In his most recent column, The Morning Call's Bill White is also astonished by Osborne's latest move. After assuring fellow Commissioners he'd hang tough and not vote for any of the so-called reform team candidates, he betrayed them. If Osborne thinks this will help him, he's nuts. He's cemented his position in Lehigh County politics as a person whose word means nothing
Moderate or establishment Republicans know he can't be trusted. The so-called reform team already knew what Osborne is like. In November 2012, it was Osborne as Chair who engineered some sort of budget move that infuriated the conservative bloc, and then conducted a news conference about it without bothering to inform any of them.
"I find this extremely disloyal to the Republican majority," stated Comm'r Vic Mazziotti at the time. "He did not inform the majority. He hasn't called since. Maybe he's planning on changing parties."
In January 2013, Osborne was ousted as Chair by the very people he now thinks will help him.
One other point. I pointed to Amanda Holt's shortcomings as a candidate, at least on paper. She may turn out to be the best Commissioner Lehigh County has ever had. Some of my more conservative friends have said I should give her a chance, and they're right.
You never know.
I certainly don't. I used to think brad Osborne was a decent guy.
22 comments:
With ALL the QUALIFIED and EXPIERENCED Names and People Going for the Open Spot I CAN NOT BELIEVE that the L/C Commishr's PICK a Piano Teacher WHO HAS NO College Education and WAS Home Schooled. I HOPE HOLT Can Draw a MAP and Re-District MORE MONEY for L/C SO OUR TAXES DO NOT GO WAY UP. BUT Then AGAIN I HAVE NO FAITH IN ANY of the L/C Commishr's and THEY SHOULD ALL BE REPLACED !!!!!!
OK VOTER'S REMEMBER Brad and WHAT HE DID when he goes up for Re-Election as a L/C Commishn'r OR as County Executive ... JUST VOTE NO TO BRAD !!!!!!!!
Does the MC still publish daily?
3:31
What did Osborne do? He voted with a clear majority of his fellow Republican commissioners to pick a Republican replacement for a Republican commissioner vacancy.
Shocking!
You seem to think he should have voted for the Democrats choice instead. Why would any true Republican do that, and why would you suggest it?
Bernie O'Hare is a closet Democrat who loves Big Government and LOTS of spending on free stuff to make people feel good.
This is why it is very possible that people are left with the impression that O'Hare thinks Osborne should have voted for the Democrats' choice.
O'Hare thinks people are incapable of researching what he has written int he past.
O'Hare thinks (and writes) lots of cRaZy stuff.
(dig the cool use of the keyboard - makes people feel good)
"What did Osborne do? He voted with a clear majority of his fellow Republican commissioners to pick a Republican replacement for a Republican commissioner vacancy."
It was not a clear R majority, as Percy Dougherty made clear. It was contrary to the desire of the GOP chair. This is a dishonest explanation, which is what I have come to expect from Brad. This vote was cast in the hope and likely the promise that the tea party Rs will rally to your banner. Not gonna' happen. He has shown himself as someone who advances himself over his own word.
The comments at 8:13 and 8:16 are the typical nonsense from those with no argument.
I do have a college education. I was not home schooled. I did not go to Kindergarten or Pre-School. I am unmarried. I lived with my parents to save money. If they preferred me not to live with them I wouldn't have lived with them. Music wise I played the Clarinet but I know how to find middle C on a piano.
Amanda Holt will be sworn in before or at the next Commissioner's meeting. Let it be said she was the choice of 5 of the 8 commissioners.
If I am correct her first votes might concern 1) establishing a policy to allow purchase of unpaid leave time in the Lehigh County Pension system.2) Approving the memorandum of Agreement between the County of Lehigh and United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCM, Local 1776 and transfer funds to implement the same 3) An Ordinance proposing a referendum Amending the Home Rule Charter to revise budget approval process.
In 2015 Republicans first will have the responsibility to review the performance of Schiller, Mazziotti, Osborne and Holt if any of these should seek re-election or election in a contested primary and survivors of this primary will be matched against Democratic opponents if any.... During the last election the Democratic opponents were Brace, Hamm, Waitkess and Pearson. Brace currently is a County Commissioner through a district election and Waitkess has moved out of the County.
"It was contrary to the desire of the GOP chair."
Wait, I thought that defying the "Party Boss" is a good thing.
Try to be a little consistent.
I am. I am countering the argument of a sophist, who claimed the Osborne was simply following the wishes of his party. He was not. I have no problem with bucking a party boss, but do have a problem with people who argue dishonestly.
Osborne was following the majority of his fellow Republican commissioners. With Osborne, it was 5 of 6 Republicans voting for Holt.
Only Dougherty continued to vote with the democrats.
That's not dishonest or sophistry, it's simple math.
Anon 11:52
If Osborne had been upfront about his plans then you would have a point. That isn't the case. Osborne explicitly promised Daugherty, Jones and Brace that he would vote with them and would not go for a Woodman candidate. He gave them his word.
And make no mistake about the fact that Holt is a Woodman candidate. Everyone knew that going in and Woodman confirmed that on Wednesday bragging to any number of folks about how he had gotten "the 5th vote for Amanda".
I thought he was elected to give his best judgment, not to follow others. The fact is that he gave his word that he would cast no vote for any of the so-called reform bloc candidaes, even if this meant that it would go to the courts. He broke his word. You say this is just simple math of following the other R Comm'rs, but that is another sophist's argument to hustify breaking one's word. Also, there has been a change in the LC GOP. Woodman is out, Heydt is in. If Osborne is to be a follower, as you claim, he should have voted for Heydt's choice. That was not Holt.
And Brad is not a follower. He is cyncially positioning himself for an exec run, even at the cost of good government. The Wayne Woodman Republicans already knew that Osborne could not be trusted. Now the rest know, too.
1:06
So you're taking Osborne to task for not sticking to some back room deal cooked up with the Democrats against members of Osborne's own party?
And Daugherty is the principled one?
I'm sorry, but IF that deal was actually made, Osborne should be praised for breaking it! If voters had wanted Osborne to vote like a democrat, they would have elected one instead of him.
The sophistry is very apparent. First, we had the majority argument, which is nonsense. Now we have the "back room deal" argument, which is equally nonsensical. There is nothing wrong or nontransparent about a Comm'r giving his word to three other Commissioners. That is no Sunshine Act violation. There is plenty wrong with breaking one's word. That is what happened.
Bernie Stop Posting articles that have ZERO factual evidence behind them. What evidence do you have Brad made a 'deal'? Someone told you who told them that possibly someone received a text? Who's feeding you this nonsense? None of this is factual.
Bernie, Chairman Hedyt remained completely neutral throughout this. You know that, and if you don't then you obviously did not talk to him personally.
Now we go from the "majoritY" argument to the "back room deal" argument to the "you got your facts wrong" argument.
My facts are right on the money. Osborne committed that he would send this to the courts before voting for a reform team candidate. That is why Dougherty was so shocked when he spoke to Bill White. Osborne did not keep his word. I also have independent evidence of such a deal, but I am not disclosing it bc doing so would reveal a source. Also, whatever public position Heydt was taking, he was privately lobbying for just one candidate.
Osborne knows this, because he was lobbied.
1). Again, let's do the math.
Six Republicans voting, four are willing to go for Holt. That's "a clear majority of his fellow Republican commissioners". Four out of six in my book is 2/3.
2). You are claiming to have evidence of an agreement between the two democrats on the board and two republicans to subvert a majority of the republican commissioners and send the pick to the Courts. Call it a "back room deal" or whatever you want, but it still doesn't look good. And nobody said anything about a Sunshine Act violation.
3). You said Heydt was only lobbying for one candidate. Who was it? And if it wasn't Holt, give Osborne credit for bucking a "party boss", which is a position you've so often criticized as needing to stay out of public decision-making.
4). Don't know what "facts" you have right, but you've surely come to all the wrong conclusions.
The sophist returns! This time he repeats all arguments previously made and rejected, but puts them in numerical form to pretend he's logical. He's not. He's a sophist and I'm done talking to him.
It's ridiculous to suggest that Brad Osborne did this at Wayne Woodman's behest because he hopes for Woodman's support and money in an eventual bid for county executive, because Woodman's wife Lisa Scheller plans to run for county executive, and Woodman will obviously support her over Osborne no matter what he does.
Post a Comment