Home