Exactly, Randy.

Sharon has a website and does extensive e-mail which costs the county nothing (I hope).

She's just a bit ahead of the average commissioner in constituent contact. There are worse things. -- s.

Where do you think the paper received its info from for this article??? my guess would be Ragsdale trying to deflect the heat from his office and his problems...

Ragsdale finance office would have complete records of commission spending...

Not sure there was great digging on the part of a reporter to come up with this story... probably just a friendly nudge from someone on the mayors staff pointing them in the right direction...

that, if Commissioner Cawood was informed of the total stationery budget, she should not have used more than her "share" (total budget divided by # of commissioners). Anything over and above that should have been paid out of her own pocket, in my opinion, out of fairness to the other commissioners. I don't necessarily see her purchases as unethical, rather I see it as being inconsiderate of her colleagues.

Fan of the Mayor Ragsdale... I had very high hopes when he came into office... Young, progressive new ideas to move our community forward... it sure did sound good...

My problems with Ragsdale are as follows:

Power Grabs... he has tried to hard to combine too many different organization so he could centralize his power base... power in to few hands has never been good for anyone...

Grand Standing... showing up at every dog and pony show with his smiling face front in center... my thought on good government is a government you do not ever hear from...

Raising taxes and increase spending... pushing thru a wheel tax... first for new library and when that flopped a new west Knox county high school... which is in the wrong place any no one wants to attend... you know what??? We probably did not need the wheel tax to build the school… we could have floated a county bond issue to build and paid for it out of the current tax base...

Spending / Pcard scandal... it is one thing if I want to go to Morton's and spend $600 of my money... but it is another thing if the mayor and his senior staff are spending my money on high price dinners and liquor... tax dollars are my money... I am but sorry you do not have to wine and dine these corporations and elected officials to accomplish want needs to be done... if wining and dining is what it takes then I don't want them as elected officials nor do I want their businesses located here...

These are just a few of my problems with the mayor... we could go on and on...

We hammer these politicians because of a little mail or tail.

But we let the ones who make stupid decisions on our behalf get away with it.

has bias. Anybody (except me) surprised? Sandra will beat Ragsdale with a bat. She will beat Scott Moore with a bat. She will beat any current incumbent with a bat, except Sharon Cawood.

The two persons that she doesn't spew her verbal vomit on is Mary Lou Horner and Sharon Cawood. She will excuse anything that the two do.

Just like when she defended Mary Lou against her employers article that briefly mentioned MLH in the Jordan Lobster article and now she excuses the theft of $3500.00 as internet rental for Sharon.

She rails against a $200 dollar lunch (which I am against) but she excuses more than $3500.00 in theft from the taxpayers of stationary. Postage will be double that, and isn't recorded.

Sharon is paid $42,000.00 a year (until 8/17/07) another $20,000.00 a year as Commissioner. Her nepotism husband is making $25,000.00 plus off the taxpayers and then they have to steal another $4,200.00.

The DA needs to launch an investigation into the waste fraud and abuse by the Cawoods.

Calling it "stealing" and "theft" seems a little harsh there, Brian. Even the paper and her critics said it is legal. If you have some other evidence of a theft, you ought to report it to the DA yourself.

Anyway, it looks like the DA is going to have bigger fish to fry and too many irons in the fire before too long.

for your advice, Randy. I will do that.

How about that Sandra Clark bias in regards to Mary Lou and Sharon?

looks like you got caught in a copy machine. Maybe that's why you had to order so much paper. You were running duplicates.

Sharon's commission colleagues ratted her out.

You're on the money, Beanster.

Larry Van Guilder

but now Van Guilder comes in. Whoever ratted her out, is a good citizen in exposing waste, fraud and abuse by any elected official.

By your comments it appears that you all were covering up for her. When did the E.W. Scripps weakly, I mean weekly staff know and when did you know it?

If there is a rat in this story it is the Cawood's. Bilking nearly $92,000.00 a year out of the taxpayers. $42,000.00 Clerk's office, $20,000.00 Commission, $25,000.00 Mark's salary and $4,200.00 in paper and envelopes.

BTW, didn't Van Guilder go to the Clerk's office to interview Cawood while she was supposed to be performing Clerk work? But you all talked Commission talk. That is what Larry Van reported in the E.W. Scripps weakly, I mean weekly.

Good grief, Brian. Get a life. -- s.

response, there is No denial, No Confirmation. Thanks Clark. You are Guilty as Charged. Prove you are innocent, if you can. It is your standard afterall.

Paging Mr. Hartmann.

Prove you are innocent

Yep, that's the standard in the new (and soon to be obsolete) GOP America.

in GOP land we believe in innocent until proven guilty. However, right here in River City, I mean KnoxViews Sandra Clark stated and believes this.

"Ethics Committee
Submitted by Sandra Clark on Wed, 2007/08/15 - 4:51pm.
The Ethics Committee should have its own attorney.

Yesterday's referral to the D.A. was appropriate, IMHO. -- s."

It is the Sandra Clark's standard. But only for everybody except Sharon Cawood.

You make wild unsubstantiated charges accusing folks of stealing sums of money, the majority of which is obviously salary. Then you state that since you are being ignored, the object of your venom must be guilty as charged and then you come back with this absurdity "in GOP land we believe in innocent until proven guilty."

So are you batshit crazy or just a liar?

If nothing else you are plain and simply boring to behold.

How about going off somewhere and work up some new material? And wipe that foam from around your mouth before you go anywhere.

Since I am fairly new at political blogging, and don't understand all of the histories here, I would like to say something. I don't know you, Mr. Hornback, but the way you phrase things automatically discounts them. It is obvious you have a very large axe to grind against the folks at the Shopper, and something against most of the people who blog here. So why do you come here and spout those types of things? I am not a defender of the Shopper, and I do not always agree with the way they print things, but I do try to be respectful. Your tactics appear to throw respect out the window.
I have never read your blog, and do not intend to. If I don't like what you say when someone else is paying for the blog space, I don't think I would like what you have to say when you pay for the space.

I was here when KnoxViews first started and left. Then Betty Bean and Chadwick B. Tindell (aka CBT) kept bringing my name up behind such anonymous posters like a Insider something. So, I decided to come back because I didn't like being accused of being someone I am not. I have received numerous compliments for my recent return and for the work that I am doing here.

As for the Shopper, they do not print the whole truth that is fit to print. They only print what they like, when they like it and it doesn't have to be fact, it many times is fiction. I can waste alot of your time citing examples, volumes of examples but I won't.

As for visiting my blog, if you don't want to that is fine.

In response to White's Creek, I quoted your friend and mine Sandra Clark. It is her words not mine. If she doesn't like what she posted, she should apologize and admit she got it wrong again. She does it often, it would not surprise anyone here or in the real world that she said something that she regrets.