One Choice
The deadline for applications to be appointed Alderman for West Bend’s 1st District runs out on Monday. To date, there is only one applicant, but he’s a good one. Here’s his info:
As I’ve said before, I know Tony and think he’d be a very thoughtful and mature Alderman. He brings a lot of private sector common sense to the table.
With only two days until the Common Council meeting, I only see three possibilities. First, Turner could be appointed Alderman right away with no fuss. He’s obviously qualified, anxious to serve his community, and submitted his application within days of the announcement.
Second, a last minute applicant may drop in as a ringer. Hopefully this won’t happen, but it’s fairly probable. I suspect that there is a candidate waiting in the wings with the votes lined up. If this happens and the ringer gets appointed, it really strengthens Turner’s position to run next April. The Council would have a lot of explaining to do if they turn away a perfectly qualified citizen who has been out in front of them for weeks for a last minute crony.
Third, the council could vote to extend the deadline for applications. I think that this is unlikely, but it could happen. It would be hard for them to justify extending the deadline. After all, if an applicant hasn’t come forward in 3 weeks, what will another week do? If they extend the deadline, it would signal that they have no intention of appointing Turner even though he is obviously qualified and willing. Given the fiasco with the mayoral appointment, I hope they have better sense than to further aggravate the citizens of West Bend.
Good luck, Tony!
The 4th of July seems to be a good time to ask if Tony believes in the Christian principals that this Country has been founded on and if he believes they apply to local goverment?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 01, 2007 at 0932 hrs
I’ll take nothing away from Mr Turner by asking why you would think that any other candidate brought forward would have to be a “ringer.”
This feels like a case where the first side to get a smear in writing believes it will have the upper hand.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 01, 2007 at 0947 hrs
Wolf,
Yes, I believe in the (Judeo-)Christian principals on which our country was founded. I am particularly fond of the inscription on the Liberty Bell: Proclaim Liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof. (Leviticus 25:10) Would that our government still held as true to the concept of liberty as the Founders did. And yes, these “self-evident” truths such as liberty and self-government, and the moral code on which they are based, are as important at the local level as they are at the state and federal levels.
grumps,
I know you directed your comment to Owen, but I don’t think he intended the term “ringer” to include any applicant who comes in tomorrow, only one particular kind of applicant:
I suspect that there is a candidate waiting in the wings with the votes lined up.
My interpretation is that if some random under-the-radar citizen like me showed up tomorrow, he wouldn’t qualify as a “ringer” under Owen’s thinking.
Posted by Tony Turner on July 01, 2007 at 1422 hrs
Grumps, Tony is right. Sorry for not being more clear.
Posted by Owen on July 01, 2007 at 1700 hrs
C’mon Owen,
Move into District 1.
Posted by Mpeterson on July 01, 2007 at 2208 hrs
I’m in District 1.
Posted by Owen on July 02, 2007 at 0059 hrs
Tony - thanks for the reply and you have our prayers and support.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 0725 hrs
I can’t recall any issues decided by the city council that fall into the realm of a religious-based moral code. I think it would be a stretch to say that the decision on how to pick a mayor was a moral lapse. I’m not sure what Mr. Turner is getting at. I liked his response to Grumps, so perhaps he could clarify this, too.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 0749 hrs
wbman, that would be a stretch, since that’s not what I said, nor was it my implication. It was a general response to a general question about my political philosophy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 0803 hrs
Then seriously, why don’t *you* put your name in? ;^)
I double dare you.Posted by Mpeterson on July 02, 2007 at 0913 hrs
Sorry to go off on this, but….
Speaking as a Lutheran, I am a little worried by Wolf’s assertion that the US was founded on “Christian principals” <sic> and that these principles should be put in place in local government.
It’s always good to remember that the Founding Fathers were relentlessly deistic in their interpretations of Christianity and were opposed to importing it as an institution into government. Jefferson, you’ll remember, did not use a Bible when he took his oath of office and every last one of them (from Washington to Franklin to Madison) were committed to the Enlightenment view that reason was the divine spark in humans and that we had an obligation to use it, rather than faith, to work out the best ways to live together.
I’m also nervous when people talk about importing religious principles into government. A Christian Iran would still be an Iran. I don’t want to see the Bible used as a Judeo-Christian sharia law. Fortunately, I see from the picture that Tony’s entire family is violating the ban in Leviticus [19:19] on proper attire. ;^)
Anyway, if Wolf means that government should embody the principles of compassion, mercy, and turning the other cheek, then great.
Posted by Mpeterson on July 02, 2007 at 0938 hrs
As Owen mentioned before, he travels often for work and could not commit to making the meetings. He could not give that position the time it deserves.
(“As a Lutheran,” you understand why Tony’s entire family is certainly not violating the proper attire thing, right?)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1116 hrs
Nevermind all of that. Which kind of Lutheran are we talking about here? My grandfather always said that if I was going to marry a Missouri Synod Lutheran girl, then I might as well marry a Catholic. If I’d brought home an LCA Lutheran I might as well have brought home Beelzebub himself.
Lutheran’s don’t really count as an “organized” religion anymore. Wherever two or more are gathered in His name we’ll just form a new synod.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1144 hrs
“Wherever two or more are gathered in His name we’ll just form a new synod.”
Now that’s funny. I think your grandfather and I are probably part of the same synod.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1156 hrs
mpeterson - you show what now lacks in education of the founding of this nation. 52 of the 55 founding fathers were seminary students. The 13 colonies all had constitutional requirements that you had to be a Christian and believe in the Bible in order to serve in goverment. The Bible was taught in public schools until 1962.
George Washington insisted chaplains be in the military and attended Christian Church services in the Congressional building.
The US Supreme Court ruled on numerous occassions that this is a Christian nation.
The State of Virginia wanted to deny citizen ship to non-Christians but was then convinced to allow non-Christians so that they could hear the Gospel and be saved.If you want to fear a religion, fear Islam that is committed to killing anyone that will not accept it. Or, you could fear aethism that is also a religion that has killed more people that any other religion in histroy through communism.
Christ and His followers have never forced anyone to believe in Him. Your fears of Christian principals have no foundation whatsoever.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1158 hrs
lol. The best part about being back in the Midwest after so many years away is that people get Lutheran Synod humor.
*My* grandfather, the Lutheran pastor, used to say that any time two Lutherans disagreed over where to put a comma in a translation of Matthew, they’d start a new synod. [in my family people are still getting over the fact that my grandfather was a Swede and my grandmother was a German—mixed marriages!]
grumps,
You’ll have to help me out then… they all do seem to be wearing cloth made out of two different kinds of thread—which is what Lev 19:19 says is a no no.
Wolf,
I suppose it depends on what you mean by a “Christian” then. Typically these days that means something rather different from what it meant in 1776. In 1776 most ‘college’ educated people had been in seminary since Harvard, and most of the colleges that date from those years, began as seminaries. But their education didn’t end with the Bible, and they did not believe that politics was a matter of faith, but of reason. The Federalist Papers and Constitution, for starters, do not depend on religious principles, but on rational ones. That’s really all I was trying to say.
That and the crack about Leviticus.
hiho
MpPosted by Mpeterson on July 02, 2007 at 1244 hrs
MP - I suppose you would say that our goverment has three braches because it was rational and not Biblical, and you would be wrong again.
Our founding fathers were concerned with giving one demonation predominance over another, not with keeping Christian principals out of goverment.
The three branches of goverment came right out of Isaih 33, 22 wherein it says;
For the Lord is our judge (judicial branch), the Lord is our lawgiver (legislative branch), the Lord is our King (executive branch).
Our founding fathers kept these separate because of human nature to abuse power.All origins of our laws and goverment came from the Christian Bible.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1318 hrs
Hi Wolf,
I’m afraid that would make us Jewish then, not Christian.
But I’m also afraid that you have me at a complete disadvantage. None of your observations track with anything I’ve ever studied about the creation of our country, the lives of its founders, the history of our judiciary and laws, or the theology taught in the seminaries of that time - and that’s the kind of disagreement that cannot be worked out online, only over coffee.
My best wishes,
MpPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1334 hrs
Mp - I thought you said that you are Lutheran, but you don’t know that you’re not Jewish because you believe in Christ who was and did quote the scriptures? Judeo-Christian ethic!
These things used to be taught in grade school but now we try to make it an intellectual pursuit. Simple things like Columbus (deeply Christian) sailed this way to the Indies because Muslims had blocked off all other routes from Spain. Amercia was discovered because of or to get around Islam.
The Pilgrims didn’t come to America because they were persecuted, they freely came to preach the gospel to the Indians that recieved it warmly. 400 years ago this year, this nation was dedicated at Virginia Beach for the advancment of Christianity by the first English settlers.Mp - check it out - our history is rich and abundant in Christianity. People have come from all over the world because of it.
Best wishes,
WolfPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 02, 2007 at 1617 hrs
Geeze the family photo is almost perfect. What’s missing is the American flag and a dog. It’s good to know we’re in a God-fearing community protected from the vice and colorations of Milwaukee.
JJ
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 03, 2007 at 1208 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134052
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 12:25 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 113
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 12:30 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).