Jackson Jambalaya

I'm sure that the Fondren Bugle will be posting something that makes the rejections of Jackson's "application" a race issue.

Because, anything that happens to the detriment of Jackson is "always" along racial lines.... according to the Fondren Tablog.

The more she and Lynch write about it, the more ignorant they look.

Ignorant. Nope. Just plain stupid.

You've cherry picked here. The bill as introduced had no such application for the city of Jackson in it, so don't go trying to say that the bill as signed by the Governor was the bill that the sponsors introduced or that they agreed with every amendment that was made along the way. Moreover, don't act as if this bill only authorized the $6 million for Jackson. It's a large bill that authorizes bonds for a lot of other projects including projects at several of the state's HBCUs. And finally, let's not act as if Democrats are universally anti-racist, especially in Mississippi, where in most circles anyone who is more than a nominal Democrat is more often than not regarded as an anti-gun, anti-fetus, pro-gay, pro-socialism scumbag.

Hey 2:15PM, you sound like you just regurgitated a Donner K cheer-leading chant. And, it appears you don't really read very well.

Face it, Harvey is inept.

And he was premature in his attack. This isn't a Democrat or Republican issue, KF simply makes points out the very partisan and censored discussions that go on over at the Fondren Bugle would never go and print the FACTS about a misstep like this and the very catalyst for the application process.

Calling Harvey out is KF's job, and frankly, JFP cannot compete on the same level because it does not support their fascist agenda (I am referring to moderated/censored discussion that is not in line with the owner).

actually HB1701, which contains the bond money, was effective on passage back in early April.

2:15: The initial bill had the provisions in Section 44 and 50 in the final bill. Except for the JRA requirement, it stayed the same as written by the bill's sponsors. Nice try.

4:14: I stand corrected.

Adam and Donna left out quite a few pertinent facts because it didn't fit their agenda. They practice what is called advocacy journalism. Factchecking indeed.

Yup. They write the "story" to fit the agenda. The upside is that beyond the baker's dozen of me-too cultists who post on the JFP tablog Ladd's reach and influence is minimal.

The Fondren Bugle still hasn't reported on the facts re: Malachi.

BUT you know if that was Melton they'd be all over that story like flies on dog shit.

From the Fondren Bugle....

Banks and Harden, along with Jackson Reps. Mary Coleman, Credell Calhoun and Alyce Clarke, Rep. Walter Robinson of Bolton, and Jackson Sen. Hillman Frazier, called on the city to send an application to MDA. The legislators, all Democrats, reserved most of their energy for criticizing Barbour and the Bond Commission for not supporting much-needed improvements to the city’s water system.

What a load of horseshit. Every letter I read encouraged the city to submit an application (Barbour and Hood). Isn't there a meeting set between all of them to resolve this?

I would respond to Donner K directly, but she has censored my voice on her tablog.

Gets even better:

sound familiar?

Rick Hill continues to consume copious quantities of hallucinogenic drugs.

The only sane one is Weill who isn't afraid to tell the truth that Jackson is headed full speed towards insolvency.

and once insolvent the state can move in and run the 106 square miles + as a state controled district. The "Legis" issued the charter at it's good pleasure in 1822 or so and it can revoke it....and should. had to say it. It would be for the best. If the stae owne 61 percent of the realestae then it already has a majority say and should exercise same.

sorry for the spelling...i'm in a hurry here.

2:01, interesting thought, except that there would be cries of racism from every corner of the state. Although the idea of abolishing the city council is tempting...

I am confused why anyone would say Jackson should turn down the money from the legislature and apply for money from other loan funds?

Jackson, like every metro-city in the United states of its size, needs hundreds of millions of dollars to solve it's water/sewer infrastructure needs.

Of course Jackson will apply for the other funds, but why should that preclude Jackson from getting the funds already approved by the legislature?

Compare the terms.

For the amount of money harvey wants to spend a year on this project, he could borrow 14 million instead of six million for the same payment using the fund from the department of health.

Basically it comes down to math. I know this eludes some of our representatives and the Fondren Bugle who want to politicize the discussion.

Let me see.

I want to borrow 6 dollars and it will cost me 14 dollars in repayment over the term of the loan.

OR

I can borrow 14 dollars and it will cost me 14 dollars over the terms of the loan.

Hmmmmmm.....Obivously, Haley is doing the math.

The funniest part of all this reporting over at JFP....

They are debating the finer points of what "illegal" means. Freakin' waste of time.

NO COMMENTS on any of the bond issue. Too complex for their simpleton minds?

Furthermore Kappy, ol' Harv can borrow more ( >$6m but <$14m ) and pay it back o'er a much longer period of time.

But you see, he wants to have it both ways. He -- and the debt lovin' shroom freak in his finance department -- wants to bullshit Jackson that we need to re-fi bonds to the tune of a net +$10 MILLION over the new term in order to bail out the NOW but then we wants to borrow the $6 million over 7 years which hurts the immediate and near term budgets with higher annual debt service costs versus the other options available.

As far as finance math. That isn't a competency of any skill level at the Bugle.

You are right, KK. What will happen is the city's budget will implode and then they will start screaming racism and how everyone backstabbed harvey when in reality, they are too dumb to add two plus two. When I say they, I mean Ladd, Lynch, and the regular commentors.

Change equals progress. If Kenny Stokes is behind it, then it's a good idea.

posted by Walt (aka Ray Carter who lives in Dinsmor) on 08/24/10 at 05:51 PM

"Why should we issue $6 million in bonds...for the same amount it took to pay them off, Jackson can borrow $15 million, and the $15 million is 83% federal money," Governor Barbour said.

"Basically it comes down to math. I know this eludes some of our representatives and the Fondren Bugle who want to politicize the discussion.

Let me see.

I want to borrow 6 dollars and it will cost me 14 dollars in repayment over the term of the loan.

OR

I can borrow 14 dollars and it will cost me 14 dollars over the terms of the loan.

Hmmmmmm.....Obivously, Haley is doing the math. "

I had heard these rumors that Repubs are good at math... ;-)

4:13 can you summarize down to a point?

OK.

For all the cof-fee drink-ing Fond-r-en Be-a-u-gle....sorry I was speaking slowly for others to understand.

Let me summarize the situation.

Jackson needs work.

Jackson needs works done to water system.

Jackson needs money.

Jackson needs money to pay for work done to water system.

HOW?

Listen to Barbour, Hood, the Feds, and everyone else that seems to know what to do, but continues to elude the current Jackson City leadership, and especially their Buglers.

7:30 I'll type slowly for your benefit. The quotation marks (those funy little, um " " " things, at the beginning and end of MOST of my post mean I was quoting a previous post. Ask the poster of the original to use smaller words if you don't understand it. The little " ;-) " (that's called an EMOTICON) is something used on the inner webs here to indicate a JOKE (hint: if someone has to explain a joke to you, you'll never get it). The emoticom came at the end of the eleven words I added, hinting that the Dems in Jackson City Council can'r handle finances, which apparently is news to some people. That nice Mr Barbour expalined very carefully how the Jackson government could accomplish ehat they need to do, but save the few remaining taxpayers in Jackson a lot of money by doing it a different way.

KF, You didn't zap 11:32? What's up? You usually zap personal bashing, and the rest of the message was purely redundant to what has already been said. Nothing of quality has been added by 11:32.

Are we going to snap at each other like children on JJ, or are we going to act like adults?

I vote to ZAP!!

You are a complete numbskull 5:54 PM. If you crave banning and zapping then please head over the JFP and enjoy the self-adoration over there.

I don't want to vote to zap you 5:54 PM, I want you zapped just to piss you off. Moron! This is not a democracy, this is Jackson Jambalaya!

Actually, the JFP would ban that type of post, because, you know, they like, censor their comments and any opposing view to suit their message.

So as the previous poster mentioned, go back to romper room. Your simpleton needs will be met.

For all those who want a good laugh and yet ANOTHER example of one-sided, partisan presentation of a complex issue spoon-fed to what appears to be the last bastion of readers at the JFP, look no further to the most recent article from Donner K herself.

She contends that illegal immigration is GOOD in terms of employment and productivity. She fails to present several factors in her simpleton approach:
1. Social Costs - medical, schooling, and the loss of educational effectiveness for our children b/c of overcrowding non-tax paying illegals
2. She does not show the states where these Large Populations of Illegal's reside. I bet it is in states like TX, CA, AZ. Hmmmm. Given the numbers game, you can hide a lot of people in those numbers.
3. She does nothing to discuss the economic impact of the costs to enforce the immigration laws or lack there of. These costs are very real, and would be higher if we were not applying the band-aid of an approach we have now.

So, Donner....Bumpity bump, bump, bump

When will the JFP figure out that presenting the entire discussion is what readers are after, they haven't yet, I do not expect them to anytime soon. To approach the immigration issue on a level of defining the word "illegals" was perfect fodder for the JFP; to attempt a real analysis of the impact of immigration in a comprehensive manner will not happen over there. I mean, why even try?

Fox News does a pretty good job of presenting guests who advocate for both (or all) sides of an issue. This terrifies the likes of DOnner K and her ilk who then get apoplectic that conservative guests are allowed to present their arguments. This leads them to state, over and over and over, that Fox is a "conservative" network. I think people like her really are delusional, in thinking that sticking to the one narrow, very liberal viewpoint, and ignoring all others, makes themselves "moderate". They really can't stand to hear anything that challenges their worldview. I've seen the "Rev" Al Sharpton more on Fox than I've seen Sean Hannity interviewed in the JFP.