RSeay

Im in the employee of no political faction. Furthermore, the law I quoted is not " from the ones that are tied up with Gordon", rather its from the WV Annotated Code and the West Virginia Constitution. Also, I'm not quite sure who the lawyer Donnie is? Thus, I'm not quite sure how I could be affiliated with them. Also, just because I believe that Ray and Judy are poor at their jobs- does not mean that I think Gordon is good at his. I want to see change for the better. I am a vocal critic of the commission. Currently, Ray and Judy are the ones empowered to do something because of the majority they hold over Gordon. Truth: They have done nothing, if given more time will still do nothing, and they should not - either of them- be trusted in public office ever again. Just because I hold that opinion of them does not mean I hold the opposite opinion of Gordon. The fact is currently, he has the ability to do little because of Judy and Ray. If that power dynamic changes, you can trust I'll be a critic of anyone elected to office who does their job as poorly as Ray and Judy. Also, just for clarity "your" shows possession. "You're" is a contraction for "you are". :) (Nov 16, 2009 | post #57)

You, sir or madam, are the one that needs to grow up. I'm motivated not by self gain, I have no direct tie to either candidate. So to question, a supporters tie to a candidate when their argument is so knowledgable is relevent. Why do you people see the need to insult me just because I don't jump on the bandwagon from moment one, without asking questions? I have been a vocal critic of Ray and Judy, that does not mean I should support anyone and everyone who stands against them without first asking why. If you are so bold, make your declaration without the use of an alias. There are few on this forum who have the fortitude to do so. You claim I think I am so smart and that I want to run for office. The fact is I don't think I am stupid, and for that very reason have not for more than a millisecond given -serious- thought to running for office in 2010. I'd dare never do so, as I have said numerous times, without both the intention to do good if elected and the means to do good by getting elected. At -this- time, I satisfy only the first requirement. Besides, for a great measure of the "campaign season" I will be in Fort Jackson undergoing basic training for the United States Military. And since, Im not running, I'll be direct- go to hell. (Nov 16, 2009 | post #49)

The political climate is one sided. Ray and Judy have done very poor as commissioners. They have hired friends, fired enemies, and governed to the benefit of no one but themselves. Cecil Patterson, by virtue of association with them, is already at a disadvantage. In addittion to those inherited disadvantages, there seem to be ruminations regarding his character as well. This is the general statement of others, not me. I'll say this much, were I a betting man, I'd wager the proverbial farm on Harold winning. By virtue of his business holdings he will be able to self finance, I'd imagine. Ultimately, or at least 90% of the time, the victor is determined by the depth of his finances not his conviction. Plus, I can assure you whether or not he shall be independantly minded upon taking his seat, he shall certainly benefit from the political organization of Gordon Lambert supporting him. I think that Harold McBride is a fine man. I do not believe he is the ideal candidate even if, arguably, he is the better of the two names on the ballot. Either way, Harold is the winner- I beleieve he is at this time damn near unstoppable. I pray for him, for despite my strong opinions, I place my faith in him because I have to. I am a young man, of conviction, who has far more youth than he has money. For all my want to change my county for the better, I am unable to do so directly. Answer this question, without bias: if he were to lose, would he run against Gordon in 2012? I honestly don't think he would. (Nov 16, 2009 | post #48)

I am no Tom Seay. "I am a Rockwell Seay." I have never once claimed to be Tom Seay. I believe you are very fortunate to have known him, I did not have the pleasure. Mr. Seay, my father, died when I was but a toddler; and although I know a great deal about him, it is from the recollection of others. I know Tom Seay like I know Franklyn Roosevelt, Napoleon, and Aristotle. He is no different, to me, than a figure from my history books. I am his son, and it is there the resemblence ends. Thank you for stating the obvious in that matter. Just so you know, I am not striving to be a Tom Seay; again, " I am a Rockwell Seay" and that is was I strive to be. However, the code I have cited is very easy read. I am not a lawyer, but I will be. My opinion on the matter is shared by our very own prosecuting attorney, who is, by the way, a lawyer. Just because it has become the standard to disregard the law and ethics for personal gain, does not make it right. Attempting to insult me, and in the process only making yourself look petty, does not make it right. The code is correct. My citing and intpretation of it is, also, correct. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #53)

To further my arguments read above, I believe the fact Mr. McBride owns an electrical company in this county should be factored into his potential candidacy in a detrimental way. As a commissioner he would have direct authority on the issuing of many contracts that require electrical work. I am not saying that Mr McBride would or intends to abuse that authority, however the sheer presence of a conflict of interest troubles me. He would be in a position to profit far more than the annual salary of being commissioner provides, his business coffers could swell with money from county contracts. Also, your knowledge of his resume is very vivid and detailed. Your writing, - to me- seems very much to be fashioned in a style that an accountant would author. Isn't his wife an accountant, you say? You seemed very knowledgable of her resume also. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #34)

I have had political conversations with both of these men. I know, in general terms, the resume of each man. I commend Mr. McBride for being a captain of industry in this county. Likewise, I'll admit that his business holdings, and their general success, bode well for his chances and put him a step forward in the race. The same applies to his postion on many county boards, specfically the solid waste authority. However, these things do not -to me- automatically qualify him as an ideal candidate- even if they all but ordain him as a likely winner. I have never suggested he was a lacky of Gordon Lambert. I would never accuse anyone of that seeing as I am so often accused of the same. I do not believe it is a stretch, however, to say they are allies- united, if by nothing else, in their shared disdain of the commission majority faction currently composed of Ray and Judy. I know for a fact, also, they are personal friends. Mr. McBride in many ways, in a general sense, reminds me of Carl Urps- not only by his affliation with Gordon Lambert, but also in the business holdings that his followers will cite as one of many, and likely the best, reason to elect him. I believe that Harold is a good man, in fact I know he is, but I do believe politically he would not be as independantly minded on the commission as you suggest. In fact, the political brain trust of Gordon Lambert and his network of affliates and supporters will be the backbone of the organzation that helps Harold. You watch and you'll see. I'm correct. The same organization will see to the relection efforts of Gordon Lambert in 2012; but you know all this, your affliation in this contest is clearly shown by the knowledge and vigor of your argument. Obviously, you are, likely, already involved directly in Harold's organization. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #33)

I understand your argument. However, just because you feel Cecil isn't a good choice, doesn't automatically make Harold a good one. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #26)

Filing for office is sometime in Jan. I think. Primary election date in West Virginia for 2010 is May 11, if I'm not mistaken. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #23)

I don't believe that either proposed option, is any better than any sitting commissioner that we currently have. I don't believe either man's leadership would be essentially disasterous, but I'd wager that come six years from now McDowell County would have benefited in no way from either man's leadership. I, personally, cannot happily vote for more of the same, regardless of what name stands as its surrogate on the ballot. I'll predict, regardless of which of these men are elected, if indeed one of these men is elected, employees of the commission and county who are not loyal to them and their political faction will not be retained. Furthermore, friends and cohorts will be appointed to replace them. The level of industry and employment in this county will not have changed in the slightest by the virtue of their efforts, thus barring extraordinary events beyond their political control- there will still be no industry and few jobs. Our youth will still be flooding out of the county, never to return, in the search of greater prospects of employment and living stanards that their the home cannot provide them. Those that remain are in serious danger to fall victim to our drug epidemic. Basically, the government will remain just as ineffective as it has been my whole life. The only differnce is the cast. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #21)

I am not at this time sold on either. I truly believe thatt which ever way the election, goes if these two are the only option, equals more or less the same result. McDowell County will be no better than it has ever been. If one wins we will see a continuation of the current majority. If the other wins, power will just switch hands and what is currently being done to Gordon will be done to Ray. Either way, the people of McDowell County DO NOT benefit. (Nov 15, 2009 | post #19)

Laugh as you like. I'm not trying to amuse you. As for my diction, I write as I speak. I am an idealist, yes. However, I do not say the things I do for any notion of self gain. Insult me all you want. It doesn't benefit anyone and it certainly doesn't bother me. I want to see good done for my home, even if I must be insulted and degraded for wanting so. (Nov 14, 2009 | post #12)

You know its funny, I am so often accused of being a flunky of the Gordon camp. Perhaps, what I am about to say will shatter that ill placed conception once and for all. If today were election day, and all votes but mine had been cast, and the election between these two men was at that time exactly tied: I would not be overjoyed to vote for either one. I fear very much that Cecil, if elected, will be a surrogate of Judy and continue the majority over Gordon Lambert with Ray Bailey. Conversely, I believe that Harold McBride will create a new majority with Gordon Lambert and use their new formed power to exact revenge on Ray Bailey and his supporters. Quite frankly, most literally, I am a member of neither side. Also, after this post I am sure to be considered an enemy of both sides. I don't care. My only concern is seeing that the best is done for McDowell County. The honest truth, both of these men would be hard pressed at this point to convince me of the need to cast my vote for either one of them. Keep in mind, in my opinion, both of these are fine men. I have nothing against either of them personally. I just cannot in good conscience cast a vote for more of the same- which I believe is on the ballot twice. It is not my intention to defame. I have stated my opinion truly on a purely political matter- likely to my detriment. (Nov 14, 2009 | post #11)

I believe most every office this election cycle will be contested. However, I most certainly beleive the race for the commissioner seat will be most interesting. I'll say nothing of either the mentioned possible candidates specfically, as I know them both- even if only slightly. Both have been very kind to me. Cecil I've known my whole life. In the most general of terms, the ideal candidate must be beholden to no political faction, that is to say they must be -more- than a glorified stand-in clone for an already sitting commissioner. This is in no way a reflection of an opinion regarding either mentioned person. It just to say we need a balanced commission- not a strengthening of the majority or an empowering of the other. What we need is an indepedent mind. Otherwise, the politics of retribution are likely to continue forever. Without an independent, no matter who wins, we get the same result. Nothing. (Nov 14, 2009 | post #5)

Just so you know, slander and "libel" laws intentionaly have a stronger burden of proof when the statement at hand concerns a public offical. To sucessfully sue for defamation of character, the public offical would have to prove the alledged defamer knew 100% that what he said or wrote was false. Thats like chapter one of an undergraduate prelaw torts class. (Nov 14, 2009 | post #48)