What are some of the qualities that are important to you when considering a candidate for public office? Do you consider their past voting history? How about their stance on gay marriage? Maybe their willingness to regulate and spend the taxpayers money without regard for the future generations? What about their stance on abortion?
Whichever one or two qualities that you may have picked that are important to you, whether I listed them above or not, do these qualities, or lack thereof, impact their ability to carry out the duties of the office they seek? For example, would you hire a tax cheat to run the U.S. Treasury? Would you vote for someone to be the Sheriff if they had a criminal record? I would think that those kind of things would be important when considering a vote for someone to represent me.
What if I told you that someone who continually lost elections for a county party was hoping to be put in charge of a state party? What if I told you that same someone had problems raising money and maintaining the trust of the donors once he actually received the donations? What if I also added that he squelched the grassroots by ignoring them and putting his own cronies in place to benefit himself and his buddies? How about if I told you he couldn't then and still can't even manage his own personal finances, what would you say to that?
Enough with the ambiguity, I'll tell you who I'm talking about, if you haven't already figured it out: Jared Woodfill. Jared is a nice enough person, but no amount of pleasantries and good personality is going to change my mind about his qualities and abilities to hold any kind of elected position. EVER. Unfortunately, he still has a following of sorts and those that support him seem to be completely blind to his inability to manage people and finances and win elections simply because of one thing; he's Pro-life.
Great, he's pro-life, and yes, it's a good, Biblical quality to have. The Bible tells us we should not murder and in my opinion, abortion IS murder. I'm going to let you in on a little secret, though. The Bible also talks about paying debts, too. Now, I know that generally speaking, we all have some debts; mortgages, credit cards, student loans, car notes, etc. and I'm not saying that having debt is evil or wrong. There are, however, consequences for not paying those debts.
Let us not forget about Jared Woodfill’s $30 Million lawsuit gamble and tax problems. Woodfill was sued in New York for defaulting on a nearly $30 million “questionably ethical” loan. Not only that, but The Houston Business Journal and the Chronicle recently reported the IRS has placed a $40,000 lien on the Woodfill Law Firm for unpaid taxes. If you're not a subscriber, you may not be able to read the link, but the information included is this:
Name: Woodfill Law Firm PC, Address: 3131 Eastside St. Suite 450, City: Houston,State: TX,
In Romans 13:7 it says "Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed."
When you don't pay for your car, the bank repossesses it. When you don't pay your house note, the bank kicks you out of your house. So why shouldn't there be consequences for those seeking elected positions? If you've proven yourself a failure in an area that your position needs you to excel in, why would anyone want to put you in that position, pro-life or no?
Great perspective on promise vs. performance. Well done.
ReplyDeleteWoodfill does not have the ability to run the state party. When Texas Eagle Forum Cathie Adams ran the party, TXGOP had two sets of books and were in debt less than a million dollars. There is a place for Social Conservatives in the party, but Fiscal Conservatives do a better job of managing the structure as a whole.
ReplyDeleteEr uh, who is the "Political Chicken" when the person who wrote this article did not even have the courage to sign his/her own name? Also, many allegations are made in the "what if's," but the writer only gives brief (and undocumented) examples of only a couple of the "what if's." This is like my saying, "What if Joe Blow killed his wife, raped his daughter, burned up the neighbor's house, and wrecked a stolen vehicle?" Then the writer only gives references (without documentation) to only one (Houston Business Journal tax lien) of the "what if's." This is called hyperbole of the worst order. I need facts, dates, documentation, URL’s, legal statements, responsible sources, etc. for each of the "what if's" if I am going to give this article any little bit of credence.
ReplyDeleteHi, Donna. My name is Kelly Horsley. You may not know me, but the fact that I didn't sign my name doesn't indicate my lack of courage. My blog name is a pseudonym. I'd be happy to link to the article. Also, the what if's were my way of setting up the argument and not meant as hyperbole. I'm sorry if you were disappointed. Not everyone writes blogs the same as you, but it doesn't make them wrong. Thanks for the feedback, Donna and for all the work you do.
Deletevery appropriate comeback!
Delete