Jackson Free Press

The push by Mayor Frank Melton and three members of the Jackson City Council to place Northside Sun owner and publisher Wyatt Emmerich on the board of the Jackson Municipal Airport Authority appears over, after the council denied Emmerich's confirmation Monday in a split 3-3 vote, with Councilman Kenneth Stokes not present to break the tie. In the final vote, Jeff Weill, Frank Blunston and Charles Tillman voted in favor, and President Leslie McLemore, Marshand Crisler and Margaret Barrett-Simon opposed the appointment.

Council members opposed to Emmerich's appointment protested the confirmation on procedural grounds, touting a city ordinance that states city boards with fewer than seven members, like the airport board, cannot have more than one representative from a single city ward. Currently, businessman Earle Jones represents Emmerich's Ward 1 on the board.

"I've had one fundamental problem with certain things that have occurred the last few years, and that's protocol and procedures," Crisler said. He later told Emmerich, "If we're going to do this the right way and follow the ordinance that we are charged with following, then a member of Ward 5 or Ward 6 should be sitting where you are now."

On Friday, May 16, Melton and supporting council members placed Emmerich's confirmation on the city council agenda for a special session on May 19, the following Monday. Barrett-Simon, McLemore and Crisler all said during the special session that the rushed confirmation, which allowed scant time for public review, was the first they had seen in their combined 36-year Council tenure.

To the chagrin of Melton, who served with Emmerich on the board of the Metro Crime Commission, the council agreed to reschedule the hearing until June 2.

Pro-appointment council members questioned motives in enforcing the ordinance. Bluntson said he learned of the ordinance's existence just before Monday's meeting, and Weill said that since he joined council, members had considered the ordinance to be negligible when reviewing a qualified candidate.

"Occasionally we'll have these nominations come up, and I'll say, 'Well, whose ward is this person from?'" Weill said. "I've had people on this council then say, 'Hey, we don't pay attention to that stuff."

Procedural questions aside, the issue of race was the clear co-star of the hearing. Emmerich publishes several newspapers in the Mississippi Delta along with Northside Sun a community newspaper serving the white suburban areas of Ridgeland and Madison. The racial subtext was apparent especially in early questioning by the two black councilmen who would go on to vote for Emmerich's confirmation.

Councilman Frank Bluntson said that he had been reading the Northside Sun because he heard complaints of a lack of diversity in the Sun. He said he was pleased to find that in Emmerich's last column describing a kids' sleepover at his house, there was a "little brother" among the children.

"I certainly don't feel like a racist," Emmerich responded, chuckling nonchalantly. "Sydney has been over an innumerable number times, and he and (Emmerich's son) John are best friends and have been over for years. I really don't like to think in those terms."

When Tillman asked about the lack of diversity in the Northside Sun staff, Emmerich said that though his paper's employees reflected the racial makeup of the region just as his Delta newspapers do, black members of the community are pictured in the paper dozens of times a month. Both the Sun magazine and newspaper run hundreds of photographs of social events each month. The Jackson metro, however, is about 60 percent African American.

Emmerich rarely discusses race in his weekly columns in the Northside Sun, but some past submissions printed in the paper have made controversial statements on race.

For instance, Emmerich gave a $100 award for a July 22, 2004, column by Dan McCullen for its "community" appeal. That column opposed renaming the airport after slain civil rights leader Medgar Evers: "Medgar Evers has no connection whatsoever with the airport and the suggestion by City Council and some of the media that his name be emblazoned on the airport is simply pouring acid into old wounds."

At the time, the Jackson Free Press criticized Emmerich for giving an award to a column that also said that blacks should be grateful for slavery. Emmerich later said the award was part of an effort to encourage letters to the editor and that that particular letter—although called a "column" in the paper—was the only one submitted for that week. He also apologized on the JFP Web site for running the column, but not to his own readers, saying that none of them had complained.

Emmerich, who said during Monday's confirmation hearing that conservative free-market principles are "part of what makes America great," has said some people have a problem with his political leanings. But they shouldn't matter, he said.

"It's an airport board. I'm a pilot. I'm qualified on aviation issues. I did not know attending to specific political philosophy had any bearing on that," he said.

A pilot who has housed his plane at Hawkins Field—one of the Jackson Municipal Airport Authority's two main strips—for years, Emmerich would have been the only board member with private aviation experience. Crisler, one of three council members against the appointment, refused to discuss Emmerich's qualifications and said Emmerich "had a number of a detractors" but that "he would not discuss these today" because of the primacy of the procedural issue.

This is not the first time Melton's nominee for a government position has been voted down by the city council. In March 2007, the council refused to confirm Charles Melvin as head of the city Department of Parks and Recreation, citing his inability to answer basic questions about the department. Later that April, then interim-Fire Chief Todd Chandler was denied a permanent promotion to fire chief after Melton had drawn out the process twice by placing Chandler's name on the council agenda before removing it after realizing he did not have enough council votes.

After the meeting, a clearly disappointed Melton told reporters in the City Hall lobby that the whole process was a political charade.

"We've made interchanges in our wards before," he said. "I will be asking for resignations from that board from those who have interfered with this process."

During the May 19 meeting, Melton accused other councilmen of unethically taking phone calls from interested parties, a charge that McLemore denied, saying that councilmen can take phone calls from concerned citizens whenever necessary.

Previous Comments

ID

130392

Comment

Whaaat? I'm frankly shocked! How could anyone deny a gentlemen of this ilk the desires of his heart. This isn't the America I know or appreciate.

Author

Walt

Date

2008-06-03T11:35:55-06:00

ID

130397

Comment

The more comments I read about Mr. Emmerich, the more I am convinced that there are a lot of Delphine Rouxs in this world.

Author

iratetoday

Date

2008-06-03T12:06:49-06:00

ID

130399

Comment

What about the side stories: Where was Stokes? Did he take a walk at the mayor's behest? Did Barrett vote "no" for the stated reason(preserving the ward system for appointments)or was another motive in play?

Author

chimneyville

Date

2008-06-03T12:29:42-06:00

ID

130401

Comment

Be patient, chimney. The Little Paper That Could is still working on it. Bryan is doing a longer version for the print version. We've spoiled y'all so that you think we can turn everything around in five minutes, and post every PDF of everything ever done within minutes. I appreciate the confidence in my staff, though. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T13:11:00-06:00

ID

130402

Comment

Who is Delphine Roux?

Author

Walt

Date

2008-06-03T13:15:59-06:00

ID

130403

Comment

Sly insult, irate. Or attempt at one. Funny, schoolgirls don't pop into my mind when I consider Wyatt's role in this community. Hmmm, let me consider what literary figure I would choose ... I wouldn't worry about Wyatt, irate. He could never fall prey to a concocted witchhunt over what a word really means. Subtlety is not exactly something he or his publications are known for. I mean, giving an award for a column saying blacks should give thanks for slavery is pretty much what it is. And I give him credit for realizing that JFP readers, if not his own, would be offended by such a thing. I take this apology to us as a compliment, even as I grimace as the thought that he didn't think his own readers deserved the same. The irony in the current debate, though, is that he never should have been for this seat in the first place due to the rules. Imagine: the mayor didn't pay any attention to the rules. It seems Wyatt didn't, either. Or, they hoped others wouldn't notice. Who knows?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T13:23:39-06:00

ID

130404

Comment

An annoying and cloying Philip Roth character, Walt, who is designed to funnel the wrath of the anti-PC crowd who would rather we all shut up about racism and white-guy slip-ups and stop making the poor dude so damn uncomfortable. "The Human Stain" tries to convince us that efforts to call out racism are all akin to witch hunts. Of course, many of us know better. Here's a segment of a review in the Times of the book that irate might have overlooked: The book indulges in the sort of tirade against political correctness that is far drearier and more intellectually constricted than political correctness itself. Roth, usually fond of both sides of an argument, fails to extend understanding toward -- and only makes fun of -- the possible discomfort of minorities or women in settings like Athena, where prejudice may be trickily institutional and atmospheric, causing events like the ''spooks'' utterance to be seized hold of and overinterpreted. Such seizing is like nabbing Al Capone for tax evasion -- neither accurate nor wrong. And despite the protests against Black History Month, brazenly placed in the mouth of Silk's African-American sister, the novel shows that Zuckerman's education would indeed have benefited from such a month. Wham, bam, thank-you-ma'am.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T13:28:30-06:00

ID

130405

Comment

I see. He's irate today because real justice, fairness, equity, due process and bilateral understanding for all are on the horizon. Well, I'm afraid he's going to be irate today, irate tomorrow and irate forever.

Author

Walt

Date

2008-06-03T13:37:28-06:00

ID

130406

Comment

I personally am going to be irate as long as people try to tell me that I'm not supposed to care about bigotry. So I guess we're even.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T13:51:05-06:00

ID

130408

Comment

You do a fine job of rooting out bigotry and I commend you for it vigorously. However, in my opinion, your brush tends to be a bit broad at times and your description of the book disingenuous. I now see why so many others who have posted here no longer do as you tend to cry wolf and troll a bit to much. I'll go back to lurk mode and enjoy most of the stories.

Author

iratetoday

Date

2008-06-03T14:25:42-06:00

ID

130409

Comment

An interesting legal question arises as to whether the council had the power to begin with to impose by ordinance a requirement that mayoral appointments be subject to ward rotation.Even if lawful is it good public policy to subject the appointment process to the ward system? It certainly enhances the power of the council and in this instance provided a procedural justification for blocking emmerich without having to openly discuss his views,say, on minority contracting goals.All is not lost for wyatt however:he could always move and establish residency(it only takes 30 days) in the next ward in the appointment rotation. If it happens to be ward 3, then would kenny have to step up and vote for a home boy?

Author

chimneyville

Date

2008-06-03T14:31:04-06:00

ID

130410

Comment

Now you're telling me my interpretation of a Philip Roth book is "disingenuous," irate? And in the next breath you accuse me of trolling my own site? Come on, dude. Did you happen to notice your, er, friendly entry onto this thread? Was it not a tad holier-than-thou? As for Wyatt, he has a very basic problem, your hyperbole aside. For years, he has profited off a newspaper that has very little non-white content. That's his business (in every way). He has seen no reason to hide it, even not blinking about giving that award to the columnist who said that blacks should give thanks for slavery every day. Yes, he apologized for it later, but only to JFP readers and only because we called him out on it. We're not exactly arguing over the meaning of the word "spooks" here. (To those who haven't bothered to read Roth, that's a reference to the book that irate was subtly quoting, as if it said something BIG.) Now, the city of Jackson isn't exactly bowing down before someone who has pretty much thumbed his nose at the city, or a majority of its residents. He made this bed. And unfortunately, in a new millenials world where diversity is "in," he may run into this problem a bit more often if he only talks about diversity here, but does nothign about it in his own publications. That's just the reality of the marketplace, and has little-to-nothing to do with what the meaning of the word is (or "spooks") is. The types of JFP-haters you speak of as if they are fabulous company don't troll, er, post here any longer because, well, we run them off. That is, people with holier-than-thou attitudes about how any challenge of bigotry is a witch hunt like those of Roth's dreams don't stick around long because, well, we challenge their a$$es to give links to what they post, and we question their assumptions (which have been the status quo for far too long). They don't own the talking stick here, so they meander on back to sites that don't challenge them as we do. Sometimes, they get kicked back there, but most of the ones who complain about getting kicked off this site for having a different opinion actually slink away when they run out of arguments, or because they weren't allowed to jump down every throat of another user with a different opinion. They then whine elsewhere about bad-ole-Donna, but we all know what the truth is. In other words, their privilege isn't credentialed here ... no more than anyone else's. If we allow them to take over, our site would have the level of commentary that the Ledger does–which has reached all-times lows of late–and I'd rather not have a Web site if we presented the worst of Mississippi to the world. And if that brush is too broad for you, well, go read a Roth novel or something. I don't really care.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T14:58:43-06:00

ID

130411

Comment

Chimney, my understanding is that there was some dialogue about race. I haven't seen the final story, yet. The other issue is an interesting one. I can see it both ways; I sure don't want any board stacked with people only from one or two wards. And I doubt Wyatt is going to move into another ward closer to the rest of us heathens. ;-) That is, unless there is some carrot associated with that appointment that I'm not privy to. Do tell, if so.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T15:00:24-06:00

ID

130412

Comment

Irate, no, Relieved, yes. The board is a lot of work and I am overbooked already with just work and family. I was asked and urged by others, so I did my duty and agreed to volunteered. Now I'm off the hook with a clear conscience. I couldn't have asked for a better outcome. Donna, are you going to define me by the McCullen letter (column?, whatever) for the rest of my life. It's been four years. Jeez. It was a mistake. Give me a break.

Author

Wyatt Emmerich

Date

2008-06-03T15:02:15-06:00

ID

130413

Comment

I'd be less likely to, Wyatt, if you had apologized for it to your own readers. As it is, it was a defining moment. Sorry. But while I have your attention, I will add that some of your newspaper policies are defining to me as well. Do you know how frustrating it is to try to follow journalistic best practices in a market where some publications "sell" stories in exchange for advertising? We came into this market trying to do things the right way and then got hit with the "well, all the other papers give us a story if we advertise" nonsense. I've never seen the assumption of quid-pro-quo for advertising so bad in any market where I've ever worked. Of course, we all know that readers can't trust publications that sell stories, and it's wasted advertiser money, but they don't always understand that up front. Maybe the Mississippi Press Association, which won't let the JFP in due to our free circulation (apparently not noticing yours or the Ledger's), could establish some sort of code of at least suggested ethics on this front. Aren't you on the board? Maybe you could suggest it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T15:03:34-06:00

ID

130414

Comment

I could pick through everything you've done at the JFP, find your worst moment and define you by it for the rest of your life. If I were that type of person.

Author

Wyatt Emmerich

Date

2008-06-03T15:07:18-06:00

ID

130415

Comment

So do it. I expect people to notice when I make mistakes, especially if I don't apologize for them (in the same forum where I made them). And do you really think that I went out there to "pick through" your paper and happened to notice the award given to a column that glorifies slavery?!? There was no subtlety there, Wyatt. What has always offended me the most as a white Mississippi, and especially one from Neshoba County, is people assuming that I am not offended by patently racist statements. I grew up vowing that I would call out racism if it killed me because I heard so many instances of it not being called out. To me, your not apologizing to your readers tell me that you're assuming that because they are white, that none of them cared. I take that a tad personally, as a white Mississippian who has been assumed to be a bigot, by blacks and whites, my whole damn life. I happened to know Sun subscribers who were offended by that column, and they were white. Why didn't they write you? Perhaps they didn't think you would give a damn. I mean, you awarded it, right? And please don't miss what I just added to my above post. I'd really love to get some public dialogue going about these practices.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T15:12:25-06:00

ID

130416

Comment

Good dialogue between publishers and editors. I was touched by it. As an unbias reader and bystander without a preference for either, I declare Donna the winner. Down goes Wyatt. I do like the argument that one act shouldn't define a person. Several acts certainly do though, and one act can define when all your future acts are in the step with that prior act. Wyatt is right though. I would still be in Africa chunking rocks at flies and lions but for the benevolence of Wyatt's people who were so gracious and loving to drive way over there to get me. And they didn't charge me a penny for the expense of getting there, branging me back and making permanent and uninterrupted work for me. Thanks Wyatt. You the best! We could never repay you either!

Author

Walt

Date

2008-06-03T15:28:56-06:00

ID

130419

Comment

I think Mr. Emmerich gave a valid explanation of that "award" and to my knowledge there have been no such articles since. Give it a rest.

Author

QB

Date

2008-06-03T15:53:00-06:00

ID

130420

Comment

Donna, I wrote that in haste. Please do not take my "give it a rest" comment as a command. It is merely my opinion and I apologize for the phrasing.

Author

QB

Date

2008-06-03T15:54:02-06:00

ID

130423

Comment

this is not meant to change the subject, but I DO read the Northside Sun, religiously. The paper on a regular basis writes thoroughly on a number of topics of great interest to me and other Jackson stakeholders: downtown redevelopment(albeit with a ben allen/leland speed/david watkins perspective);Belhaven/belhaven heights(as sometimes interpreted by Virgi Lindsey);fondren/ woodland hills;city hall including council meetings and status of major public works projects(weill,mclemore and barrett are regulaly quoted);JPD, the board of supervisors(robert grahams discussions on fiscal matters and his parks plan are recalled);school(both public and private) events,awards ,recognition photos;and,folks all dressed up attending society balls.  

Author

chimneyville

Date

2008-06-03T15:56:54-06:00

ID

130424

Comment

So you want me to write that four years ago somebody said something racially offensive in a letter in the Sun and that I now apologize for it four years later because Donna Ladd is still offended by it? And until I do that, your are going to perennially blast me on your blog?

Author

Wyatt Emmerich

Date

2008-06-03T15:58:14-06:00

ID

130425

Comment

Wyatt, Donna's not the only person that is still offended by a column,letter or whatever you want to call it that justified slavery. Your ability to continually miss the point amazes me. The problem is that it doesn't amaze you.

Author

msgrits

Date

2008-06-03T16:07:17-06:00

ID

130426

Comment

Walt, you're biased, and you know it! Be honest. ;-) Glad you're touched, though. I coulda told you that. I don't think one act should define a person, either, although I think *how* you handle a very important act can inevitably define you. I mean, Wyatt comes from a school of personal-responsibility sushi-eaters who argue all the time that people shouldn't get a second chance and should be defined by their mistakes. Right, Wyatt? And I think it goes without saying that that one column isn't the only thing I find offensive about Wyatt's publications. I said on another thread that, after he mentioned how diverse his content is, I picked up Sun magazine at Newk's last weekend and literally counted fewer than 10 black faces among hundreds of white ones. I also am offended at how his crime articles talk about black criminals without giving any other defining characteristics--which is also a violation of 21st century best-practices policies. (Unlike the Ledger, I don't think you should never mention race, when it works with other descriptions to help catch someone. But "black male" just doesn't cut it.) I don't like the way he falsely characterizes "the liberals" in an intellectually dishonest way, as if everyone who doesn't agree with him thinks the same way and is part of some liberal monolith. Surely, Harvard taught something other than binary thinking. I don't like how out of touch he is with realityââ,¬â€saying that all of us have cars, AC, cell phones, the Internet, etcs. Who is "us"? I don't like the way he makes it sound, again dishonestly, that liberals (meaning not him) don't believe in "free enterprise" because, for instance, we don't believe in immunizing every corporation from lawsuits or limiting their competition. I don't especially like the way he wrote about a little boy cuddling with the rebel flag as if that's not a sickening image to so many of us who don't glorify the Old South. Even many of us white people. I don't like that he hasn't challenged Melton more over the years, instead choosing to be part of the compliant media who helped put him there, all the while (and condescendingly) laughing at Melton's antics as if he's some sort of circus clown. All that said, I like Wyatt in person quite a bit. I find him much more honest and real and, well, smart in actual conversations than in his papers, and he has a great car that he brought me home in one time from a panel at Belhaven College. I would say that his audience is smart enough to handle that Wyatt. I bet he wouldn't even lose that many advertisers if he'd lose the binary schtick.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T16:10:13-06:00

ID

130427

Comment

What about the romanticization of the good ole times of slavery; and then searching your heart, soul, mind and gut, yet only being able to say it was "too bad what happened to blacks." I was just as offended by that. Was it "too bad" or simply awful, appalling or frightful how whites acted inhumane, barbaric and ungodly toward other human beings? Or am I supposed to appreciate that article as much as I appreciated the TransAtlantic voyage?

Author

Walt

Date

2008-06-03T16:15:37-06:00

ID

130428

Comment

So you want me to write that four years ago somebody said something racially offensive in a letter in the Sun and that I now apologize for it four years later because Donna Ladd is still offended by it? No. I wish you were big enough to write a column, or a "letter," saying that you apologize because it's the right thing to do. But instead you choose to act like a victim who happened to get caught by some screechy Delphine Roux. That is such an insult to other people offended by these kinds of sentiments. The fact that you think it's all about me, and that if I would shut up about it all would be forgotten, is probably the most offensive thing you've said. And as Ms. Grits says, the fact that you can't see that is at the heart of your blind spot. And until I do that, your are going to perennially blast me on your blog? Just every now and then, when I need to burn someone at the stake. Wyatt, I hadn't mentioned this in a long time. It came up, not from me, but from people concerned about you're being appointed to the Airport Board. But doesn't it strike you that you play a leadership role in the community--you have the power to help this town and state heal and thrive. You own your own pulpit. First, do no harm. And if you do, even accidentally, be big enough to realize it and make up for it. And if you don't want to do that, don't act all offended that a state that is growing up around you calls you out on it from time to time. It is truly time to give old-south ideas and division a rest and allow our state to be all she can be. And that will take all of us working together, not sowing division.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T16:18:09-06:00

ID

130430

Comment

Been there. Done that. So long for now.

Author

Wyatt Emmerich

Date

2008-06-03T16:31:09-06:00

ID

130432

Comment

Hey! What about the whole exchanging-stories-for-advertising problem? Can't we have a public conversation about that!?! Maybe we could get others publications to follow our lede if we put our heads together on pushing for better ethics on this front. And readers would love it if they knew they weren't reading bought stories. And ... been where and done what?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T16:41:39-06:00

ID

130444

Comment

Where are these "white neighborhoods" that the Northside Sun continues to cater to? This particular paper is distributed in all the stores near my house and I wouldn't consider my community to be all white, not that it really matters. Once I witnessed a purse snatching in broad daylight in a place where one would least expect it. I appreciate the fact that Wyatt's paper informs everyone about these incidents. I no longer carry a purse because they seem to be a target. I work too hard for what little I do have. Also, when the forecast is cloudy, I carry my umbrella. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't one of your main advertisers Melton's former campaign manager?

Author

saint H

Date

2008-06-03T18:25:04-06:00

ID

130445

Comment

Saint H, the Northside Sun prints its target areas on the front page of the print edition. Certainly, those gerrymandered areas aren't as white as they used to be, which is part of the reason it is weird that the paper is not diversifying more. Even though it is not the mission of the JFP to cover every purse-snatching, I have no problem that one does that. What I take offense to, as does every major journalism organization in the country, is that assailants are often simply identified by their race even if there are no other identifying factors included. It doesn't take a lot of common sense to see why that is unhelpful at best. And why does Mississippi always have to do things the shoddy way, assuming no one notices? I believe in high standards, and this should apply to our local publications as well as anyone or anything else. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't one of your main advertisers Melton's former campaign manager? No, I don't believe Robert Johnson has ever advertised in the JFP, although he has yelled at me on occasion. I'm not sure the point you're making if he had, though. No one gets a quid pro quo from the JFP (that is: you advertise, and we promise a story about you). That's unethical, and we often have to explain to advertisers used to getting those dicey deals from other publications why (a) it's unethical, (b) a lie to readers and (c) not helpful because people know the editorial is bought. Yes, we sometimes write about advertisers, but no more often than we write about non-advertisers. In fact, we have rules about it–we call it the wall between church and state (or editorial and publishing). We didn't make it up, so don't give us too much credit. This is a major canon of journalism: Thou shalt not sell editorial. Oh, and if Melton's campaign manager was an advertiser, I think that would prove *my* point. We don't pander to advertisers. ;-D If you do sell any kind of story (or advertorial), it is supposed to be clearly marked as "advertising" so that you're being honest with the readers. But the JFP doesn't sell advertorial (except when we publish the menu guides, technically, which has no writing and all paid menus) because, frankly, it's usually the worst read in a publication, and that's not what our paper is about doing. I believe Boom will include "sponsored" articles about the organizations that bought sponsorships. But, otherwise, it will have no advertorial, either, as I understand it. I haven't been involved with it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-03T18:59:39-06:00

ID

130503

Comment

Ooo. Sour grapes. Sounds to me like Mr. Emmerich is a hamburger and fries short of a happy meal. Sounds like pure jealousy to me: his Sun can't stand on it's own, and doesn't deliver half the news of the JFP forums: much less, the JFP itself.

Author

Lady Havoc

Date

2008-06-04T16:39:01-06:00

ID

130542

Comment

Hi all, note this is now a much longer story. The print version should have replaced this earlier, Web version earlier, but was mistakenly put up as a separate document. That one has now replaced the original piece above. Following are three comments that were posted under the new version until I closed it in order to marry them up: no good deed goes unpunished posted by kudzuking on 06/05/08 at 02:27 PM -- [edit comment] _________ Melton: "I will be asking for resignations from that board from those who have interfered with this process." Uh, didn't der Fuhrer try that strategy right after his inauguration? And how successful was that? How many months to June 2009? posted by Rex on 06/05/08 at 02:55 PM -- [edit comment] ___________ Chandler and Emmerich. What kind of nut is Frank? posted by Walt on 06/05/08 at 03:02 PM -- [edit comment]

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-06-05T13:24:26-06:00