Sunday, April 23, 2006

Argus endorses Jim Pratt and Phil Westmoreland

From the Argus



The Howell Public Schools district needs a strong, well-focused school board to face demanding times and challenging issues. Paramount among those issues are budgets, strong curriculums, controlling the costs of health benefits and opening the new Parker High School under construction south of town.
With that in mind, we endorse JIM PRATT and PHILIP WESTMORELAND for the two four-year board seats that are being contested by six candidates in the May 2 election.


The Argus also has another article on the school race keying mostly on the flag issue, but also to school funding.

This is the current list of Endorsements. My vote is going with the Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC first and foremost and will be for John Arthur and Wendy Day.

John Arthur:
Livingston County Republicans
Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC of Livingston County
Livingston Organization for Values in Education (LOVE PAC)

Wendy Day:
Livingston County Republicans
Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC of Livingston County
Livingston Organization for Values in Education (LOVE PAC)
Right to Life of Michigan
Michigan Campaign for Families

Dennis McGuire:
No endorsements

Jim Pratt:
Right to Life
Daily Press and Argus

Valerie Webster:
Howell Education Association (MEA's Howell affiliate)

Phil Westmoreland:
Howell Education Association (MEA's Howell affiliate)
Daily Press and Argus

Also - in Hartland the MEA's Hartland affiliate endorsed Cindy Sinelli and Lynn Burrill. The Concerned Taxpayers Group PAC of Livingston County endorsed Nora Kessel and Dennis Tierney for Hartland Schools. In Pinckney the MEA's affiliate endorsed Laura Burwell. The Concerned Taxpayers Group did not endorse anybody for Pinckney Schools. The candidates who snubbed the Concerned Taxpayers Group were Sinelli, Burrill, Marcia Jablonski, and Richard Gass.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

The paper also endorsed John Kerry. Enough said.

Anonymous said...

The paper has really stirred the pot during this entire campaign. I am sure the LOVE group and this election has boosted their paper sales. I don't agree with their endorsements. They interviewed these candidates, some weeks apart, and asked them different questions. I know that the conservative candidates were grilled- and I can only imagine the softball questions some of them got thrown at them. I guess it will just come down to voter turn out.

Anonymous said...

It's always about who gets the vote out.

Kevins said...

Surprise, surprise, surprise. The republicans are again sticking to the political strategy started by their hero richard Nixon and are attacking the messenger. The difference between all the endorsement’s by dan’s groups and the newspaper is that the newspaper had no personal agenda. In fact, the person who edits the editorial page and has a major voice in endorsements was a conservative republican candidate for the state House in the 47th District. Still, you're going to hear the same BS about the “liberal media” from the people on this site.
The paper endorsed John Kerry because he was the best candidate, and in hindsight, they were right. The newspaper stirred up nothing. For that, you need to lay the blame at the feet of the discrimination group, the so-called “love pac.” They should have been in Lansing Saturday; they would have felt right at home.

Anonymous said...

Kevin S. -

If the paper had no agenda, then why did Wendy Day get grilled for 20 minutes of her interview on the flag issue and Jim Pratt got one question? Jim Pratt negotiates FOR the union, this will be the fox at the henhouse door. Maria Stuart is hardly unbiased. After all, LOVE had the audacity to kick her out of their group. Made her mad. Now she has the power of the ink, so what. Didn't help them when they endorsed Kerry.
Buddy Moorehouse is the same kind of republican Mike Hall is. Nowhere to be found. Except in the deep dark corners of promiseland. (they'll know what I mean).
Wendy Day and John Arthur are still the most level headed candidates and they've got my vote. Can't wait to cast it on Tuesday, May 2nd.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the paper endorsed John Kerry because no other President has completely sold out our country to the highest bidder like Geore Bush. He has made one wrong decision after another.

Don't tell me you all think he's doing a good job? Maybe that's why you like Devos, just another rich kid living off his old man's name and money!

Just what we need, another trust fund baby! Republican's stand for nothing but big money! The rest is smoke and mirrors!

Kevins said...

Yes, Anonymous, the newspaper does not have an agenda. I know someone as closed-minded as you will never understand that, but newspapers bend over backward to be fair, objective and even handed. As far as humanly possible – because, obviously humans make mistakes – they do that job.

How do you know that wendy day was allegedly “grilled for 20 minutes’ unless you were there or this is day? How would you also know jim pratt allegedly got only “one question?” jim pratt negotiates for what union? What the hell does that mean?

I’m certainly not going to defend Maria Stuart because I agree with you on that issue. Frankly, I will never understand how someone as petty, unprofessional and unintelligent can be the managing editor of a daily newspaper. However, she is only one voice. And why would she be kicked out of the so-called “love pac?” All the people blasting me on this blog for calling them out on the group’s obvious discrimination tell me I would be welcome at their meetings. Obviously that’s not the case.

Again, John Kerry was the best candidate, and time has certainly proven them right. If anything it shows they have the moral courage to endorse the best candidate, no matter what the consequences or the backlash. The easy way out would have been to endorse the guy in the White House now who has the lowest approval ratings in history.

I have no idea who mike hall is, so that reference is lost on me, nor do I know what “Nowhere to be found. Except in the deep dark corners of promiseland,” means. Maybe, just maybe, Buddy Moorehouse is trying to be a journalist, and the obvious bigoted views of day and Arthur disqualified them for endorsement?

Again, a vote for day and Arthur is a vote for discrimination.

Anonymous said...

Kevin S.

You called Wendy Day and John Arthur biggots. I would suggest to you that you be very careful. They could have a "personal injury" case against you if you cannot prove what you just said to be true. They are absolutely NOT biggots. They are Christians, conservatives, fiscally knowledgeable and responsible, wise, warm, folks. Careful Kevin, if they lose this election, I will contact them both for a suit against you. You can debate and comment in public, but slander and injury in public are not permitted by law.

Kevins said...

This is a prefect example of the threats and intimidation republicans are famous for, and it’s an even better example of why they cannot be trusted with control of everything. Now you have a small sense of how Joe Wilson must have felt. However, I am not afraid. I stand by what I wrote, and in the words of your hero the incompetent GWB I say “bring it on.”

Obviously I’m not a lawyer like you are, but alleged injury by what is written is called libel, not slander. Second, these are public figures, and they have a much higher standard. You can criticize their polices with some immunity, and that’s what I did. Third, the defense against libel is the truth, and truth is on my side. When you try to exclude one group of people or dislike a group of people for nothing they have personally done that’s called discrimination. No matter how you dress it up, they are still bigots. So anonymous, when they lose I’ll tell you where you can find me.

Anonymous said...

John Arthur is about as qualified to run Howell Public Schools as a monkey is qualified to run Fermi.

Anonymous said...

Kevins - it was your guy Kerry (the traitor) that said "bring it on". We have to fact check you dems all the time. You just make stuff up to suit you.

Kevins said...

Anonymous 4/25/2006 10:15 PM
No, sorry, you are wrong. What I said GWB said was correct. I was paraphrasing, his exact words were: “My answer is bring them on” talking about Iraqi insurgents attacking U.S. force in a speech in Washington, D.C. on July 3, 2003. I do my research, you should do yours. How is Sen. John Kerry a traitor? He’s a combat veteran. Oh yea, you don’t agree with him and you’re a republican so that makes him a traitor. I see your twisted logic.
If you’re the same anonymous who threatened to sue me, I’m going to paraphrase once more and say, bring it on.

Anonymous said...

What do you call people who don't believe homosexuals ahould have the same rights and protection under the law as heterosexuals? Bigot is what I call them! You should call them that too whether they believe they are Democrat or Republican.

Anonymous said...

I'm seeing lots of campaign signs on public property....is this legal?

Anonymous said...

As a regular voting Republican....I just can not bring myself to vote for John Arthur...I guess Jim Pratt will have to do.

John Arthur is about as bad a choice as I can pick in this race...I cannot believe my party selected him!!!

Anonymous said...

Wendy Day homeschools her kids.

Kevins said...

Now that at least on of the republican bigots lost the school board race, I am ready for you to carry out the threat you made against me on April 25. To paraphrase your hero, bring it on and sue me.