Has Senator George F. Allen “jumped the shark” ?

Political career trajectory unclear!

Still climbing or on his way down?

A moment’s lapse of judgment causes damage!


Continuing today was the discussion around the water cooler about Senator George F. Allen and his little “macaca” problem. The headlines in The Richmond Times dispatch this morning read “Allen phones, apologizes to Webb aide”.

It was a slow day and everybody had to chime in with an opinion. Some think it is a non-consequential issue. Some think it is an embarrassment but that it too will pass in time.

But one of the old "gray-beards" in the office suggested a scenario that may not bode so well for the junior Senator from Virginia.

Russ (last name withheld), a normally quiet gentelman in his later 50's, was at UVA a couple years ahead of George F. Allen. He didn’t really know Allen then and wasn’t into the football scene or other circles that Allen may have traveled in.

But Russ was ready to talk. It seems that Russ clearly remembers when young George Allen, just barely out of law school, ran for a seat in the Virginia General Assembly. He did not win that time but "carried the ball home" with a win for a House of Delegates seat in 1981, beginning the meteoric political career of George F. Allen.

Since that time, Russ followed with close interest Allen’s fantastically successful rise from a humble beginning of wealth and privilege to the spectacular political career that included being elected to the Virginia House of Delegates, the United States House of Representatives, Governor of Virginia and now the United States Senate. Some political observers now consider Allen as a man with promising prospects to end up in the Oval Office and leader of the free world in 2008.

All of this happened in the short span of only 25 years.

But Russ was quick to point out that Allen’s meteoric raise in politics was not all of his own doing. It was to a good measure due to being in the right place at the right time (the U.S. House of Representatives race in 1991 to fill a vacancy left by ailing Congressman D. French Slaughter, Jr.) and to the mistakes of his political opponents (poor political judgment of candidate for Governor Mary Sue Terry in 1993).

Without the benefit of one U.S. Congressman getting sick (Slaughter) and one Virginia Attorney General (Terry) getting goofy, it is entirely possible that George Felix Allen would be a political nobody today.

Russ recounted how former Attorney General Mary Sue Terry experienced a similarly blessed political career.

Terry started out her political career as a conspicuously successful Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney, was first elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 1978, and was elected Virginia’s first woman Attorney General in 1985. She was arguably one of the most popular politicians in Virginia in 1985. Every political challenge she met, she coasted through with resounding victories. Of course during her ascendancy as a political power hitter, she was always running as a Democratic candidate during an era when the Democrats were in control of Virginia politics.

So, when Mary Sue Terry announced that she was running for Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, there was little doubt that she would succeed, especially since she was running against a less well known Republican opponent who was considered at that time to be a political “light-weight” --one George Felex Allen.

As expected Terry’s campaign got off to a good start and she enjoyed a comfortable lead in both the polls and the money chase. Things were looking good… real good.

Then something happened… Something bad... real bad.

The golden girl, Mary Sue Terry, started tripping over her own tongue. She didn't sound like a Governor... or at least somebody the voters were comfortable in making Governor.

There was bad advice coming from the DNC down to the Terry camp. There was fumbling by her handlers. There were policy gaffs that revealed that Terry either did not understand Virginia needs too well or that she was not in charge of her own campaign. Whatever the case may have been, the early lead Terry enjoyed vaporized in breath-taking short order and campaign dollars started flowing to political “light-weight" George Allen. The rest is history.

The political ascendance of Mary Sue Terry was in a meteoric trajectory until, through her own little political mis-steps, it came to a sudden apex and began a rapid descent during the months preceding the November 1993 election for Governor of Virginia.

Russ pointed out that every political star has a certain trajectory of ascending to an apex and then going into decline. Some trajectories are longer and some are shorter. Some are higher and some are lower. We never know how a political career will end until it is over.

The question now is obvious: Did Senator George F. Allen hit his political apex on August 11th when he twice called a “foreign looking” but American born Webb campaign worker by the name “macaca” … a type of monkey and also a term that is sometimes used as a racial insult.

Another one of our more culturally enlightened colleagues chirped in: “It sounds like Senator Allen may have jumped the shark.”

Of course none of us mid-30-ish people knew what on earth she was talking about… "jumped the shark" ? What is that supposed to mean?

The explanation was a lot along the lines of what Russ had explained but it had to do with the rise and fall of the old TV favorite “Happy Days.” The popular TV series went on forever until the Fonz “jumped the shark.” That symbolism now applies to any situation where the ascendancy in popularity of a TV show, a celebity, political personality, or whatever, has stopped and the decent has begun.

Recent polls (take your pick) indicate that Senator Allen no doubt did himself some damage. Rasmussen gives a pretty good run down and assessment.

So, for those of you who relate better to the pop-culture than to practical politics the question might be better stated: Did Senator George Allen "jump the shark" on August 11th?

I guess we will know better in November.

Readers... your views please.

Virginia: Numero Uno!!! But for what?

Hog heaven for business interests?

Or…

Something more sinister?

The Iconoclast asks some awkward questions!

No. Miss Virginia did not just take top honors in the Miss America contest. While that would be nice, that would be just another beauty contest and not an appropriate topic for the “serious blogosphere journalism” that you have come to expect here at the Iconoclast.

What we speak of now is nothing less than serious business… "business" as defined by Forbes Magazine... arguably one of the world's most respected authorities on the subject.

Forbes Magazine also has a web-site at http://www.forbes.com that claims to be the “Home Page for the World’s Business Leaders.” Forbes Magazine and its web-site are reputable sources of all things "business" and especially all things “money.”

Forbes is known for its practice of publishing ranked “lists” of money related things like for example executive pay, Forbes 400 richest people in America, the World’s richest people, most expensive zip codes, etcetera, etcetera, on and on, adnauseam. Frankly, I think Forbes publishes these lists to give a little bit of spice to an otherwise very dry subject matter.

I understand that for many, money is never a dry subject… maybe it is just that Forbes is not my regular choice of reading material.

But anyway, how could I overlook the headlines in the August 16th edition of Forbes reading “Virginia: The Best State For Business” ?

Alright! We’re number one!

By Forbes standards, this was a “fluff piece” written in terms that even I could understand and enjoy.

Briefly, the Forbes ranking of all 50 states in America was based on 6 general categories containing a total of 30 “metrics” measuring the desirability of a state for business interests.

The 6 general categories included business costs, economic climate, growth prospects, labor, quality of life and regulatory environment.

In this ranking Virginia placed in the top ten states for all six general categories and in the top half of all states for all but 3 of the 30 metrics.

Pretty darned impressive if you ask me.

Having been born and raised and lived in Virginia my entire life, I generally knew that Virginia was a good place to call home and a state with many assets to be proud of… the mountains, the ocean, its historic cities, its beautiful country-side, its long and significant history, its contributions to our nations founding and growth… I could go on and on…

But to be honest, I don’t ever recall thinking that “I like Virginia because it is a good place to make money.” I would probably like Virginia as my home even if it were a bad place to make money. I guess that is why I am not a regular subscriber to Forbes.

But, the basic premise of the Forbes new list and Virginia’s “numero uno” position has got me thinking.

What does it really mean?

Is being the number one best state for business necessarily always good for all of us regular people who live here?

After some research, my findings were decidedly mixed.

Yes, there is an obvious correlation between a good business environment and the creation of profit for business owners and investors. Sometimes, but not always, that translates to good jobs and good wages to support workers, families and the community in general.

Did you notice that I said "sometimes" ?

Business profits do not always translate directly to good business citizenship.

Some businesses take more from the community than they give back. Some businesses provide jobs but they are not living wage jobs. Some businesses extract non-renewable resources. Some businesses create harmful environmental impacts. Some businesses abandon inner cities that got them started and move out to the richer suburbs. Some businesses become a burden on community infrastructure and never generate taxes pay for that burden. Some businesses expect that the taxpayers should subsidize their profits (AKA corporate welfare).

So, the point here being, business profits for owners and investors are not enough to conclude unequivocally that a favorable business environment is all good and never bad for everybody. That would be a far too simplistic generalization. As in everything, there are always winners and loosers.

In fact, there are some real interesting pitfalls to consider.

Some most interesting insights on these potential pitfalls are found in an arcane piece of research coming out of the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis (CCEA) at the University of Connecticut entitled “The Economics of Ethics: The Cost of Political Corruption” published in February of 2004.

The basic thesis of this research is that political corruption is harmful to the public interests and carries significant economic costs for society in general.

No kidding?!

Most interestingly, while this research seems to have prompted by circumstances in Connecticut, it provides a ranking of political corruption on a state by state basis. The research document explains that the quantification of political corruption is difficult because “the perpetrators work so hard to evade detection.” However, it goes on to conclude that “…the number of federal convictions of public officials for crimes involving corruption is a good proxy for the level of political corruption across the states.”

This is where it gets real interesting for us Virginians. (Read this very carefully.)

It seems that the Commonwealth of Virginia, the same Virginia just came in number one in the Forbes list for the "Best States for Business" is none other than the same Virginia that came in number one in the CCEA ranking of states on Federal misconduct convictions per 100 elected officials for the ten year period from 1986 to 1995.

Not only did Virginia come in number one for the most political corruption during this period, its rate of Federal convictions of elected officials during that period (10.3 convictions per 100 elected officials) was nearly 5 times greater than the average for all states (2.12 convictions per 100 elected officials). Remember… this was for a ten year period. This is not a fluke.

When you compare the 25 best states and 25 worst states for business to the ranking for political corruption, it is really hard to see any correlation at all. This leads me to conclude that what we have here is "apples and oranges" or an inappropriate statistical comparison.

Given this problem, what can we to conclude from this unusual dual number one ranking for Virginia… "the best state in America for business" and the at the same time the most politically corrupt?

Are we to conclude that political corruption is good for business? Such conclusion would be sensationally provocative and obviously an oversimplification of a much more complex dynamic.

However, there can be no doubt that political corruption is not infrequently motivated by shady business practices aimed at making a quick and easy buck. Sad to say: this happens all the time... here in Virginia and elsewhere. Maybe here in Virginia far too often.

In the hope to glean more insight, we had one of our Iconoclast research associates contact directly the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis to try to find out why Virginia is not just number one in political corruption but conspicuously in a league of its own and depressingly way ahead of almost all other states (only Florida and Maryland were even remotely close to Virginia for official corruption).

A knowledgable CCEA representative graciously offered the theory that it “probably was linked with the combination of a lot of opportunities for public officials to exploit economic development activities and contracting and weak state or local oversight.”

Very interesting...

That theory makes a lot of sense. Little official oversight combined with the temptation to make a quick, easy and crooked buck.

Going further in our research, we came across the May 28, 1991 speech by the then President of Czechoslovakia, Vaclav Havel, entitled “On the temptations of political power” delivered on the occasion of his acceptance of the Sonning Prize for his contribution to European civilization.

And yes, this does relate to the subject we are discussing.

The speech, opens with the thought provoking question: “Why is it that people long for political power, and why, when they have achieved it, are they so reluctant to give it up?"

He then goes on to explain that there are three basic motivations for seeking political power: the motivation of ideas for a better society, the motivation of self-affirmation the individual is making a difference, and the motivation of the perks that come along with political power.

Havel was appropriately humble when he said: “I feel compelled again and again to examine my own motives and ask whether I am not beginning to deceive myself. Might I not be more concerned with satisfying an unacknowledged longing for self-affirmation – a desire to prove that I mean something and that therefore I exist – than I am with pure public service?”

What about the privileges of office… you know… the perks… Yeah…the perks are nice.

On the issue of privileges of office Havel is poignantly circumspect… as if thinking about himself he said: “But where do logic and objective necessity stop and excuses begin? Where does the interest of the country stop and the love of privileges begin?”

Continuing he says: “Regardless of how pure his intentions may originally have been, it takes a high degree of self-awareness and critical distance for someone in power – however well-meaning at the start – to recognize that moment clearly. You get used to things, and gradually, without being aware of it, you may lose your sense of judgment.”

Mmmm. Something to think about…

The Iconoclast makes no pretense of being any kind of a “socio-political think tank” However it a sobering thought that my home state Virginia, the state that I love is, ranked number one in the Forbes list of the "Best States for Business" and at the same time number one for political corruption over an entire decade.

It bothers me that not only is Virginia ranked number one in political corruption for an entire decade, the incidence of political corruption is nearly five times the national average.

This is nothing short of disgraceful!

I would like to thank the CCEA of the University of Connecticut for their very informative research. I would like to also thank former President Vaclav Havel of Czechoslovakia (1989-1992) and the Czech Republic (1993-2003, where ever he is, for his thoughtful insight on the temptations of political power.

This issue of public integrity warrants further research and far more financial resources than the Iconoclast has available to spend on it. Thus the Iconoclast issues a challenge to all of Virginia’s fine institutions of higher learning to delve into the issue further and find out why Virginia is number one for lovers, for business interests and for crooked politicians.

Unquestionably our beautiful Commonwealth is exploding with economic opportunity. The temptations that former Czech President Havel spoke of are beckoning our political leadership. Inadedequate state and local oversight is sacraficing the greater public interest. Reform is needed. Virginia universities... step up to the plate and help find the way to higher public integrity.

Being number one is not all that it is cracked up to be.

This is not just one more beauty contest.


NOTE: The photograph accompanying this article has little or nothing to do with the subject of the article. It is just a picture of some pretty girls in a beauty contest. No suitable pictures were available of happy rich business investors or corrupt politicians who helped them get that way. So this picture was as appropriate as we could find. Thanks for understanding.

Appalachia Investigation Widens

Election fraud investigation sparks new inquiries.

New Special Prosecutor named by panel of Judges!

Illegal gambling tied to ongoing investigation?

Where is it all going to end?

In the sad story of official corruption in the Southwest Virginia community of Appalachia, The Richmond Times Dispatch reported last week new developments in the widening investigation.

Readers of the Iconoclast will recall that this whole mess got started about two and a half years ago (May of 2004) as a result of complaints and allegations of strange and goofy election practices in the Town of Appalachia.

When it was learned that votes were being bought for as little as a bag of pork rinds (I kid you not), there was the inevitable snickering and guffawing throughout the Commonwealth and even the nation, the story having made the national news!

The snickering stopped, however, when the announcements came of the 300 page indictment, including 917 separate charges against no less than 14 important citizens of the Town of Appalachia including none other than The Honorable Ben Ellis Cooper.

Along with Mayor Cooper, also indicted were Councilman Owen Sherrett III, Benjamin Surber, head of the Appalachia Police Department, and eleven other cronies and relatives who shared in the “privileges of office” during the reign of Mayor Cooper.

The 300 page indictment revealed a disturbing pattern of dirty local politics, vindictiveness, greed, megalomania and out right corruption by public officials.

Once again in May of this year (see earlier Iconoclast report) , the community was again rocked by a major police action to uncover a major illegal gambling activities and that they were possibly related to the official corruption investigation.

Initially, this investigation was being led by Wise County Commonwealth’s Attorney Chad Dotson, who stepped aside to be replaced by two Norton attorneys, Tim McAffee and Greg Stewart as Special Prosecutors.

While McAffee and Stewart started the investigation into the illegal gambling investigation, a three Judge panel, last week, appointed the a new Special Prosecutor, Lee Harrel, Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney from Wythe County to handle the illegal gambling investigation.

Both Special Prosecutors McAffee and Stewart will remain to prosecute the voter-fraud case against the 14 persons indicted so far.

This makes three Special Prosecutors working on the widening investigation in the little Town of Appalachia.

Given the incredibly complex nature of this widening investigation, it is easy to see why they now need three Special Prosecutors. Expect this developing story to continue for many months if not years before the whole story is played out. We wouldn't be surprised if more indictments are not on the way.

The Iconoclast will keep its readers updated periodically on this sordid story. Maybe we can learn something from it.

Note: As always, the Iconoclast appreciates additional insights and tips from readers who are close to ground zero. Information may be sent confidentially directly to commonwealthiconoclst@yahoo.com .

RELATED STORIES:

Pork Rind Scandal No Longer A Laughing Matter

Pork Rinds: A threat to democracy?

Three Cheers for Grand Jury...

In the Search for Elusive Truth

Who can you believe?


Professional journalism vs. Blog journalism?


What is ground truth in our complex and diverse world?


Truth is where you find it... even in the blogosphere!



Team Iconoclast is always amused to see how the blogosphere continues to gain in prominence in the modern lexicon.

Even the most casual perusal of mainstream media outlets will find scores of references to blogs and the blogosphere. We even find references to blogs in the cartoons. Everybody wants to talk about blogs and the blogosphere, but still the blogosphere is a mystery to most observers, especially those much over the age of thirty… sadly, I am now pushing those limits.

This is kind of curious considering the term “blogosphere” was only first coined in 1999 and didn’t have much public exposure until just a couple of years ago (about 2004 during the Presidential election campaign season).

Still, countless academics, social-scientists, philosophers, journalists and pundits of every description are trying to make heads or tails out of what the bloggosphere is and what role it serves in the world today. The blogosphere... a product of the Internet… is an ever expanding web that never ends… so they say…

So, it was with interest that we recently read in The Southside Messenger an editorial entitled “Anonymous bloggers.”

The recent editorial piece was about blogging and contained some thoughts about what blogging is all about. The editorial points out that “up until recent years the American public was reliant on mass media outlets to obtain their news” but now “the internet has spawned a new form of journalism: blogging.”

While this is perhaps an over simplification, there is indeed a faction in the blogosphere that can be categorized as pertaining to current events, political and social commentary, etc. These blogs might fairly be considered a new form of journalism providing an important alternative source of information to those who are so inclined to search the world-wide-web.

The Iconoclast falls in that narrow category of the vastly diverse blogosphere.

On one point we take mild exception to the editorial position of The Southside Messenger where the editor states that “unlike professional journalists, bloggers are not tethered to any code of ethics.”

This is not true.

Within the blogging community which is admittedly informal, rapidly growing and constantly changing, there is a spirited debate and discussion concerning standards of ethics. For the vast majority of all news-type blogs, the unvarnished truth is the "gold standard" for measuring what is fit to publish. Admittedly, there is now and always will be spirited debate on what is the real truth. The measure of truth is elusive. Also, the truth sometimes uncomfortable if not down right unpleasant.

Furthermore, does anyone really believe the mythology that professional journalists are free of bias and report only the unvarnished truth? Code of ethics notwithstanding, every major outlet in the mainstream media has a bias on just about any issue you can think of. The idea that mainstream media is purely objective is absolutely ridiculous.

Think about it. Who in their right mind would accept the FOX (conservative spin) or CNN (liberal spin) version of the news as the absolute pure and objective, fact based news?

The fact is that the really good professional journalists are skillful at camouflaging their biases so that they appear objective and fair. Maybe it is... maybe it isn't. That is the job of historians to hash out later.

The bloggosphere is much harder to assess and categorize than the mainstream media. There are too many blogs for anyone to effectively assess. Some are very scholarly. Some are stupid and frivolous. Some are based on some form of reality. Some are based on fantasy. Some have ethical purpose of mind. Some have malicious purpose of mind. Some are in between. There is no way to fairly generalize about the nature of all blogs.

Yes, there will always be rogue bloggers who intentionally publish hurtful lies, distortions of fact, and malicious propaganda for any number of causes… good, bad or indifferent. These bad examples are normally quickly identified and challenged by a large universe of knowledgeable readers. The rogue bloggers are forced to either rebut the challenge, retract their erroneous positions, or to whimper away in silence. The rogue bloggers come and go sometimes in a matter of days or a few weeks. Most of these rogue bloggers just can’t sustain any regular readership other than by fellow crazy’s.

The Iconoclast doesn’t claim to be The New York Times of blogs… oh… maybe that wasn’t such a good example… but we endeavor to base our reports on verifiable facts and to take principled positions on those facts. These are our opinions. We are entitled to have opinions just like everybody else.

We receive a fair number of scandalous tips from readers as potential topics for new posts. Some of these tips are quite useful. As a matter of editorial policy, we do not report scandalous tips just for the sake of feeding the scandal. Information received from readers, anonymously or identified, is not used unless 1) it serves what we consider some principled purpose, and 2) it can be reasonably verified as factual through at least one other independent source. Our editorial policy is not all that different from the standard used by so called professional journalists.

From time to time, the Iconoclast will make a mistake in a post. Errors in fact or of a clerical nature will be corrected as soon as they come to our attention.

But, for the most part, points of disagreement are not due to error. They are simply a reflection of honest differences of opinion on any number of contentious issues. Readers who take exception with the Iconoclast’s editorial position on any issue are encouraged to express their disagreement in the form of comments. We only ask that the comments be kept reasonably civilized.

But... in case you are wondering... we do not retract positions or opinions just because somebody gets their feelings hurt.

Some might ask about the anonymity that is so prevalent in the blogosphere.

Participants in the blogosphere include those who write posts on a blog and those who participate in the discussion of those posts. Anonymity is a common practice in the blogosphere for many reasons.

The Internet was born in the murky world of international cold war politics and secrecy. J.C.R. Licklider, one of architects of the evolving information technology “saw [the idea] of universal networking as a potential unifying human revolution.”

Think about it: universal networking… a unifying human revolution. What does this mean? Does the word “revolution” give you any ideas?

For one thing, the concept of universal networking tears down all barriers concerning who has the right and capability to express ideas. With universal networking, otherwise known as the Internet, everyone has the right and capability to put their thoughts out there on the world-wide-web for better or worse.

Anonymity is useful because ideas are dangerous… even good ideas… even progressive ideas.

In some parts of the world today, the expression of certain ideas that most of us would consider righteous can result in almost certain assassination, execution, torture, or indefinite incarceration for no lawful reason.

Even here in America, where we have the First Amendment right of freedom of speech, the expression of ideas is not always welcome by the prevailing political authorities and can result in very real and unpleasant political retribution. Consequently, many individuals who participate in political blogs today in America elect to remain anonymous. They chose to let their ideas do the fighting.

As a political / social commentary blog, the Iconoclast does not shy away from controversial issues, stories or personalities. In fact, controversy, or sharp differences in positions on various issues is exactly what makes for interesting blog posts. We are not afraid of offending traditional sensibilities and we do not mind making irreverent fun of bad behavior by important people.

Regular readers of the Iconoclast will recognize that we often discuss examples of bad behavior by public officials as a way to teach better behavior. From these examples of bad behavior, others can learn to avoid the same mistakes.

On the other hand, the Iconoclast doesn’t mind giving a tip of the hat and thanks to those little people who distinguish themselves by taking the righteous stand against injustice under the color of authority. There are many unsung little heroes in every community who stand up to against the “tanks” of abusive authority every day. Some get run over. The least we can do is to give them a little unsolicited recognition and appreciation.

So, during your search for the elusive truth, don't presume that the mainstream media will always tell you the truth and don't presume that the blogosphere will always tell you lies.

The Iconoclast advises that readers should evaluate critically all sources of news and only after careful evaluation use your analytical skills to determine where the truth really is. It takes work... but it is worth it.

The truth is out there... and maybe even in the blogosphere.

You, my friends, are the final arbitrator of what the truth is.

Conflict of Interest: A case study in standards of public conduct.

Are appearances of conflict important?

Or, shall we adhere to the “handcuffs and prison bars” standard of public accountability?

Richmond’s Benjamin J. Lambert IV caught on the horns of a dilemma?


Readers of the Iconoclast are no doubt aware that the Iconoclast has addressed the issue of “conflict of interest” by public officials on a number of occasions during this past year.

So, it was with interest that we read the recent news report and accompanying editorial piece in The Richmond Times Dispatch concerning Benjamin J. Lambert IV, and his withdrawn candidacy for the 3rd District Richmond School Board seat.

Before we go any further, we wish to make it clear that Mr. Lambert has a good reputation and has done nothing to warrant criticism in this matter. He is in the news because he has been caught on the horns of a dilemma... a decidedly uncomfortable place to be!

The news article in The Richmond Times Dispatch explains that Mr. Lambert who had earlier announced his candidacy for the school board seat, and to contest incumbent School Board Member, Carol A. O. Wolf, was compelled to withdraw his candidacy when his employer Banc of America Investment Services, elected not to approve his request for company permission to run for elected office.

Mr. Lambert is a vice president and financial advisor to the Banc of America Investment Services.

In declining Mr. Lambert’s request for permission to run for the Richmond School Board, Banc of America Investment Services sources indicated that the company “takes a conservative view on conflicts of interest and so turned down Mr. Lambert’s request to seek public office.”


Mmmm… interesting phraseology… “takes a conservative view” on conflict of interest?" We will come back to this in a moment.

What exactly is "conflict of interest"?

In the same edition of The Richmond Times Dispatch, the Editor, weighed in on this matter in an editorial entitled “Side Out.”

In this piece, the Times Dispatch Editor laments that the withdrawal of Mr. Lambert from the contest will leave the 3rd District Richmond School Board seat uncontested giving incumbent Carol A. O. Wolf a free ride. It goes on to suggest that Mr. Lambert “would have brought a fresh voice to the discussion on the city’s schools…”

The Iconoclast does not disagree with the Times Dispatch’s concern that the 3rd District School Board seat will go uncontested. Yes there is a need for ”sober reflection and dispassionate scrutiny” as the Editor characterized the qualities that Mr. Lambert would bring to the table.

However, the Iconoclast takes a slightly different view of the situation… a dilemma if you will… one that pits the question of appearances of conflict of interest against the real need to have spirited debate and self reflection on the Richmond School Board.

And this issue goes beyond the Richmond School Board and even the City of Richmond.

Now let us go back to the interesting phraseology cited above. The Iconoclast is inclined to commend the Banc of America Investment Services for it is so called “conservative view on conflicts of interest.”

What the Banc of America Investment Services seems to be saying here is that they are not satisfied with meeting minimum standards of the law when it comes to their own employees becoming involved with public offices. The company is setting a higher and more ethically strict standard concerning conflict of interest than is required by law.

Good for them! A breath of fresh air all too rarely seen in modern business practices and today's politics!

Not only does the Banc of America Investment Services want to avoid actual legal conflicts of interest, it wants to avoid even the appearances of conflict of interest. The company apparently recognized that this situation could have become a credibility and trust issue in a scenario where Lambert would serve in a dual role as a broker-dealer and member of a school board trying raise money via bond issue.

By Virginia law namely Title 2.2, Chapter 31, the State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act, Mr. Lambert could have no doubt walked a careful line to avoid actual conditions of legal conflict of interest. The Banc of America Investment Services was wise to not accept the minimum standard. They will be better served by adhering to the higher standard of public accountability.

For this good example of high standards in ethical conduct for its employees, a tip of the hat to the Banc of America Investment Services from the Iconoclast!

While the Richmond Times Dispatch is not flaunting the issue of conflict of interest, the Iconoclast awards Times Dispatch a questioning raise of the eyebrow for not even mentioning the issue of “conflict of interest” as the company’s concern in declining permission for Mr. Lambert’s candidacy.

It seems to us that the Times Dispatch may have overlooked the more important issue... namely integrity in public service.

Conflict of interest... this is an important issue. Editors of The Richmond Times Dispatch... wake up and pay attention!

There is no doubt that Mr. Lambert will have many opportunities to contribute to his community in the comming months and years. For the time being, it is best that he do so as a private citizen. We wish him well in whatever role he serves.

Lunenburg Special Election for Sheriff: A Nice Guy Finishes First!

"Nice guys finish last"...but not this time!

Arthur Townsend - who was recently fired by interim Sheriff Randall Stoots for not being "loyal" - wins Lunenburg's special election for Sheriff!

Though the State Board of Elections hasn't verified the results, it appears that Sheriff Randall Stoots is on the bottom looking up at both Arthur Townsend and Jimmy Moses in Lunenburg's Special Election for Sheriff which took place yesterday.

Will this serve as a "wake up call" to other local elected officials in Southside Virginia who consistently exercise poor judgement? Let's hope so, or the ghost of Barney Fife could come calling on those folks next!

The Iconoclast congratulates the voters of Lunenburg County for selecting Arthur Townsend as their next Sheriff. Our sources in the area indicate that Mr. Townsend is experienced, professional, and well-liked by citizens of the County. We feel confident that Mr. Townsend will make better decisions than his (albeit temporary) predecessor, Mr. Randall Stoots.

We here at the Iconcolcast hope that newly elected Sheriff Townsend will offer Jimmy Moses back his former job, which Moses was unjustly fired from a few months ago by Stoots.

Additionally the Iconoclast hopes that Mr. Townsend will publically offer Randall Stoots the option to stay on as a Deputy with Lunenburg County. Thus showing real leadership, professionalism, and courage - which is something Mr. Townsend was unjustly denied when Stoots dismissed him after 20 + years of dedicated service. We know this is asking alot, but we feel that Mr. Townsend is up to the task! Whether or not Mr. Stoots chooses to accept such an offer is his choice...

So, nice guys don't alwasy finish last do they?! Congratulations to Arthur Townsend, and we wish him the best of luck in his new, and well deserved position!

(Note: The photograph above is not Arthur Townsend addressing the media after his victory, but rather someone who is happy about the results of another unrelated election!)

Barney Fife to decide Lunenburg race for office of High Sheriff ?

Ghost of famous lawman decisive factor in special election!

Ectoplasm and Politics in the Old Free State!

Ghosts and goblins…is this fair politics… or what?

Ladies and gentlemen… we are almost on the eve of the final special election for High Sheriff of Lunenburg County.

On August 8th, only a few days away, the good citizens of Lunenburg County will finally decide who will take the office of High Sheriff of Lunenburg County Virginia, the Old Free State of the Confederacy.

Friends tell me… and who am I to doubt it… that Lunenburg County is called the “Old Free State” because when Virginia seceded from the Union in 1861, in anticipation of the late unpleasantness, they seceded for good… forever… and forever…

Yes, there may have been a few minor military set backs… but nothing that would change the minds of the Lunenburgers and their political leadership.

So the story goes, Lunenburg County may have “forgotten” to rejoin the Union after the War of the Rebellion was done.

Technically, Lunenburg County may still remain a sovereign nation separate from the United States of America!

Probably just a clerical error… or something…

Whatever…

The real issue today is the almost unbelievable political drama that is unfolding in Lunenburg County in the special election race for Sheriff in the aftermath of the untimely (and perfectly legal and natural) deaths of the past two Sheriffs.

We now are facing a four way race.

See previous posts for details.

So far, the Iconoclast has elected to not endorse any one candidate. However, we confess to make a great deal of fun of Sheriff Stoots for firing two reputedly competent Deputy Sheriffs after learning that they could be political rivals.

Frankly, Sheriff Stoots has never adequately explained his actions in firing Deputies Moses and Townsend to our satisfaction. Excuses and rationalizations… at best. Dumb knee-jerk reaction by most accounts!

So… with the Iconoclast poll showing that Sheriff Stoots and fired-ex-Deputy Moses in an apparent neck-in-neck race with only a few days remaining before the final vote, we at the Iconoclast are in the awkward position of making a recommendation to the good citizens of Lunenburg County.

We had hoped it wouldn’t come to this but it did…

Given this dilemma, we notice that not too far behind the leaders in this special election (Sheriff Stoots and fired-Deputy Moses) is none other than the Ghost of Deputy Barney Fife.

The Ghost of Deputy Barney Fife. Dare we hope for answers? Yes... We hear you...

Given these most strange circumstances, we at the Iconoclast are inclined to suggest some kind of way for Lunenburg County to come together and heal. There must be some way to move ahead and bring some sense of closure to this very strange situation.

So, we suggest that those who voted for the Ghost of Deputy Barney Fife consider voting for fired-Deputy Moses in the actual election on August 8th.

This is our thinking…

We hope that Sheriff-elect Moses will do the right thing for all concerned. Give fired-Deputy Townsend back his job. He did not deserve being fired by Acting-Sheriff Stoots on highly questionable grounds. This was an act of political retribution.

Furthermore… and this is a big one… the Iconoclast recommends that Sheriff-elect Moses offer to Sheriff Stoots (after losing the election) a job as “Deputy Stoots,” so long as he (Stoots) agrees to carry out the oath of office (none of this “loyalty to the boss” crap).

Deputy Barney Fife was always a “Deputy” and we always loved him. In his hands, the results of the Lunenburg County special election for High Sheriff now rest.

To be perfectly honest, most of us know that Barney Fife is a fictional character played by Don Knots. We are cool with anyone who might differ with our view. But Barney Fife was a great inspiration whether fictional or real or ectoplasm.

Barney… we seek your guidance!

The Iconoclast has no problem in entrusting the results of the Lunenburg County special election to this great lawman.

May the best candidate win…

Ex-County Administrator in Greene County Convicted!

Citizen complaints lead to allegations of false entries of records by an officer!

Long term investigation ends in conviction of Ex-County Administrator!

Long arm of the law catches up!

This is an interesting news story coming from nearby Greene County, and falling under the category of violations of public trust by public officials… an all too large category and one shared by too many individuals who mistakenly feel that “privileges of office” include not having to follow normal policies, rules and even… as in this case… the law.

Greene County Virginia is a very pleasant little county of about 15,000 people, located only a few miles north of Charlottesville. It doesn’t have the rapid growth that the Charlottesville area has but it is a prosperous and growing community with a bright future.

Real estate speculation and development is a thriving business for some. The smell of money to be made is in the air.

Perhaps that is what led to the problem we speak of now. What problem?... you may ask.

The problem that eventually led to this interesting news story started almost two years ago, and a year prior to the retirement of the long-time Greene County Administrator. The problem evolved from an inconsequential citizen complaint about certain irregularities involving the County’s zoning ordinance.

This story was reported briefly again last week in The Daily Progress of Charlottesville.

It turns out, that those irregularities involved a certain property owned by then County Administrator Julius Lee Morris.

One thing leading to another, a Special Prosecutor was named, and nearly two years later, the former Greene County Administrator Julius Lee Morris, who had only recently retired after serving as the County Administrator for 32 years, has been convicted of altering official public documents.

Specifically, the alterations involved unauthorized changes to official planning / zoning documents of the County.

While it is perhaps significant that the former County Administrator’s inappropriate behavior involved real estate property that he had a personal financial interest in, that particular fact was secondary to the fundamental illegality that a public official had made false entries into the official public records of the County.

Think about this for a moment.

Why do we bother keeping “official public records” anyway?

Answer: It might be good to keep and protect certain records for the protection of the public interests.

This would make good sense, given the frailties of human memory and inevitable differences of opinions that result on different issues after the passage of time. Having official public records guarantees that citizens can inspect the records and derive satisfaction that everybody is playing by the same fair policies and rules.

It certainly would not make any sense if important official public records were to be arbitrarily changed willy-nilly by those officials who are entrusted to keep and protect those public records.

Nor would it be appropriate for public officials to mishandle, damage, destroy or loose public records, either through negligence or especially, intentionally with the purpose of changing the nature of public policy and actions.

In the case at hand, planning /zoning documents are for the purpose of documenting the official policies and actions of the local unit of government pertaining to land-use and development. Policies, rules and procedures are adopted by the governing body to ensure that there is uniformity and fairness in how land is developed and used.

The attorney for the ex-County Administrator argued that her client somehow was not responsible because the records were not “in his keeping and belonging to his office.”

Unfortunately, for ex-County Administrator Morris, the Judge did not buy these specious and convoluted argument which were outlined in an earlier article in The Daily Progress.

The Judge concluded that the ex-County Administrator was indeed criminally culpable as he was the top administrator and direct supervisor of the zoning administrator who routinely kept custody of the documents. The Judge concluded that the alterations were made with fraudulent intent and were therefore illegal. Central to the Judges ruling of illegal conduct, he noted that the alterations were done by “concealing the original writing on the plans rather than noting a revision” as is normal procedure when an alteration is proper.

To add to the ex-County Administrator’s problems he was found to have “lied” to state police and to be “untruthful” in his representation that the County Attorney gave him advice to make the alterations to the planning/zoning documents.

It is unclear what advantage the ex-County Administrator Julius Lee Morris derived from this illegal act of making “false entries of records by an officer” but it is likely that he rationalized it as minor matter and one that would not be noticed by the public or be questioned by other county personnel. After all, he was the boss.

The ex-County Administrator was wrong on all counts. The public did notice. And, when faced with an official investigation by a Special Prosecutor from other county, other Greene County personnel had no choice but to cooperate and tell the damaging truth. To do anything other than tell the truth and whole truth would have resulted in unpleasant legal consequences.

This is not a happy story. Sources in the community have suggested that over the years the ex-County Administrator Morris seemed like a pretty respectable public official. Unfortunately for Mr. Morris, a Judge has ruled that his behavior was illegal.

No we are not talking about long years in prison for the ex-County Administrator. However, Mr. Morris’ otherwise good reputation is tarnished forever. Worse yet, Mr. Morris betrayed the public trust and damaged public confidence in the Greene County Government. It will be repaired in time, but not forgotten soon.

If there is any silver lining to this sad story of violation of public trust, it is that the wheels of justice and long arm of the law, while slow and ponderous, do in most cases, and in the end achieve justice for all... even for Mr. Morris.

Sigh…




POST SCRIPT: According to The Daily Progress: "Present in the courtroom was Catherine Clossin, Greene’s former planning director, who said she was fired for probing into possible zoning violations involving Morris. She has filed a federal lawsuit against Morris and the county seeking unspecified damages. No trial date has been set."

What a tangled web we weave...

Sigh... again...