jaydub Mach1 Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Obama says he has lost confidence in the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and has told Congress he is removing him from the position. Obama's move follows an investigation by IG Gerald Walpin of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star, into the misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit group that Johnson headed. Mayor Kevin Johnson used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car. The president didn't offer any more explanation I guess it IS nice to be king!!!!! Oh wait.....this is the US....we don't HAVE kings......... Remember all the hand wringing by the corrupt liberal big media when Bush removed the politically appointed US attorneys? Now, the corrupt liberal big media are rushing to defend their guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffIsHereToo Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 I've stayed out of the discussion here but this is just to blatant a and too easy...so here is the section of the article my good friend omitted that follows the few select sentences he posted: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090612/ap_on_...W1hcmVtb3Zlcw-- In August 2008, Walpin referred the matter to the local U.S. attorney's office, which said the IG's conclusions seemed overstated and did not accurately reflect all the information gathered in the investigation. "We also highlighted numerous questions and further investigation they needed to conduct, including the fact that they had not done an audit to establish how much AmeriCorps money was actually misspent," Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown said in an April 29 letter to the federal counsel of inspectors general. Walpin's office made repeated public comments just before the Sacramento mayoral election, prompting the U.S. attorney's office to inform the media that it did not intend to file any criminal charges. Brown said at the time of the settlement that prosecutors determined there was no fraud, but rather a culture of "sloppiness" in St. HOPE's record-keeping. Walpin, a New York attorney, was appointed by then-President George W. Bush. Alan Solomont, a Democrat and the board chairman of the government-run corporation, and Stephen Goldsmith, a Republican and the board's vice chair, said they strongly endorsed Obama's decision. The real problem was this guy Walpin had a problem with Obama's friend, who was running for Mayor, and used his position to announce these accusations just before the election going so far with shooting off his mouth that the US Attorney's Office had to publicly say that there was no plan to bring any criminal complaint and then report Walpin to the federal counsel of inspectors general for a review of his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 As a moderator who regularly closes threads when they get a little off topic or one who closes threads because they turn into debates (which you obviously disagree) I dont think its proper for you to be quoting an major section of an article. I believe this is a violation of the terms of service as I have been advised of in the past. I know this isnt something Liberals like to do, but maybe as a Moderator you should lead from the front and lead by example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hawkins Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 As a moderator who regularly closes threads when they get a little off topic or one who closes threads because they turn into debates (which you obviously disagree) I dont think its proper for you to be quoting an major section of an article. I believe this is a violation of the terms of service as I have been advised of in the past. I know this isnt something Liberals like to do, but maybe as a Moderator you should lead from the front and lead by example. Who is he Debating? It looks like he just added "The Rest of the Story". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Thats what I figured. Your above everyone else and can do as you want. Its everyone else who has to follow the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Who is he Debating? It looks like he just added "The Rest of the Story". You might want to read my post again, if you can. Never said he was debating anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Dear Leader, I see you changed your post of quoting the entire story and added a link to the story. Good Job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hawkins Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 You might want to read my post again, if you can. Never said he was debating anyone. OK, so your saying that he can't add his 2 cents, since he is a Mod?.....I don't understand He added more of the Article that was omitted........................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSGT500 Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Sounds like "fair and balanced" reporting to me. If jay was concerned with Jeff's reply, he would reply himself. But jay never does that. He just throws the Obama bomb and runs. It's like right wing guerrilla warfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 OK, so your saying that he can't add his 2 cents, since he is a Mod?.....I don't understand He added more of the Article that was omitted........................... The first poster didnt quote an entire article. Our Dear Leader did, which I have been told I cant do in the past as it violates the Terms of Service. We are only allowed to post bits and pieces of articles and we must add a link to the article, which our Dear Leader did after pointing it out. I brought up the fact of closing threads because threads have been closed in the past in which our Dear Leader didnt like. I say this because we should all be held to the Terms of Service, not just those who dont have the almighty power of a moderator. I believe anyone could and should add their two cents. If you havent figured it out yet I believe there is nothing better then a good debate. This is what makes America great. I dont like some being limited to what they are allowed to say and others arnt. If you have a opinion please let everyone know, but follow the Terms of Service and if your a moderator, lead from the front by following the terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffIsHereToo Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 As a moderator who regularly closes threads when they get a little off topic or one who closes threads because they turn into debates (which you obviously disagree) I dont think its proper for you to be quoting an major section of an article. I believe this is a violation of the terms of service as I have been advised of in the past. I know this isnt something Liberals like to do, but maybe as a Moderator you should lead from the front and lead by example. I am really sorry if I upset you! I keep hearing this accusation leveled against me but with the exception of when we had the Great Hood Scoop Debates" I have closed fewer than "maybe" 10 threads, if that, in two years. Having said that, the two recent threads in the SGT area that I closed, went far off track AFTER I asked people to stay on topic and not get into SGT vs. GT500, and the political stuff already filling this area, they didn't stop, so I closed um! I don't care which side of the aisle someone is on, or what car you drive, instead this area I think serves its purpose and unless I am told otherwise I'd rather not see this stuff leak into the car area that's all! You may not remember the bitter SGT vs. GT500 debates when we first merged the forums but it wasn't pretty...we've since come together as "Team Shelby" and I see no reason to allows threads to degenerate back to that. Again, I'm sorry if the way I do my unpaid work, which I really try to be the benefit of all, by doing my best to keep things orderly, easy to find, and enjoyable for all regardless of politics, religion, or political party, NA or supercharged, SGT or GT500. I do thank you for the welcome reminder of the policy so I have cut it down and provided the link for anyone that wants to read the full article. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 You may not remember the bitter issues when we first merged the forums and the SGT/GT500 owner debates. It wasn't pretty...we've since come together as "Team Shelby" and there's no reason to go back to that. Actually, I do remember and unlike most I would call those "good times". Thank you for following the Terms we must ALL live by. Oh and well were slightly back on that topic, why cant we have a "SGT vs. GT 500" topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffIsHereToo Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Actually, I do remember and unlike most I would call those "good times". Thank you for following the Terms we must ALL live by. Oh and well were slightly back on that topic, why cant we have a "SGT vs. GT 500" topic? Sorry I should have been more specific...it wasn't a topic about the cars themselves, or the owners that enjoy them, which is TOTALLY cool! No this was one of those back and forths by some fellow SGT owners giving reasons why a GT500 wasn't a "real" Shelby. Sorry...but that sort of thing has no place here at TEAM Shelby....there are PLENTY of other sites you can have those sorts of divisive debates. We have enough divisiveness in this area don't you think? At least we can hopefully find common ground and the love and enjoyment of the car. If we take that away... BTW: I'm not here to lead or follow...I'm just a guy that's been asked to try to keep some sense of order and that's all I try to do the best I know how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss Doctor Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Personally, I think that you do a fairly good job, Jeff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffIsHereToo Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 The first poster didnt quote an entire article. Our Dear Leader did, which I have been told I cant do in the past as it violates the Terms of Service. We are only allowed to post bits and pieces of articles and we must add a link to the article, which our Dear Leader did after pointing it out. I brought up the fact of closing threads because threads have been closed in the past in which our Dear Leader didnt like. I say this because we should all be held to the Terms of Service, not just those who dont have the almighty power of a moderator. I believe anyone could and should add their two cents. If you havent figured it out yet I believe there is nothing better then a good debate. This is what makes America great. I dont like some being limited to what they are allowed to say and others arnt. If you have a opinion please let everyone know, but follow the Terms of Service and if your a moderator, lead from the front by following the terms. Since you're now the DMCA Police now could you help us out over here and ask that ShelbyDude cut this down and cite the URL? http://www.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44207 Thanks man! :happy feet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FormerGmc Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 Since you're now the DMCA Police now could you help us out over here and ask that ShelbyDude cut this down and cite the URL? http://www.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44207 Thanks man! :happy feet: Here ya go: http://www.watchman2009.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reino Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 Since you're now the DMCA Police now could you help us out over here and ask that ShelbyDude cut this down and cite the URL? http://www.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44207 Thanks man! :happy feet: I asked. Thats all I can do. Im here for you sir. Also, if you dont mind me saying, that was one heck of a post, I made it just over 2 lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted June 13, 2009 Report Share Posted June 13, 2009 I have to ask. What is the big deal about allowing a debate over the SGT v GT 500 and the Shelby heritage. You have people on both sides of the aisle with opinions. They state their opinion, someone responds, and the groups converse. It is not like someone is physically threatened etc. I have seen some nasty debates on this site. They escalate, then people on both sides urge moderation and seeking a common ground. Every debate that I have seen, that becomes heated, eventually resolves itself on its own without the need to close a thread or threaten people. We are all adults. We can resolve our own problems. Threads should only be closed due to profanity, threatening, etc. Just because one or both sides exchange insults or hurt someone's feelings is not a reason to close a thread IMO. Again, every heated thread usually results in both sides agreeing to disagree or moderation. The thread should not be closed because someone decides we all have to be on the same team. Even families have disagreements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.