Ed Naile, CNHT

Hear Ed Naile every Wednesday morning on WLMW 90.7 FM on the Girard at Large radio show or listen to the archives at Voter Fraud Radio
Monday
Feb112008

Pour Some Coffee For Poor Mr. Coffey

A few day ago I wrote an article about RSA 91-A, The Right to Know Law, and how our sneaky, self serving, Right to Know Commission is, for the third year in a row, trying to get secret meeting language slipped into RSA 91- A to allow elected officials “wiggle room” to talk about public business behind closed doors, with secret letters, or private email.

And now we have Hillsboro, NH Selectmen “voting” to not renew the contract of the 15 year Town Administrator, Jim Coffey - much to his surprise.

Here is what the Hillsboro Selectmen reported in their Jan. 29, 2008 Non-public Meeting allowed under RSA 91-A:3,II (C). I leave out the standard parts and cut to the meat of why they are not renewing Mr. Coffey’s contract.

“It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. Coffey has a good reputation with the town.” (No vote)

“Chair Haley stated that Mr. Coffey has spoken about doing personal things, such as recreational sports, traveling, and spending time in his camp in Vermont upon retirement.” (Is that a letter of resignation?)

“James Coffey sent a letter to the Selectmen regarding his contract which expires on June 8th 2008.”

“It is the consensus of the Board that we will not renew Mr. Coffey’s contract beyond that date, but based upon his knowledge, his tenure at the job and his professional attachment to the town we want Mr. Coffey to assist the Board of Selectmen with the hiring process of a new Town Administrator.”

Then during the next part of the 23 minute Non-public Meeting the Hillsboro Selectmen go on to praise Town Administrator Jim Coffey.

So I would ask “Where’s the beef” with Jim Coffey? Exactly why have three Hillsboro Selectmen all shown up, without Mr. Coffey present, and in a 23 minute non-public meeting, recorded in the most cryptic minutes possible, come to a “consensus” to not renew the contract of the Town Administrator without a single reference to any problems.

The Selectmen voted in a recorded vote to go into and come out of the non-public meeting but never actually voted to not renew Mr. Coffey’s contract! (Remember the CNHT motto: “Sneaky doesn’t necessarily mean smart.”)

This is a classic example of a group who has been meeting on the side or by email and will probably lead Mr. Coffey to sue the town- again. He just won an out of court settlement with the Town’s insurance company, not really court itself, for having a former Selectman disparage him in a press release - and now round two, with a different Board of Selectmen.

Common municipal sense and the law should stop sensible people from doing this:

Making decisions, discussing strategy, or planning how votes will go BEHIND CLOSED DOORS!

The former Selectman who got the town sued and quit had probably convinced himself in private that he had some “dirt” on Mr. Coffey. Had he asked questions in public he could have found out what was going on and been right. In this case he was full of hot air it seems.

The current selectmen are probably quite satisfied with themselves that they pulled one over on the public - and Mr. Coffey. Time will tell.

Right now there is a bill in the NH House, HB 1408, created by lawyers on the Right to Know Commission, which will encourage public officials to do the WRONG thing and play fast, loose, and sneaky with the public’s business.

Get ready for more lawsuits and more of the wrong people getting elected to public office in New Hampshire in the future.

Monday
Feb112008

Well No One Else Was Saying Anything About It

Maybe we are not an exact replica of Massachusetts but we certainly are trying. Take for instance the Gary Dodds story. I like to think of it as “Chappaquiddick Light.”

You have your big gas guzzling parade float of a car smacked into something during a not so explainable outing. Several parties involved wind up wet and disoriented enough to not be able to give a factual or consistent story as to what happened and to whom.

Instead of a compliant, willing to serve police department as in Mass. you have a somewhat more aggressive investigation here in the Granite State. Thank goodness for that and that no one was killed/drowned, or left to die.

Our NH Chappaquiddick Light is bit more hokey but has some other similarities.

Our hero swam the dark and swirling waters – so did the Mass. hero.

Looks like a babe was involved – ditto the southern version of this soapy opera.

The babe/babes are keeping their mouths shut – no pun intended. No Chappaquiddick call girl has yet to come clean – ditto the unintentional pun. What no tell-all books?

Not one single cockeyed story peddled by the hero makes any sense what so ever.

It’s all about saving someone’s political career - in both cases a career that should not be saved.

And you have the, lie then swear to it, cluster of supporters of the hero, including the defense team of genius legal minds.

Will NH let our hero go on to be a future “Lion of the Congress” or will he be found to be a lying wanna-be member of Congress?

Soon, after the end of this charade of a trial, we will see if NH has chugged down the Massachusetts Kool-Aid.

Chappaquiddick was a bell weather of where that state was headed in the sixties, along with Jerry Studds and his young boy European vacation bonanza and the ever so interesting whore house run by Barney Frank’s personal add guy pal.

Good luck Gary! You stand a chance of helping us MEASURE where NH is in today’s world of professional politicians.

Guess that makes you kind of a dipstick.

Wednesday
Feb062008

The Revenge/Compromise Express

It looks like John McCain has sewn up the Republican nomination with a huge 30% - 40% of the base. Good luck with that!

I assume the love fest with his pals in the press should end abruptly, this afternoon maybe, and the Democrats can begin the seven month process of tearing him apart.

Let’s see if any accusations of ill temperament come up now. More important will be to see if he can survive those accusations without blowing a gasket.

And we have the previously ignored age/health problem. When the writers come back to Hollywood will there be a new sit com about a doddering, nasty, Senator who can’t do anything right?

John McCain can always fall back on talk radio to help him out.

Yea, it should be a skate to the White House for big John.

Wednesday
Feb062008

Lawsuits Anyone?

Our friends on the House Judiciary Subcommittee studying the best way to gut the Right to Know Law, RSA 91-A, have once again carved out a loophole for anyone wanting secret meetings for public officials.

Here is the language that has stopped the bill during the last two years they have tried this and failed:

“A chance, social, or other encounter not convened for the purpose of discussing or acting upon such matters shall not constitute a meeting if no decisions are made regarding such matters.”

“II. Communications outside a meeting, including, but not limited to, sequential communications among members of a public body, shall not be used to circumvent the spirit and purpose of this chapter as expressed in RSA 91-A: 1.”

There you have it! Sequential Meetings, where a secret quorum of members of a public body “talk things over,” are now “legal” as long as you don’t circumvent the spirit of the law. Now who would do that in this ethical world?

The spirit of the law is to NOT discuss issues the public body has control over outside of an advertised public meeting.

The Right to Know Commission must be very excited about this prize. They were once again willing to lose the entire bill they have been working on for four years just to get sequential meetings included.

I know who will NOT be happy. Here is a sample list:

1. Any candidate for school superintendent who finds out that several members of the school board or hiring committee had some “outside communications” with their favorite candidate over him.

2. Any equipment dealer who finds out that the road agent and several selectmen were having “outside communications” with a different dealer during the sealed bid process.

3. Any city councilors who find out that several other city councilors had “outside communications” with the city manager who just signed million dollar salary/retirement deals with some public employees behind their backs. (See Dover)

4. Taxpayers who find out several members of the conservation commission had “outside communications” with a certain landowner before a large easement purchase near thier homes.

And the list goes on.

I should not be too upset that the Judiciary Committee will once again support a bill that is blatantly unconstitutional, see Part I Article 8, because this will be a huge bonus to CNHT in membership, and more importantly, in activists.

Nothing, except maybe a bad computerized mass appraisal reassessment, spurs on angry taxpayers like a sneaky, conniving, group of local officials violating the Right to Know Law.

Governor Lynch should veto this bill if it gets past the Senate on the third try and send the Right to Know Commission back to the drawing board to do what the Commission was created to do. These people were tasked by the State Supreme Court with finding a way to keep private information Health and Human services keeps electronically from being released along with what HHS keeps that is public information.

Kudos to The NH Municipal Association for picking the proper RTKC lawyers to gut RSA 91-A. They are doing a bang up job.

Monday
Feb042008

Endorsements

Because I wish this primary was over my mind has drifted off towards what has been left out of the race so far, how about a serious look at endorsements, as serious as this 2008 primary deserves anyway.

By now, John Edwards is wandering around his 50,000 square foot mansion in his favorite extra short terry cloth bathrobe, cold cup of coffee in one hand, mirror in the other, wondering what the hell happened to his political career, no endorsement from him. Ditto Bill Richards.

And where is the last guy whose turn it was? Where is Bob Dole when we need an endorsement? Maybe no endorsement from a battle scarred WWI survivor who was parked in the US Senate for half a lifetime IS and endorsement of sorts.

Obama endorser Oprah is back on the trail with her bro. This is bound to make her some life-long enemies she never had to deal with before. But then she can always have herself on as an Oprah guest later and pour out her hurt feelings to one of the most moonbat audiences in TV history. That would crank out a few bucks and make her a victim as well. When one crunches the financials of it, it’s a no lose proposition for Oprah.

Then there is THE endorsement of all endorsements, except for “The Gloved One” who is busy at some day care center in Abu Dhabi, this is the Hollywood endorsement where the entire audience of the last Democrat debate was made up of Gucci-shoed tinsel toes from Tinsel Town. They sit in nodding approval, unknowing of mistakes of history, collapsing economies, military defense, market forces, or any number of issues. Their support is based on the most superficial of all reasons – feelings. They live in an insular world of self awareness to the exclusion of all else – much like many of the puppets on our political stage.

When you think about it, a Hollywood personality can not possibly pass up a chance to endorse a candidate. The people who surround and worship these stars in their everyday super star life would never, ever question anything they do or say. So when a Hollywood type spouts off about all things political, he or she, or the one in transition, is once again swooned over. It’s like tapping into a brand new, never objecting audience, kind of like Madonna re-inventing herself for a constantly rotating group of 12 year old concert goers.

Me – I need to know what Shirley McLain’s squirrelly brother or Garrison Keillor thinks about my candidate before I make up my mind.

I think the only endorsement that matters is one from an issue advocating political entity. They will at least dig up dirt on an opponent or pound home their own study proving candidate A did this or that better than candidate B. This is a much more fair and balanced way of advocating for your guy. Just spin on behalf of a credible organization.

The most effective endorsement isn’t really an endorsement at all. A free pass from the major news media who feed off of Washington by using past connections and free print or airtime is a huge bonus. They can, for instance, “forget” that a candidate stole 900 FBI files.

The media will chose their favorites and least favorites in any given race and simply repeat the name of the chosen in a good light over and over, again and again, until it is burned into the public memory, or cast a scornful eye into their least favorite candidate’s past or present positions until any thought of that candidate brings up bad responses.

The constant barrage of unscientific polls is one way to do this.

“He can’t win.” “He has it sewn up.” “She is unbeatable.” “He is dropping in our polls.”

And when the “polls” are wrong? This is the instant reply: “If only he had a few more days to continue the momentum our polls showed.”

Just a few months left folks and we can get on with finding a replacement for this nonsense and the exciting Ms. Spears.