Ethics Guru - Memories of Stalin
Posted: 18 May 2008 07:34 AM   [ Ignore ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2050
Joined  2007-09-19

When you pull up the below linked article and see the size of this man’s face relative to the story, you suddenly start shaking, thinking you are in Communist China or the old Soviet Union with those 12 story posters with likenesses of our leaders. Is this is what we have to look forward to?

http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/19053154.html

 Signature 

“My only regret is that I have but one King Cake to bake for my City,” Maurepas (1931-1999)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 08:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  8944
Joined  2005-10-19
maurepas1 - 18 May 2008 07:34 AM

When you pull up the below linked article and see the size of this man’s face relative to the story, you suddenly start shaking, thinking you are in Communist China or the old Soviet Union with those 12 story posters with likenesses of our leaders. Is this is what we have to look forward to?

http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/19053154.html

So you think the Advocate is on Jindal’s side?

 Signature 

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for . . but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong. - Robert Heinlein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 08:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  22889
Joined  2004-10-21

Why would a state governor NOT want to answer his ethics board, and have a requested sit down with them??

I’m getting more and more concerned about Jindal.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 09:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Regular Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  118
Joined  2008-04-05
fred - 18 May 2008 08:38 AM

Why would a state governor NOT want to answer his ethics board, and have a requested sit down with them??

I’m getting more and more concerned about Jindal.

me too. And Kostelka: what a goat this dude is.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 10:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5940
Joined  2007-07-26

Read this spin by Sellers:

By MARK BALLARD
Advocate Capitol News Bureau
Published: May 18, 2008 - UPDATED: 12:05 a.m.
Comments (0)
Print Email Save Share
Page 1 of 2 SINGLE PAGE VIEW
Eleven days prior to signing the ethics bill into law, the 10-member Louisiana Board of Ethics warned Gov. Bobby Jindal that a last-minute change of wording threatened its ability to enforce the governor’s “gold standard” of reform, according to documents acquired by The Advocate through a public records request.

“The last-minute adoption of a ‘clear and convincing’ standard of evidence in a civil proceeding raises legal questions that will be litigated for years,” the board members wrote Jindal, adding that the provision was added “without discussion or consideration of the Board’s operating procedures.”

The board asked to meet with the governor “for an opportunity to share with you the reasons we believe this will not be good for Louisiana.” The board’s March 3 letter was never answered. Jindal signed the legislation into law on March 14.

State Sen. Bob Kostelka, the Jindal ally responsible for the change that concerned the Ethics Board, responded in a May 12 letter disapproving of the board’s private request for a veto and for its public questioning of the wording’s impact.

Writing to the board’s administrator, Richard Sherburne, Kostelka, who chairs the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee, wrote: “I must question the authority for you and the Board of Ethics to question specific legislation, particularly that which has already been passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the governor, other than to provide information, but not personal opinion, when requested by an executive branch agency or the Legislature.”

Of the board’s request for a veto, the Monroe Republican wrote “that letter seems to have been asking the impossible of the governor, since it was requesting him to veto a portion of the ethics legislation that he had called for in that special session.”

In a little-noticed move during the final days of Jindal’s first special legislative session in February, Kostelka amended the standard needed to show a violation of the ethics code from the easier-to-prove “reliable and substantial” evidence to the more difficult “clear and convincing” standard.

The technical legal term refers to the quantity and quality of evidence required to convince a judge or jury whether a claim is true.
The Public Affairs Research Council and other critics contend that “clear and convincing” proof would be excessive and would slow the prosecution of ethics cases. The higher standard takes effect on Aug. 15.

Jindal did not respond to a request to discuss the correspondence.

Jindal’s press secretary, Melissa Sellers, forwarded a prepared statement quoting Jimmy Faircloth, Jindal’s executive counsel.
“Legislators made this language change and if the board feels this change is inappropriate they should make their case to legislators,” Faircloth stated. “It is important to note that the Administration’s budget more than doubled the Ethics Board’s funding, provided them every dollar they requested, and the Administration remains committed to fully funding any reasonable request for additional resources for the Board.”

Jindal knowingly and delibrately supported that legisilative change because he knew he would not pass it without it. I predicted a fluff ethics bill before the session and that is exactly what we got.

I will leave the description of Mr. Jindal’s behavior to you guys to describe.

 Signature 

“How small of all that human hearts endure / That part which laws or kings can cause or cure.” Samuel Johnson

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 12:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Regular Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  118
Joined  2008-04-05

He may really BE the smartest governor we’ve ever had: this is a flimflam worthy of Edwin Edwards himself, but even Edwards was not so brazen and clever as to get elected on a platform of “reform” and then use a key ally to make the changes unenforceable.

Other than that, it is pretty much as if Foster was still running things: helmet laws are a top priority, Foster’s incompetent pick to run the National Guard keeps his job despite widespread criticism from professionals, and the 4th Floor keeps doing all it can to keep government growing.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 05:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  819
Joined  2007-09-12
Stopping By - 18 May 2008 09:36 AM

fred - 18 May 2008 08:38 AM
Why would a state governor NOT want to answer his ethics board, and have a requested sit down with them??

I’m getting more and more concerned about Jindal.

me too. And Kostelka: what a goat this dude is.

Amen on both counts.  As someone said in another post, this is the kind of flim-flam we expected from EWE.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 May 2008 06:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3357
Joined  2004-06-19
maurepas1 - 18 May 2008 07:34 AM

When you pull up the below linked article and see the size of this man’s face relative to the story, you suddenly start shaking, thinking you are in Communist China or the old Soviet Union with those 12 story posters with likenesses of our leaders. Is this is what we have to look forward to?

http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/19053154.html

This statement indicates a troubling lack of leadership on the part of the state’s Governor:

Jindal’s press secretary, Melissa Sellers, forwarded a prepared statement quoting Jimmy Faircloth, Jindal’s executive counsel.
“Legislators made this language change and if the board feels this change is inappropriate they should make their case to legislators,” Faircloth stated.

This is pitiful.  Leaders don’t PUNT, for crying out loud!

BTW, Legislators also changed the ehtics law to no longer allow accusers to remain anonymous, which is actually a right we extend to criminals, and I don’t recall anyone from the administration blaming THAT on the legislature.  In fact, didn’t JIndal VETO that bill?

This gets worse by the day…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2008 09:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1543
Joined  2007-08-27

Where are you Bottom Line.  Save Bobby protect him.

You wouldnt vote for guilty is you had video tape of Bobby standing over the body with a smoking gun in his hand.

Profile