Brannon Skewers Harris, will not run for re-election

[Jim Tucker]

Brannon has certainly stepped in it and probably made the best move by resigning.

But....have you ever met Suzanne Harris? Brannon's shots aren't far from the mark.

I would agree with that assessment. Both sides are smelling stinky and I'm sure there is allot more poop we will get on us as they keep slinging it.

 

[Jim Tucker]

I've met Suzanne, and Scott's remarks are self-serving but inaccurate. I might ask if you know the lady. She was working her butt off this afternoon (at the same time you were posting this) on stacks and stacks of emails from public records requests. She even had some of her little foot-soldiers helping her. A typical day for her and her friends in the quest for good government.

Scott couldn't be further from the mark. Suzanne wants the same thing as most good citizens, i.e., good, honest, effective, transparent government by honorable people acting in an intelligent and honest fashion. The difference between her and most is that when she sees our public officials failing her (and our) most basic tests and trust, she acts! And she works her ass off in taking action on your behalf and mine.

Talk is easy and cheap. Saddle up and put in the time with Suzanne and her little foot-soldiers, and you'll appreciate a wee bit more just how much she and others like her are doing for you.

When all the dust settles, perhaps you'll understand better just how courageous and honest this lady is. While Scott is free to attack her with his self-serving statements of dubious veracity, she is forbidden to refute his attacks with factual information in her possession. I know she has it. I've seen it. Come to the courthouse 4/30 for an educational day.

I hope you have what it takes to publicly apologize for your imputations here today once all the facts are public, provided of course there is no judicial seal on the proceedings. Suzanne is on the side of the angels, your statement notwithstanding. You speak from a perspective of factual deprivation.

Thanks for telling your side of the story Suzanne.

Would that you were right in that regard.

Who talks like this?

 

[Andy A]

Thanks for telling your side of the story Suzanne.



Who talks like this?

Someone who is educated, intellectual and understands there is more than one way to use the English language correctly.

 

[Jim Tucker]

Someone who is educated, intellectual and understands there is more than one way to use the English language correctly.

Actually, there is not.

 

[Andy A]

Actually, there is not.

You haven't spent much time in England, have you. The manner of speech used by lazin&drinkin is one used often in the British Isles. At least it was when I was there for two years.

 

[Jim Tucker]

You haven't spent much time in England, have you. The manner of speech used by lazin&drinkin is one used often in the British Isles. At least it was when I was there for two years.

Sorry guvnah, I didn't realize where we were.

 

[graytonbeachguy]

Someone who is educated, intellectual and understands there is more than one way to use the English language correctly.

Or someone who is trying to look impressive. Like people who think using "plethora" is a sign of intellectual heft.

 

[graytonbeachguy]

I've met Suzanne, and Scott's remarks are self-serving but inaccurate. I might ask if you know the lady. She was working her butt off this afternoon (at the same time you were posting this) on stacks and stacks of emails from public records requests. She even had some of her little foot-soldiers helping her. A typical day for her and her friends in the quest for good government.

Scott couldn't be further from the mark. Suzanne wants the same thing as most good citizens, i.e., good, honest, effective, transparent government by honorable people acting in an intelligent and honest fashion. The difference between her and most is that when she sees our public officials failing her (and our) most basic tests and trust, she acts! And she works her ass off in taking action on your behalf and mine.

Talk is easy and cheap. Saddle up and put in the time with Suzanne and her little foot-soldiers, and you'll appreciate a wee bit more just how much she and others like her are doing for you.

When all the dust settles, perhaps you'll understand better just how courageous and honest this lady is. While Scott is free to attack her with his self-serving statements of dubious veracity, she is forbidden to refute his attacks with factual information in her possession. I know she has it. I've seen it. Come to the courthouse 4/30 for an educational day.

I hope you have what it takes to publicly apologize for your imputations here today once all the facts are public, provided of course there is no judicial seal on the proceedings. Suzanne is on the side of the angels, your statement notwithstanding. You speak from a perspective of factual deprivation.

So let me get this straight....Evidence that you have seen, but are unable to discuss, illustrates what?

I don't disagree that Brannon has made some horrible blunders. I'm just saying that the whole cast in this play is more than a bit self-serving and disfunctional.

You are correct in pointing out my error in stating Brannon resigned. He did, indeed, simply declare he was not a candidate for re-election. I guess I do "have what it takes" to apologize when I am incorrect.

 

[Annie66]

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. You want to gripe and complain, run for office. To me, people like you who offer no solid proof or solutions to the problems are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

From your remarks you must be one of the following1) An elected public official. (2) A contributor to one of of our "fine public servants". And I'd gladly run but I'm not well known and I don't believe in accepting political contributions from wealthy developers and 'developer tree huggers'.

 

[Jim Tucker]

What is a "developer tree hugger"?