By Chris Ingram 

Having watched the unfolding saga known as the Hillsborough County Commission the last few years, I have begun to wonder if you could write fiction as good as this. I mean seriously folks, we’ve got a commissioner who was convicted in civil court of sexual harassment (which county taxpayers are on the hook for to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars), a county administrator and county attorney who allegedly gave themselves secret pay-raises, and now we discover the same two clowns were inappropriately collecting e-mails involving them and an ongoing Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) investigation. These people could make Congress blush. 

I for one have had enough. 

We elect the bozos who hire (and have the authority to fire) these people. So ultimately ”we the people” are to blame if we wonder why these court jesters are still around come Friday. 

After watching the county commissioners do next to nothing (with the exception of Mark Sharpe up to this point), I took this issue into my own hands and have filed the following complaint against Hillsborough County Attorney Renee Lee with the Florida Bar. 

If you too have had enough, contact your county commissioner at (813) 272-5660 and tell them to fire Pat Bean and Renee Lee — and if they don’t, tell them you plan to fire them come next election whatever they are running for! 

The complaint against Ms. Lee is below. If there were an organization that oversaw the “ethics” of Pat Bean, I’d be filing a complaint against her too.  

 The Florida Bar Inquiry/Complaint Form 

PART ONE:  Your Name/Address: Chris Ingram,  Tampa, Fla. 33615 

Attorney’s Name: Renee Lee Address: 601 E. Kennedy Blvd., Tampa  State: Fla.  Phone:813-272-5670  Zip Code: 33602 

PART TWO: The specific thing or things I am complaining about are: 

Hillsborough County Attorney Renee Lee in her capacity as County Attorney, engaged in activities which have been referred to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and which are in violation of the public trust expected of attorneys-at-law as outlined in the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Florida Bar. It is in my opinion, that upon thorough review of the actions of Ms. Lee in her capacity as Attorney for the County of Hillsborough, the Florida Bar will determine that Ms. Lee was in fact in Violation of a Rule of Professional Conduct for her role in her and/or County Administrator Pat Bean’s request for e-mails involving an ongoing audit and about a Florida Dep. Of Law Enforcement inquiry into Ms. Bean and Ms. Lee’s secret pay raises. Clearly Ms. Lee has a personal interest in the FDLE matter and audit issue in as much as she was a potential target of both issues. 

More specifically, I allege Ms. Lee is in violation of, Rule 4-8.4 Misconduct which states: 

A lawyer shall not: 

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; 

Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-8.4(a) 

(b)   commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;

 Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-8.4(b)

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and, 

Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-8.4(c) 

(e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official; 

Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-8.4(e) 

Specific to this complaint, I note that the St. Petersburg Times (Mar. 10, 2010) has reported: 

“However, Lee never addressed comments made by Commissioner Rose Ferlita earlier in the meeting. News accounts have noted that Ferlita read e-mails from one of Barnes’ employees during a January meeting in which she was dressing down the auditor. 

Ferlita said Wednesday that Lee gave her the e-mails. And she said later that Lee volunteered them, perhaps while trying to be helpful. Lee declined comment after the meeting.” 

Clearly if true, Ms. Lee’s actions are in violation of this section. 

Furthermore, as it relates to Ms. Bean’s request for e-mails regarding the audit, I believe the ethics committee will find Ms. Lee in violation of RULE 4-1.2 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION (d) Criminal or Fraudulent Conduct. A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is criminal or fraudulent. 

The key part of this section is what a reasonably attorney should know. Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, I believe it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-1.2(d) in as much as Ms. Lee should have known that the request for the e-mails (which Ms. Bean acknowledges receiving) was inappropriate. 

If a lawyer comes to know or reasonably should know that a client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law or if the lawyer intends to act contrary to the client’s instructions, the lawyer must consult with the client regarding the limitations on the lawyer’s conduct. See rule 4-1.4(a)(5). 

Again, the key part of this section is what a reasonably attorney should know. Through her actions with County Administrator Pat Bean, I believe it will be found that Ms. Lee violated 4-1.4(a)(5) in as much as she should have known her actions or those requested of her were in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct in as  much as she should have advised Ms. Bean that her request for e-mails involving an ongoing audit and about a Florida Dep. Of Law Enforcement inquiry into Ms. Bean and Ms. Lee’s secret pay raises. 

According to the Florida Bar, RULE 4-8.4 MISCONDUCT  comments suggest that “Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer’s abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of attorney.” 

I believe the position Ms. Lee holds qualifies, and that her abuse of the responsibilities she holds as County Attorney demonstrate her inability to fulfill the professional role of attorney when using even the most minimal standards of application as set forth by the Florida Bar. 

PART THREE: The witnesses in support of my allegations are: [see attached sheet]. 

Ken Hagan, Commissioner
Rose Ferlita, Commissioner
Kevin White, Commissioner
Al Higginbotthom, Commissioner
Jim Norman, Commissioner
Mark Sharpe, Commissioner
Kevin Beckner, Commissioner
Pat Bean, County Administrator
Jim Barnes, County Auditor
Florida Department of Law Enforcement 

 PART FOUR: Under penalty of perjury, I declare the foregoing facts are true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. 

_____________________________
Christopher Ingram 

____ — ____ — ________ 

(End of complaint as submitted) 

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Front Page Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: Chris@IrreverentView.com. 

By submitting an e-mail comment you consent to your comment and first name being posted on the Irreverent View website. If you wish to remain completely anonymous, please state so in your e-mail.

By Chris Ingram

If you ever had any question about what is wrong with American politics, Jeff Atwater who is the Florida State Senate President and is a  candidate for Chief Financial Officer should erase any doubt. This guy is so full of bull-sh*t and double-talk he ought to get an Academy Award.  

His performance was captured on video by the Times/Herald — a link to the clip is shown at the end of the column.

With not exactly a straight-face (though he tries) Atwater claims: 1) That he doesn’t have and can’t get copies of his American Express card statements from when he had such a card provided by the Republican Party of Florida. 2) That he personally asked RPOF Chairman John “I’ll protect you” Thrasher (who is also a junior Senator in the Fla. State Senate and who in a roundabout way answers to Atwater) for the records, and that Thrasher told him “no.” 3)  At one point when he confuses himself with his own B.S. he states “I am not the card” whatever that means.  4) He states if you “ask any member of the legislature who carries a company card with them whether they work for a law firm or whatever institution it is they work for, the statements go to the company” – implying people with corporate cards in business never see their cards – hu? I’ve had cards from employers before and I always got a copy and had to account for all my expenses. I guess the key qualifier here is “if you ask any member of the legislature,” because if you ask anybody else who ever had a corporate credit card they’d be soiling their pants if they made personal charges on their corporate cards instead of making ridiculous excuses about where the statements went. 5) Atwater claims he “never” got copies of the card statements.

This guy wants to be the Chief Financial Officer of Florida. I wouldn’t let him be the Treasurer of my little girl’s Brownie Troop.

Folks, Jeff Atwater is without a doubt lying and hiding something (with the help of his friend John Thasher).  Mr. Atwater clearly has no respect for “what is right” and in fact has a sense of entitlement that exempts him from being accountable to anyone.

Politicians like Jeff Atwater who talk out of both sides of their mouths are bankrupting our state and our country – at the expense of the next generation who will be saddled with the debt and the problems people like this scumbag leave them with.

Would someone in the Republican Party of Florida please stand up and show some leadership?

You can see all the lies for yourself by clicking here.

Then come back and tell us what you think by leaving your comments.

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Front Page Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: Chris@IrreverentView.com.

By submitting an e-mail comment you consent to your comment and first name being posted on the Irreverent View website. If you wish to remain completely anonymous, please state so in your e-mail.

By Chris Ingram

Atwater’s Hypocrisy

Kudos to the St. Petersburg Times for its editorial in today’s paper exposing the two faces of Florida State Senate President (and candidate for CFO) Jeff Atwater. The Times may be a little slow catching on (Irreverent View exposed Atwater’s hypocrisy in columns on Dec. 12th and again on Dec. 31st) but better late than never.

The Times piece points out that candidate for CFO Atwater is running as a fiscal conservative who seeks to control government spending, but legislator Atwater has no problem with mounting up the debt. Most of us learn about actions speaking louder than words early on in life. Apparently little Jeffrey missed that lesson in second grade — or he thinks we did.

Out of one side of his mouth Atwater says, “Unfunded mandates, insurmountable debt, and unconscionable spending are mortgaging our children and grandchildren’s future.” (I think he stole this line from me by the way).

Meanwhile Jeff “I think voters are stupid” Atwater supported the boondoggle “high speed rail” proposal which includes billions in federal aid borrowed with money from China. And he had no problem mortgaging our children’s future by accepting billions in federal stimulus money (thanks again China!) so long as it meant he and his brethren in the legislature didn’t have to make spending cuts or raise taxes to balance the state budget last year.

My friends this is what I call leadership by bankruptcy. It’s also called “how incumbents get re-elected.” Because the lube-job people like Atwater are giving voters can only be accomplished because…voters are, well, stupid.

Personally I will be voting for Atwater’s Democratic opponent to send a message to the G.O.P. that so long as you continue electing empty suits who talk out of both sides of their mouths you cannot count on my vote. I’m also going to get one of those Rosetta Stone CDs to learn how to speak Mandarin (Crib sheet for those of you who went to Florida public schools: that’s the language spoken in China).

Reader Comments on Marco’s Amex Charges

There were lots of posts in response to my column last week about Marco Rubio’s American Express card charges. Bad news for Rubio is most of them were not favorable toward him. See them all here.

Creative Loafing Interview

Mitch Perry of Creative Loafing interviewed me about Florida politics on Friday. You can listen to the interview by clicking here.

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Front Page Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: Chris@IrreverentView.com.

By submitting an e-mail comment you consent to your comment and first name being posted on the Irreverent View website. If you wish to remain completely anonymous, please state so in your e-mail.

By Chris Ingram

It comes as no surprise that the Charlie Crist campaign or someone associated with it released Marco Rubio’s Republican Party of Florida corporate American Express card statements to the media. As a result, Rubio “came clean” and admitted his own inappropriate charges yesterday.  Now take note, the inappropriate charges weren’t for strip clubs or trips to Europe, but rather for things like fixing the wife’s minivan and purchasing supplies at a lumber company; things that hardly fall into the category of legitimate Republican Party expenses. While this certainly puts a dent in the armor of Rubio’s Boy Scout image, it probably isn’t the smoking gun Chuckles the Clown needs to completely derail Rubio’s campaign.

Still, for many Rubio supporters they will be asking themselves “is this guy who he purports himself to be, or is he just another typical politician?”

While Rubio demonstrated poor judgment in using an RPOF provided Amex card for personal expenses, it should be noted he probably did not break the law. Further poor judgment was shown when Rubio failed to own up to the issue and release this bad news on his own terms, prior to his political adversaries showing his hand. Politics 101 dictates if you have bad news and you know your opponent knows your bad news, you release it on your own terms and you do it early. Marco’s arrogance and inexperience got in the way of following this dictum. Or did he think Jim Greer and company were nice guys who would never expose Marco’s card problems?

So now “Team Bankrupt America” (aka: the Crist campaign) slips a few card statements to the media and what does Rubio do? He cries foul play as if releasing the statements is somehow worse than the charges. Come on Marco, get with the program. You had to know this was coming and you could have and should have owned up to it a long time ago. Did you think Jim Greer was shredding your statements when the shredder truck pulled up to RPOF headquarters on his last day in office? 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Marco Rubio isn’t perfect.

Rubio has demonstrated amateurishness in his campaign multiple times. This is in my opinion due in large part because he has never lost an election. Having never lost, and having risen to power so young and so quickly has made Marco think he is invincible and that he knows everything. Obviously Marco has a lot to learn. Hopefully he’ll get some adults working on his campaign soon and fewer “yes” men and more people who will tell him what he needs to hear, not what he wants to hear. We as voters need politicians to tell us what we need, not what we want, and so too does Marco Rubio.

Still, not all is bad. Rubio’s fundraising has been far greater than expected, and his “earned media” the last few weeks has been tremendously positive, save for today’s news and that little incident with the dead pig a few weeks ago.

But Rubio and his campaign continue to struggle.

Instead of continuing to act like the underdog, he’s marching forward as though he’s got this race in the bag. But poll numbers change and fortunes in politics tend to fall twice as fast as they rise. This is a hard fact that is difficult to impress upon someone who has never lost an election and who is currently 18 points up in the polls.

The best thing going for Marco is he is the greatest communicator in the Republican Party today. He knows how to deliver a line and fire up a crowd. He is the closest thing to Ronald Reagan the party has seen since, well, Ronald Reagan. But one-on-one, Rubio is not comfortable in his own skin. At events where Charlie Crist is running around smiling at everyone, asking them their names, and making pointless small-talk to make them feel good, Rubio is in a corner somewhere with his I-phone chatting or texting away. Just last week a prominent elected official from the Tampa Bay area told me he saw Rubio at an event in Tampa. He said Marco was off to himself with cell phone in hand all but ignoring a cadre of potential influential supporters. The elected official told me, “I’m leaning toward voting for Marco not because I love Rubio, but because Charlie Crist has shown no leadership and I’ve had enough of Charlie. Marco had a chance to talk to me to seal the deal and he blew the opportunity. ” And so, potential still exists for Charlie “Republcan Bill Clinton” Crist. I’ve heard similar sentiments from countless others.

Another problem is in Rubio’s organization. His campaign team lacks leadership and people with the skills to recognize their weaknesses and address them as a business with a failing product line would by making changes. Denials and lame excuses will only carry you so far with voters. Making necessary changes to the product or assembly line will carry you over the finish line. But hey, I should love these guys, whenever I get mail from the campaign it is addressed to “Dr. Chris Ingram” (even though I am not a doctor and I never played one on TV).  

On the other hand, he still has an advantage in as much as people are still very tired of Too-tan Charlie. But the “hug” and the stimulus issue is only going to get Rubio a few more First Downs, and never a score. This fact is primarily due to Rubio yanking it from the playbook when he said he would have accepted stimulus money. Charlie’s achilles last year was the hug. But it peaked too soon and the heel is now healing. Rubio needs to prove to voter’s he’s the man to address the issues — not just show that Charlie Crist is not.  

Still, while not perfect, Rubio represents a clear choice for Floridians. That choice is between a status quo pushing, establishment-loving, liberal in a Republican’s suit who speaks in platitudes about “the people” so much you want to puke versus an imperfect but young, energetic, “American Dream” candidate with fresh ideas for America’s future.

Marco’s youth and inexperience as a candidate relative to Chuckles is a strength as much as a weakness. A weakness for the mistakes he’s making now, but also strength in that he will, like a bottle of wine, improve over time. The seal on Charlie Crist’s bottle has long since been broken and his wine has slowly begun to turn to vinegar. 

Charlie is what he is: forever just another empty suit.

The Rubio Amex story as reported in the St. Pete Times can be found here.

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Front Page Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: Chris@IrreverentView.com.

By submitting an e-mail comment you consent to your comment and first name being posted on the Irreverent View website. If you wish to remain completely anonymous, please state so in your e-mail.

By Chris Ingram

Dear Chairman Thrasher:

Congratulations on your election as Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida. I wouldn’t wish this job on my worst enemy. Sharon Day should be relieved she lost and doesn’t have to herd all the cats on the committee with all the dogs in the legislature.

While I didn’t support you for reasons that I have previously made public, I have to hand it to you, I liked what you said in your campaign speech last Saturday in Orlando. I particularly liked the part about the need to “restore integrity” to the Republican Party of Florida. Listening to you say that while that greasy buffoon Jim Greer was sitting right next to you on the dais was priceless! But poor ol’ Greer is so dim-witted I doubt he knew you were talking about him.

Anyhow, enough about Greer. I think the next time we see him the authorities will be marching him out in an orange jump-suit with lord only knows how many others in tow.

As you begin your term, I hope you will seriously and immediately begin the necessary reforms to restore integrity to the party. In addition to a full-scale third-party audit of the party’s books and necessary changes to the party’s constitution, by-laws, and rules to prevent another Jim Greer fiasco, I call on you to make the necessary legislative changes to abolish the RPOF “loyalty oath” for party members.

You may or may not be aware of the oath, but it reads as follows:

I, ________________________ , hereby swear and affirm that during my term of office* I will not actively, publicly, or financially support the election of any candidate other than the Republican candidate in a partisan unitary, general or special election, or a Registered Republican in non-partisan elections, other than Ju­dicial races governed under Florida Statute 105, if there is a reg­istered Republican running for the same office, unless the coun­ty executive committee has taken an affirmative vote to endorse one Republican over another per Rule 8(B). I further swear and affirm that I will not engage in activities or conduct that may be deemed by the Grievance Committee and affirmed by the RPOF Chairman as likely to injure the name of the Republican Party or interfere with the activities of the Republican Party.

*office includes general membership in a county party “REC” organization.

Chairman, I know that before you professed your “love” of the Republican Party that you gave $500 to Alex Sink, a Democrat. While I don’t fault you for the action, I am suspect of the reason why you did this (I have been told by others who are lobbyists like you were that you did it because you had to “play the game”). You may have noticed voters are tired of games that lobbyists, legislators, and other politicos have been playing lately.

In any event, it appears you violated the RPOF loyalty oath by giving money to Ms. Sink. For the record, I voted for Ms. Sink. Not because someone was paying me to influence her and I needed to play the game, but because I felt her Republican opponent was another typical career politician looking for his next job because he was termed out of his current office. And I will continue to vote against/not support Republican incumbents who are nothing but empty suits. Throw me out if you want, but people like Charlie Crist, Mike Fassano, and Jeff Atwater who speak out of both sides of their mouths and care nothing about anything other than getting re-elected won’t get my vote.

So here we are today, the two of us “loyalty oath breakers.” Based on the current reading of the oath, neither of us – based on our previous actions are fit to serve as members of the party – much less its state party chairman.

Of course you and I both know that is a ridiculous assertion. And that is why you should introduce legislation to repeal the oath. Having a bunch of blindly-loyal, Kool-aid drinking party members is hardly good for a party that preaches free-thought, the need for fresh ideas, spends millions on “outreach,” and talks such a good game about how closed-minded the Democrats are. As your chairmanship and my membership in the Hillsborough REC prove, the REC Loyalty Oath is a meaningless relic of days gone by. The fact that it would make Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Castro proud is further cause for why it should be abolished.

I have spoken with several REC Chairs who agree that it is nonsensical to have an oath as a barrier to entry, participation, and grassroots support of the party. And I cannot count how many people I have met who consider themselves “Republicans” but who refuse in good conscience to officially join the party because of the subordination requirement the oath subjects them to.

You may “love” the party, but most free-thinkers limit their love to God, Family, and Country, not a political party – especially one that has gone awry with unethical leaders, reckless spending, and a “win at all cost” view. The Republican Party will do just fine when it nominates decent candidates, but no GOP candidate deserves anybody’s vote just because they have an “R” after their name. The oath makes us look weak and makes our members look, well, stupid.

Step up to the plate and do what’s right Chairman Thrasher. Abolish the loyalty oath.

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Front Page Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: Chris@IrreverentView.com.

By submitting an e-mail comment you consent to your comment and first name being posted on the Irreverent View website. If you wish to remain completely anonymous, please state so in your e-mail.

By Shamus McConomy 

Amtrak: a train wreck in more ways than one.

Two phenomenon have occurred to make trains popular in America, the animated television character “Thomas the Tank Engine” and Vice President Joe Biden.  During the 2008 presidential campaign he became the national poster child for Amtrak.  Stories of him commuting between his Delaware home and Washington D.C., on Amtrak, provided an interesting vignette of Senator Joe Biden as just an “average Joe.”  The problem with Vice President Biden’s love affair with trains is 

it costs the tax payers $1 billion dollars per year to subsidize a product we as consumers have proven we don’t want but as taxpayers support. 

The issue with Amtrak is that it is emblematic of the government’s inability to pull the plug on any program, no matter how much money it wastes and how useless it is.  Amtrak came about as the result of the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970, which was our government’s solution to the private sector’s near elimination of unprofitable passenger rail service.  True to the government’s self appointed roll as economic firemen, as the private sector was running out of this burning building, the government was running in.  Yet despite decades of federal subsidies, Amtrak the public corporation (public as in government-owned) has never turned a profit. Furthermore growth of the discount airline industry has made passenger rail service even less relevant to the national transportation landscape.  

If you need proof that a national rail system is obsolete and not worth our tax money, check out the options I found when planning a trip to San Antonio this summer.  Having to take the entire family to a wedding and previously never paying airfare for my children, I had tremendous sticker shock at the $1100 total airfare for my family of four.  Erroneously assuming Amtrak’s role was to provide an inexpensive travel alternative I took a stab at taking the family via train.  The result of this inquiry was enough to send Snidely Whiplash to Washington to tie our politicians to the train tracks.  

WARNING:  the following trip itineraries are true.  

Option 1:  Depart Friday morning on Southwest Airlines from Tampa to San Antonio for a two hour forty minute flight.  Total airfare $1100.  Attend the rehearsal dinner and wedding, with time to see the Alamo and then return to Tampa in short order. 

Option 2:  Depart Thursday morning from Tampa’s Amtrak station and take a bus to Orlando.  Yes, a bus. From Orlando, take Amtrak’s #98 Silver Meteor to Washington D.C.  While waiting eight hours and fifteen minutes to leave Washington, we take the metro to the U.S. Naval Observatory and thank Vice President Topham Hatt for subsidizing my vacation.  Later we hop on the #29 Capital Limited for the third leg of the trip to San Antonio – this time via Chicago.  With only six hours to make our connecting train to San Antonio, we hurry to catch the 21 Texas Eagle.  Once we arrive in San Antonio Sunday afternoon, we will have enough time to present the newlyweds their wedding gift (the wedding was yesterday) before returning home to Tampa three or four days later. For the pleasure of this 84 hour 15 minute whistle-stop tour of America I will pay $1,752, a savings of negative $652 versus flying.  And that was for coach!  I would hate to see the cost without the subsidy.  

Option 3:  This option is only available if Option 2 is selected but it involves my fuming mad wife taking the kids and booking a return flight on Southwest, while I am sent back to Tampa via rail to think about what I’ve done in an effort to act like a European. 

The Washington geniuses we call politicians believe the solution to our rail and economic woes can be found in making our choo-choos faster.  Yes the high speed rail is going to create jobs and help us emulate our rail loving European cousins. President Obama has openly demonstrated his envy of said Europeans who can travel by their continent by rail while simultaneously avoiding their role in international conflicts (did I say that out loud?). This rail envy ignores the fact that Western Europe is roughly the size of the Northeastern section of the United States (where incidentally, passenger rail kind of actually works).  While backpacking college kids voyaging to Amsterdam to score legal weed may love the European rail system, America’s present and future national transportation has been overwhelmingly voted on by American consumers.  The winner each time is air travel and the existing Interstate Highway system. 

Although I’ve railed on Amtrak (pun intended) the message herein is really a cautionary illustration on how government runs “public/private” companies like Amtrak and the Post Office. Instead of acknowledging that the only feasible routes are the regional routes of 200 miles or less, government pumps money into an 1810 dream of a national rail system, instead of acknowledging the 2010 reality.  The government is currently increasing its involvement into private industry through TARP and bailouts, so it is important to note situations, such as Amtrak, proving politicians will fund losing initiatives for political expediency. 

Now that the government is in the car business can I interest you in a hybrid Edsel? 

Shamus McConomy is a resident of the Tampa Bay Area where he has spent his career as a lender to small and medium sized businesses.  He holds a Bachelor of Science in Finance from the University of South Florida and an M.B.A. from the University of Tampa.  E-mail him at:  samcconomy@yahoo.com

Ambassador Hoffman’s verbatim reply:

Chris, this is all on the record. 

I told Sharon Day that I like both candidates, and I have no reason to doubt that she would make a good chairman.  Her passion and commitment to real Republican values would put her in good standing to lead the party at the grass roots level–with the ground game–and with donors as well.  I can’t believe that donors wouldn’t rally around any newly and properly elected qualified chair–and that would include Sharon. 

Importantly, and mission critical,  any chair should publicly pledge to support the effort for new, formally codified, and implemented governance rules  for the chairman’s office–that should be a condition of election and I hope both candidates would make that pledge on the 20th.  Like any organization, these are absolutely necessary to define limits of authority between the chair and the executive committee.  In that way the executive committee would have true oversight, just like a board of directors in a corporation.  All actions of the chair should be transparent to the executive committee, not necessarily the public.  While plans and strategy can be confidential from the public, there can be no such principle of confidentiality–only total transparency– between the chair and the executive committee.  This requires action, not lip service!!

 As to the details of the resignation, being bound by a confidentiality clause not to disclose to the executive committee the details of an agreement —-in which agreement  the negotiators were representing the executive committee and the Party in the first place— simply defies logic and renders any theoretical agreement false on its face.    Whatever severance agreement or understanding that  Greer might claim was reached should be publicly disavowed by the new chair immediately because of this but also because of the post resignation discovery of Greer’s failure himself to disclose even more significant violations of trust.

Al Hoffman is the former ambassador to Portugal appointed by President George W. Bush in 2005. He is the former national finance director for the Republican National Committee. He and his wife live in North Palm Beach.

Irreverent View appreciates Ambassador Hoffman’s remarks. We call on all candidates for RPOF positions (as well as current committee members) to call for, and demand the reforms Ambassador Hoffman suggests. He is a true patriot and is to be commended for speaking out about the current state of affairs within the RPOF with such objectivity.

By Rep. Lindsay M. Harrington — exclusive on Irreverent View

Have today’s Republicans become young again, and forgotten the life experiences that we learned, which allowed us to thrive until today? Some would say, “Yes, the Republicans have lost their way, forgotten their values, and are behaving like young calves re-born, but ignorant of the past.” 

We all remember learning as children that elephants have tremendous memory, protective instincts for their herd/family group, and seasonable migration routes, among other things. Only the very young elephants, which haven’t experienced the season’s changes, or threats and dangers, are vulnerable. The older members of the herd always try to shield and protect the less experienced elephants, who as they mature, come to demonstrate the same incredible recall of their elders. 

No, we Republicans do not have to go back to the Reagan days to talk about things we have learned. We can just look back over the past four years or so, and see some lessons that are maybe being over-looked today.

Always susceptible to the right message in the right package, Republicans have sometimes not looked beyond the shallow images to discover the true values of our elected leaders. We sometimes forget the values that represent the history and the present for Republicans.

Esquire magazine this month presents an interesting and concise summary of Republican beliefs today, which in a nutshell is –“Surprise!” — conservative values, and intelligent analysis. We are not the extremists that some folks would like to portray.

So why, in looking at the interest groups that would say the Republican Party of Florida needs to be changed, would we forget the lessons we have so recently been taught?

Did we blindly accept the judgment of a charismatic leader who said “Here is your new Chairman; I have chosen him for you?” Didn’t we welcome him with open arms unknowingly?  But, trusting our leader, and paying homage to him we accepted this unknown person as our Chairman.

And, when we learned of the differences in our values, and those of our appointed leader, why did it take so long to plead for release from our elected leaders, to mitigate the damage being done? Have we forgotten already what happens when we yield our open democratic process of choosing a leader will bring?

Three years ago, a cleverly designed bill, for which no one would take responsibility, seamlessly passed the Florida Legislature, forever changing the proportional representation in the RPOF, and expanding to draconian levels the unitary authority of the Chairman. We accepted the wisdom of our leaders, and adjusted ourselves to the new order.

In 2009, another legislative reform bill to alter the Republican Party magically appeared, with no parentage; but we rose up, and with great struggle and frustration had it set aside, for that moment.

Now we reach the pinnacle of our struggle for Party reform through the leverage of a member-led Special Meeting. Literally at the eleventh hour, intervening forces step in to engineer a resignation of the Chairman — thankfully, we thought. But then the financial misdeeds began to unfold, one by one, and in a scant thirty days we go from the brink of salvation of a victorious election year, to the depths of crisis.

Who should magically appear to rescue the Party, but the Legislature, with one of its own. At the same time steps were taken (and decisions made) outside the purview of those legally recognized to make such decisions.  The destiny of our Party has been determined by those without the responsibility or the authority to make these decisions.  Our moment of decision will pass on February 20^th.  Will we take up the banner and charge into the election year?

But, are we remembering what is coming this January for our Party? A completely new election of leadership must be made. Have we forgotten that with foresight the present Legislature has a pre-filed bill to bring “corrective actions to the statutes”, but only if necessary?

The election next January will surely be driven by the prevailing parties this Saturday. If the Legislative leadership prevails, this may well be the last election of a grass-roots Chairman in our collective life-time. If the grass-roots prevail, we must surely fight again unwanted legislative reform measures to be forced upon us without voice or representation.

Have we not learned from our recent past the price of ceding our voting voice to the dictatorial choices of the few? Remember the lyrics to the rock song by The Who, “Meet the New Boss; Same As The Old Boss-We Won’t Be Fooled Again!”

Let us learn from this unfortunate episode in the history of our Party.  Let us wisely cast our vote this coming weekend to protect the Party, to protect the Republican voters, and to place the power properly in the hands of the citizens of our great state who, like mature elephants, understand the ramifications of a wrong turn on the trek of political life. We will this weekend, with resolve, meet and overcome the obstacles that were placed before our Party in recent years. 

Lindsay Harrington is State Committeeman from Charlotte County and is a former member of the  Florida House of Representatives  1996-2004 and served as Speaker pro tem during the 2002-2004 session.