Main Menu

blog advertising is good for you


Township Board Tells Voters Where To Go and What to Do With Themselves When They Get There!!!

The Washington Township Board tonight told its citizens to go have sex with themselves and by a 4-3 vote gave itself a near 60 percent raise.  The board took no public input and raised its pay from $2200 a year to more than $3600.  Who still wants township government?

I am now more than ever convinced that the only difference between a township board member and a Somali pirate are jet skis and a rocket launcher.


I spoke to Washington Township Board President Ray Baker this morning.  He told me the raises were necessary because the township has a lot of work to do, even though it doesn’t have a fire department anymore.  He says says the township has to sell land, cell phone towers and consolidate office space.  He also says the public doesn’t understand township government and it would take too long to educate them.

Really?  Here’s your opportunity to get educated from the people who voted “yes”.

If you call  be respectful, polite and don’t get personal and I’m sure the Board members won’t mind spending time with you explaining why they voted themselves a 60 percent raise.

  • Rob

    “Tax and Spend – official moto of the Dems.” Hmmm… last 8 years of historical spending wasn’t done by the Dems.

  • Robert-NW Side

    I called in to Abdul’s show Friday morning. I spoke of those scumsuckers on the WTB. I also opined that they (the Board) violated Article 1 Section 31 of our Constitution in not ‘permitting’ the public a voice in the vote.

    Abdul told me that the Constitution was more ‘complicated’ than that.

    More complicated? It was written to be understood by the common man of 1851. It takes a politician, or an attorney, to make something simple to be complicated.

    Following is the text from Section 31. How complicated is it to comprehend?

    “No law shall restrain any of the inhabitants of the State from assembling together in a peaceable manner, to consult for their common good; nor from instructing their representatives; nor from applying to the General Assembly for redress of grievances.” — http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/const/art1.html

    “Instructing their representatives”. Wasn’t a lot of that happening Thursday evening, huh??

    It does NOT say “Beseeching their representatives’, nor does it say “begging their representatives”, nor does it say “pandering to their representatives”.

    Our Constitution at 1-31 is NOT complicated. What part of “instructing their representatives” doesn’t Abdul, or other politicians and lawyers understand?

    From Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/word/instructing
    INSTRUCT’ING, ppr. Teaching; informing the mind; directing.

    Cambridge Dictionary: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=instruct*1+0&dict=A
    instruct (ORDER)
    verb [T]
    to order or tell (someone) to do something, esp. in a formal way
    The police have been instructed not to let anyone leave the area.

    [Show phonetics]
    noun [C usually pl]
    The general received instructions to attack at dawn.

    Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/word/instruct
    INSTRUCT’, v.t. [L. instruo, instructum; in and struo, to set or to put on, to furnish. The L. struo is contracted from struco or strugo. See Destroy.]

    1. To teach; to inform the mind; to educate; to impart knowledge to one who was destitute of it. The first duty of parents is to instruct their children in the principles of religion and morality.

    2. To direct; to enjoin; to persuade or admonish.

    She being before instructed by her mother, said, give me here the head of John the Baptist in a charger. Matt.14.

    3. To direct or command; to furnish with orders. The president instructed his envoy to insist on the restitution of the property.

    4. To inform; to advise or give notice to. On this question the court is not instructed.

    Bottom line: Abdul is wrong. 1-31 is NOT complicated. The WTB violated our federal 1st Amendment right to political speech, and violated our Indiana Constitution at 1-31.

  • Greg

    T.A., with sincere respect, I am not opting for a broad generalization in this case. I am merely stated what I think I know about the social and political belief’s of these two particular individuals. My personal conversations with them in the past would leave no other conclusion. In the broadest sense, they are professed socialists vs. capitalists. They believe in entitlement and not earnings. They believe in the notion of the now popular words of “income redistribution”. They believe in absolute control by government and have little regard for individual accountability. Not bad people, but just possess beliefs that fall outside what I believe represent traditional America. They own and drive a change agenda that I feel weakens us rather than strengthens us. Since we are a country that allows freedom of ideas and beliefs, I have no problem. However, when I see folks like this in positions provided by local level partisian politics, it troubles me. Again, this can be said as well for folks on the far, far right.
    Extreme ideology knows no particular party.

  • Think Again

    Rico, HONEY, I dn’t hate Sarah Palin! She’s the product of a five-tiems-tried public university system, she butchers the language, she’s an airhead and somehow she became one of only 50 governors. I pity her.

    After all it’s the state that gave us Uncle Ted Stevens.

    Thanks again, Greg. I do appreciate your broader definition. I don’t know these clowns well, but I’;ve bene to a couple of meetings and watched them. They obviously bloviate very well, and they think this township board thing is a couple notches above the Supreme Court in importance.

    I watched closely, in person, while the fire department consolidation debate raged. Honestly, I thought they behaved well then. They were watching out for efficiencies.

    They loved to talk and act important, but that decision seemed in-line with our best fiscal and security interests.

  • Greg

    T.A. Peace. I agree that given your last sentence, credit should be given where credit is due. I belong to the team that wants to reinforce every good behavior driven to find balanced outcomes.

  • Rico

    Not counting typos, Think Again, your last post was worse than the one before–at least, for someone who places such importance on one’s command of the language. If we were to debate grammar, I may lose. However, it is you who continues to call Gov. Palin stupid(in different words, perhaps). Therefore, you deserve to be challenged, with respect to your grasp of English.

    I still say that your visceral hatred(yeah, hatred) of Sarah Palin goes far deeper than how intelligent you perceive her to be. Why don’t you call Dr. 90210 if you need that to feel better about yourself?

  • Pingback: There She Goes | Indiana Barrister()