Does Bennett realize Obama is still president?
They fire Drew Johnson and he ends up at the Washington Times with so many more readers than he had, yet they keep Clay Bennett. Speaks volumes about the wisdom of the paper. Charlatanooga and it's political incest remain.
I agree with Perrin Lance, there should be a claw back agreement signed saying that whoever gets tax benefits in order to develop the Tubman site should be held accountable and fulfill the grandiose promises they make about projected JOBS and TAXES provided by the development. That is not toooooo much to ask is it? The Black Creek Mountain/York Capital TIF, are a prime example of tax payers holding the bag with no way to enforce their grandiose promises. Perrin Lance is only looking out for the tax payer on this issue, after all, it is the tax payers money, Berke hasn't spent a dime other than his share of taxes, just like everyone else. Responsible contracts provide assurances and Mr. Lance is correct in asking for a signed agreement.
If you can fog a mirror and pay union dues, you can belong to the UAW. That doesn't say much for a more qualified work force does it? You have all of these trades unions where you have to be qualified and tested in order to work on union construction jobs, yes, belonging to that type of union makes sense. Belonging to the UAW is belonging to the Democrat fund raising arm and legalized extortion union. That is the MAIN initiative of the UAW, in my opinion. We all understand that those crying and whining about opposition to the UAW support the Democrat/Liberal party and want to enhance the funds of the party with collection of UAW dues, fact. That is the main concern of those for the UAW, they just won't say it. Let VW workers organize of course, just don't do it with the nastiest skunk in town, the UAW.
When an unlawful person threatens your life with a gun, you had better pray a lawful person is close by to save your life and the police are not able to be every where. So, more than likely that person saving your life would be a lawful permit holder. So before you make a blanket statement condemning everyone that has a gun, use some thought and reason first. By the way, I am 54 and owned a gun since I was 8 years old and have never harmed a person with one in my life. Get the picture?
I have a question. What about the dependent family members of city workers? Are they not being discriminated against? Take for instance a city worker that has a disabled parent, brother, sister, adult child that is totally dependent on the city worker? Why were they not included in the law so that the benefits could be included in those family members lives?? Instead Anderson only targeted live in lover's of a specific time frame to give city worker benefits to. I dare say that actual blood family members dependent upon city workers for their care and keeping are more deserving than unmarried boy friends or girlfriends. That my friends is discrimination against the actual needy and disabled family members of the actual city workers. Should not those folks be taken care of BEFORE a boyfriend or girlfriend that could actually fake a relationship so they could take a free ride on the tax payers dime. The law he proposed is putting an unrelated friend/lover ahead of actual family dependents, now is that not putting a selfish, personal agenda ahead of the family members? I find it amazing that family is jumped over for his agenda.
This writer, once again, is wrong. The federal government can't be trusted, as seen by the IRS targeting of conservative groups, Fast and Furious gun running scheme, etc.. Most of us feel the state can take care of itself without the Obama fiasco ruining things more than they are. The feds simply cannot be trusted anymore.
Anderson's main agenda is a personal one and not what he ran on to get elected. That is called a bait and switch and good reason to be recalled.
In a prior comment it was stated "And many of the "10,000" people were deceived by CGAT into signing the petition. You guys also attempted to shame people into signing by setting up in front of churches. That is fact."
Are you saying that everyone, or even most, of the people that signed the petition cannot think for themselves and were duped, even though the media was making the story the lead issue of the day? Also, how can that be claimed as fact? Has all of those people been interviewed and recanted their signing of the petition? If not, it is not fact and only an opinion, I am sure you would agree. The law for recalls is like any other law, if you don't like it get it changed, otherwise, it is the law. Easy.