It's ironic that the Green Party is like a disposable political party for Democrats who missed the filing deadline. Use it once, then toss it away after the election.

That said, if Tullis gets on the ballot, I'll vote for him.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

I love it every time it's mentioned that Bill Halter followed directions, dotted his I's and crossed his T's. Isn't it a crying shame our choice for Senator in November is Johnny Blanche? Blanche avoids I's & T's and Boozman doesn't even know what they are.

We let Garland County and a couple of others cheat us out of the ability to send a smart and decent person to the Senate. But thanks Bill thanks.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Radical Centrist, I do agree with your assessment, "It's ironic that the Green Party is like a disposable political party for Democrats who missed the filing deadline. Use it once, then toss it away after the election."

I do wish there was a Green Party opponent in the 2nd district race. ::sigh::
In any case, I couldn't believe Shoffner's comments. I am sure if she has an opponent her butt is toast.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

>>It's ironic that the Green Party is like a disposable political party for Democrats who missed the filing deadline.<<

NOT IRONIC at all Radical. IGNORANT. Which judge delayed ruling on whether the Greens qualified as a viable Party? That's why there were few candidate filings.

Which majority party set the threshold for political party recognition based upon the prior election results for POTUS?

Not ironic at all. You're simply ignorant.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Radical, what if the ruling majority party had set political party recognition on county-wide voting results for the prior election?

That way every time a Democrat wanted to run in Benton County they would be required to gather petition signatures for ballot access.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

eLwood - It is ironic in the sense that the Green Party is known for opposing disposable things like plastic water bottles, etc., but now they're getting the reputation of being the disposable political party.

The other ironic thing is that the Green Party candidates most likely to win are the ones like Tullis and Richard Carroll who are simply borrowing the party label for the sake of political expediency. I look forward to voting for Tullis as the Green Party candidate in November, then waiting for him to rejoin the Democratic Party a few weeks after taking office.

By the way, do Green Party members believe that the governor's security detail operate as his "manservants"? If so... there's another irony.

It's possible that a real Green candidate could emerge to challenge Tullis for the nomination, but that will put the convention in a real dilemma: do they nominate a real Green Party true believer who is guaranteed to lose, or nominate the Democrat who could win, but would probably abandon the Green Party afterward?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Good insight on the situation of Shoffner and all constitutional officers from LTEs in today's DOG-

New law advisable

Here is a compromise rising above the positions of both Lt. Gov. Bill Halter and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, since the state probably doesn’t authorize state cars for personal use because it is extra income not provided by law.

To pay taxes on the value of the personal use of state cars does not make this practice right. Moral sense would indicate that the value of such usage should be returned to the state. That amount would be more than the taxes on the use value, of course.

Paying taxes on the value at first glance appears to be ethical, but is it really? It is something like taking money from a company safe and then paying taxes on the amount taken rather than replacing the money. Or better, not taking it in the first place.

Perhaps a new law should be passed spelling out standards for using public resources by public officials.

WILLIAM H. FRIEDMAN Conway

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

>>now they're getting the reputation of being the disposable political party.<<

Hardly. ONE CASE- of Rep Carroll who is a strong union man and Greens support workers, living wage and workers' rights.

Somehow you FAILED TO MENTION the one case of former Democrat, Jim Lendall, converting to Green Party allegiance.

Thus your score is Green to Demo=1,
Demo to Green=1.

Have any more unfounded truths which need examining?

.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Give the Greens a little more time. Democrats like Blank Lincoln and Markie Mark Pryor, Republicans like John Boozman and Tim "Little Turdblossum" Griffin are making the Green party a more and more viable party.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Has anyone every stopped to ask why and who is coming after Shoffner? Recently a rumor started that she might have the nerve to run for Governor. Then all this starts and she's demonized by the press. She never said she "deserved" a state car. That was the interpretation by a reporter that was intent on doing a hatchet job.

You people are being played and don't even realize it. The question you should be asking is who was behind this and why. I suspect everyone will continue to be played by those running the ADG and their buddies.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

needrealethicsreform

All you need do is see Princess Martha's quotes provided on this blog a few days ago and her remarks leave no doubt about her feelings of entitlement.

Wilcox got his due because of privilege violations and little doubt Princess Martha is next.

If the "newspapers" can raise a stink about Halter's office rugs then Princess Martha's personal use of a luxury SUV IS NOT off limits.

This is not the time in history to be dangling privilege out to the great under-employed and unemployed.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

eLwood, what exact quotes are you referring to my I ask? She never said she was "deserving." That was the AD/G headline. I never once read where she said she was entitled or deserved a vehicle. She pointed out that constitutional officers have had vehichles long before she became State Treasurer. She said she wanted someone to interpret the law. The last ruling from an AG was then AG Bryant. If AG McDaniel or the ADG think it's against any law then why don't they point to that law. The rest of the state officers scurried like mice when the lights are turned on by the ADG and Republicans. It may play well with the papers to roll over to the Republicans but I think Democrats need to learn how to stand up to such bullying and pr stunts (lawsuits).

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

I've been involved in ethics reform for decades. The 1992 measure on salaries was to stop the use of expense accounts to supplement the low salaries found in the Arkansas Constitution. It was not related to state owned vehicles. Not long after passage, then AG Winston Bryant ruled that with regards to state vehicle use constitutional officers were exempt. AG's Pryor, Beebe, and McDaniel have not ruled differently. ALL 3 used state vehicles for personal use and made no reimbursements to the state. Gov. Beebe now says that he did pay taxes though on that personal use, but did NOT reimburse the state. One would assume because he agreed with AG Bryant's ruling on the matter.

Now, what I don't understand is why media attention has been so harsh on our only female state constitutional officer. Yes, she made some good points in a very careless manner. Nobody has yet to say that the state officials are not allowed to use their state-provided vehicles. No law has been sited, yet she was lambasted for refusing to make a legal opinion and state what she would do. It's the job of the Attorney General to interpret the law and again, that was done by Bryant after the passage of Amendment 70.

So now many are attacking Shoffner for not reimbursing the state for personal use of her state-provided vehicle, yet only AG McDaniel has offered to do so at 1972 mileage rates (15 cents vs. current 48 cents). Gov. Beebee, Lt. Gov. Halter and the other MALE state officals have not said they would reimburse the state (taxpayers). They simply said they'd pay FEDERAL taxes on the personal use. Still no one is even sure if that's legally required. People do not pay federal income on health care and many other perks. The Gov. does not, to my knowledge, have to pay federal income taxes on his free housing and lodging. While security may be required by law to get around the vehicle issue, it's not required that he accept food and housing from the state (taxpayers).

So my question is this. Why is everyone including the Ark Times making a much bigger deal out of Shoffner and not the men? I know I am not alone in my concern because many I have talked to have felt the same. In fact, I've had more people defend Shoffner's "tell it like it is" response than the response from the men which has been weak and contradictory.

Look at the following from the most recent ADG article in Sunday's paper. It's clear that it has not been established if the vehicle use is exempt or not.

==================================

Rep. Robert Moore, D-Arkansas City, is to be House speaker for 2011 and 2012. He said he likely would be exempt from paying taxes on commutes in a state vehicle because he is eligible to receive mileage payments for drives to the state Capitol from his home. Internal Revenue Service regulations allow those payments to be taxfree.
He said he hasn’t decided whether to accept a state vehicle but having one might be cheaper for the state than paying him mileage from Arkansas City, which is about 120 miles from Little Rock.
Regarding the tax question, he said there is a “significant disparity of opinion” and the Legislature in 2011 likely will consider ways to address it in law.
The current speaker, Rep. Robbie Wills, D-Conway, drives a state vehicle, which the House considers tax-exempt.
Unlike Moore, Wills isn’t eligible for mileage reimbursement because he lives within 50 miles of the Capitol.
========================================

We most definitely need to clarify the current law since nobody seems to accept AG Bryant's opinion. Personally I think it's clear the law allows the use, but some disagree. Instead of everyone rushing to do what the Republican Party or the media things should be done, perhaps the voters should be the ones to decide. I don't think the Republican Party, nor the media has a right to speak for the voters. Obviously they do according to their actions.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Regarding the Green Party, I do not expect them to allow the likes of Mr. Tullis to use their party for political gain. I'd suggest they do some research on Mr. Tullis before making a huge mistake. I would encourage them to field a candidate for every office.

By the way ArkTimes, AG McDaniel does not have a Republican opponent either so Shoffner is not the only one.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Although the Democrat proclaimed Bobby Tullis "Born to Audit" back in the Democratic primary for Auditor in 1994, after being defeated by Gus Wingfield, Mr. Tullis went on to become entangled in the Bill McCuen flag affair and apparently narrowly avoided indictment along with his friend. He may not be the strongest candidate to take on Shoffner over ethics.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

it seems to me that tullis could have expected the slings and arrows to come out but he is still putting himself out there in the arena. he must think the problems with ms. shoffner outweigh his personal comfort.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

usuallysilent,

the bigger mistake might be keeping someone in office who is arrogant and out of touch with reality.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

usualysilent makes a lot of great points some of which I've made already.

Why exactly do you say she is arrogant sundownhappens?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

needrealethicsreform

why did you focus on the arrogant and not on the out of touch with reality?

could it really be true she is nuts?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Let's focus on both. Give proof of either. Facts or specific allegations....either.

I'm beginning to think you are nuts.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Funny how nobody seems to be able to dispute what usuallysilent said. You political hacks (3 pseudos...1 person) sure seemed hacked off for some reason. Did Shoffner not shake your hand or something?

As smart as you may think you are, there's always people who are smarter.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike