the Controversial Committee Report
“We don’t raise sacred cows...we just butcher them.”
"Warm Fuzzy Code"
We admit it! Staff of the CCR is experiencing that warm and runny feeling now that QueenB VD has forced the Pet Rocks (LaMorgese, Farris, Spink and Ward) to pass her ‘fuzzy’ ethics code revisions. And if you want to have the same NPD-glow, just like the queen constantly experiences, then review the DMN(1) articles noted below.
Please, no outlandish chucking allowed — while reading the queen’s quotes in the articles for the irrational defense of her revised ethics code — as this could cause one to stop and wonder if constant mane flipping might be causing her synapses to loosely rattle around.
On the bright side…the Pet Rocks passing the queen’s ethics measure will be similar to those who didn’t read the entire congressional bill prior to passing the ACA (otherwise known as ObamaCare). The ‘devil’ will later be discovered in the details…and the real cost identified.
And while speaking of the Prince of Darkness, a smart politician always has a ‘devil’ to beat to allow followers to believe they are doing something worthwhile, or constructive on their behalf.
(In simple terms, the queen beating a ‘devil’ amounts to a spin vortex to cloud the fact she is leading from behind, babbling about non-relevant issues, or drumming up mega-bucks for her campaign war chest.)
And in this case, QueenB VD has beaten, ad nausea, the ‘be-hay-sus’ out of her former opponent and politically-identified ‘devil,’ Herbie Gears. Granted, Herbie was no saint, but he did provided the best possible political foil for the queen to have a ‘devil’ to thrash and stir up discontent for her ethics revision scam…once she aligned her Pet Rocks for a vote.
Back to the new, revised and toothless ethics code QueenB VD has touted in various forms for the past four years. (Photo op of the new ethics code signing and pen give away to be announced at a later date.)
Since a major potion of the "new" code deals with campaign financing, there are some details few have noticed buried in all the legal jargon. Remember, to operate her realm the queen requires a flush treasury. Most serfs and peons do not realize the cost and preparation necessary for daily photo ops, ribbon cuttings, gratuitous travel and entertaining those who may want to do business with the city…all within the limits of the new ethics code (snicker).
The queen has dictated that the following tariffs are in effect immediately…even though the queen isn’t involved in an ongoing campaign. (Remember, the new max contribution level, as decreed by the queen in the revised code, is $25,000.)
The Queen’s Revised Ethics Code Campaign Fund Tariffs
(All subjects must pay to play…no pay, no play)
$ 25 Peons
$ 50 Serfs
$100 Harpies
$200 Flying Harpies
$300 Mother Superior of Flying Harpies
$10,000 "Business" Acquaintances/PACs
$25,000 Sugar Daddy Contributors
Upon review, many will note there is little change in these amounts from the queen’s current modus operandi while collecting bucks for previous campaigns. The one glaring distinction is she now has leverage to increase the piddling amounts some donors previously eked out. Yes, it will cost some individuals, who want to tie a string to the queen’s scepter, more in future elections! The new ethics code so decrees!
Public Service Announcement/Alert: Staff of the CCR compiled the current submitted lists for 2014(2) queenly donors who contributed over $300 to her campaign. These individuals could expect life in the realm to be a bit more pricy for them in the future as a result of the new donor caps:
Donors to date for 2014: Fran Mather - $2,005 (In-kind); Heinz Simon - $10,000; Ralph D. Ellis (Amarillo) - $5,000; Joseph McQuillan - $10,000; Karen C. Ellis (Amarillo) - $5,000; Raymond Woolridge - $2,000; Ellen H. Backes (Dallas) - $5,000; John Hickey (Coppell) - $2,000; David & Sandy Hardie - $2,000; J. Ralph Ellis, Jr. - $10,000; A.D. Carter (Frisco) - $1,000; Joe Hollman - $500; Travis Hollman - $500; Dillon Partnership - $5,200; Randy DeWitt (Front Burner Restaurant) - $5,707 (In-kind); Perry & Sandra Maxwell - $1,000; Roger Stebbins - $500; Theresa Pellow - $500; Lloyd & Anita Weaver - $500; John & Hanna Gibbons - $17,500 (Front Burner Restaurant); Jack Hines - $500; Walter & Karen Levy (Dallas) - $2,000; R.C. Shazad - $500; Metro Realtors PAC - $1,000; Trevor Ahlberg - $500; William Meadows (Ft. Worth) - $500; Dan Niemeire - $350; Shanay Bhagat - $500; Doug Harper - $1,000 (In-kind); Dharmesk Patel - $1,000; Bharat Patel - $1,000; Mehul & Vaishali Patel - $1,000; Mike Chaffin - $1,000; Shawn Wiora - $1,000; Dale Walsh - $500; Walter & Karen Levy (Dallas) - $3,000; Gary Blake (Ft. Worth) - $1,000; Brint Ryan (Dallas) - $10,000; Boeing Co. PAC - $1,000; Irving Voices PAC - $1,478 (In-kind); and a $30,000 Loan that does not include any descriptive information as to the source, repayment terms, or if interest bearing. Is the "loan" still outstanding? (One has to wonder if this the same type of "loan" that might have caused Harper-Brown to drive her Benz over the campaign finance cliff due to the Texas Ethics Commission’s recent ruling and fine.)
By what strange and contorted queen’s definition would several of the above contributors not be considered lobbyist and required to register under the new ethics definition if they: Advised the queen on a course of action to take with various issues; pimp for others seeking council support on issues; or even request a city hand-out while serving on a city board, commission, or act as a major campaign official?
Another factor readers of the report should note is: Any politico who infers campaign contributions do not influence their thought processes, decision making, or vote is not breathing the same atmosphere as the rest of us on this planet. And to be realistic, the new, revised and toothless ethics code will not hinder, stop or hide those secretive or private meetings and conversations politicos have with those wanting to do business with the city. (Meetings in Las Vegas come to mind. Tennis Center on the Texas Stadium site captures the imagination.)
Finally, the new, revised and queenly-spectacular (snicker) ethics code will be monitored, enforced and hovered over by the queen’s Mother Superior of Flying Harpies. This spin-regurgitating, loyal, all-knowing, never wrong, and verbal abuser of those who beg to differ with any queenly pronouncements will ensure everyone complies with the ethics code dictates and pays the required tributes. Otherwise, she will castigate those who fail via social media, grapevine and baseless innuendos.
While there are no punishments identified in the new ethics code for violators, the Mother Superior of Flying Harpies will still be in charge. Individuals will wish they had obeyed the all new edicts for donating campaign bucks into the queen’s treasury if the Mother Superior of Flying Harpies swoops down on them.
Remember, sharp harpy tongues and talons is all the enforcement the queen needs to demand fealty from all non-believing subjects to perpetuate the sham of leadership!(3)
……………………Mark Holbrook
Notes:
- Avi Selk, DMN, 08-07-14: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/irving/headlines/20140806-irving-council-could-vote-today-on-new-campaign-donation-limits.ece and 08-08-14: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/irving/headlines/20140807-irving-council-puts-limits-on-political-donations-lobbyists.ece
- City of Irving: http://www.ci.irving.tx.us/city-secretary/elections/campaign-finance-forms-2014.asp
3. Kudos to the non-Pet Rocks who voted against the queen’s sham of an ethics code revision: Putnam, Webb, Meagher and Danish. Yes, those kudos even extend and include Danish! Of course, while Danish was voting no against the ethics policy, he was having visions of a plump, juicy burger from Big State and approving the $75,000 city payment to a private property owner for the Big State parking lot.
