Filed under: Bob Mollette,ELECTION,Uncategorized — tkm September 28, 2005 @ 14:0 pm





(posted by tkm)


Filed under: DEFINITIONS,Uncategorized — tkm September 23, 2005 @ 11:0 am

I found this WORD while surfing the internet and thought how appropriate for describing Portsmouth.

Kleptocracy (sometimes Cleptocracy) (root: Klepto+cracy = rule by thieves)

Is a pejorative, informal term for a government so corrupt that no pretense of honesty remains. In a kleptocracy the mechanisms of government are almost entirely devoted to taxing the public at large in order to amass substantial personal fortunes for the rulers and their cronies (collectively, kleptocrats), or to keep said rulers in power. Kleptocrats typically use and/or anonymous banking to protect and conceal their illegal gains.

Kleptocratic states consistently tend to be politically and socially unstable, while being stably kleptocratic. That is, the political governance of such states typically consists of one set of thieves displacing their predecessors by subversive or violent means.

The economies of kleptocracies tend to perform badly, as the systematic corruption engendered by kleptocratic governance imposes a massive tax on enterprises. Kleptocrats realize that they have more to gain from taking a large share of a stable or shrinking pie than from a shrinking share of an increasing pie.

The creation of a kleptocracy typically results in many years of general hardship and suffering for the vast majority of citizens as civil society and the rule of law disintegrates. In addition, kleptocrats routinely ignore economic and social problems in their quest to amass ever more wealth. As kleptocrats do not attempt to build or maintain functioning states, or even maintain large security forces for fear of coups d’état, kleptocracies are generally incompetent in the face of social crises, and often collapse into prolonged civil war and anarchy.

Some observers use the term ‘kleptocracy’ to disparage democratic political processes, which permit corporations to influence political policy. A more accurate term for this influence over a state is plutocracy.

(posted by tkm)


Filed under: MRDD,Uncategorized — tkm September 19, 2005 @ 11:0 am

Update on story by Bob Forrey 10-31-2005
CLICK: Out-of-Date Rape


(The photo above, in which a molested child is viewed as if through a mother’s tears…..)


this story appeared first on the Sentinel–9/14/2005

Last week, while at the Scioto County Court House, I saw Ms. Yates standing outside Judge Kirsch’s Court Room. Ms Yates is a mother of a 5-year-old mentally retarded daughter who was raped by Zane Douglas Loper, a staff member of MRDD and later a city policeman. Though Loper was convicted and is currently serving an eighteen-year prison term for his crime, justice is still not being done, for having been victimized by a member of the staff of the MRDD, the girl is now being victimized by the Portsmouth lawyer who represents her in the case that her mother filed against the MRDD and its director John Oakley.

Because of the politics and legal shenanigans that go on in Portsmouth, Ms. Yates had originally thought it would be a mistake to have a Portsmouth lawyer, which is why she hired one in Chillicothe. But the Chillicothe lawyer hired a co-council in Portsmouth, Stanley C. Bender, and the worst Ms. Yates had feared is coming to pass.

This past week she learned that Bender, her own attorney, is trying to appoint a guardian ad litem to represent all her child’s legal issues. This guardian is an ex-partner in Bender’s firm whom he has chosen without her consent. This removes Ms. Yates from making any legal decisions for her child who she has been fighting for the past 9 years. Bender can then settle the case without Ms. Yates’ permission and receive his cut, 1/3 of all monies granted to the child and other legal fees he may deem necessary. Bender claims the mother is too emotionally distraught and is incapable of knowing what is best for the child. The mother is deeply dedicated to the welfare of her daughter, but she is not distraught or irrational. On the contrary, Ms Yates is deeply hurt and saddened that she was betrayed by her attorney just for monies he could receive. Ms. Yates strikes me as level-headed and correct in her assessment of this situation: Bender is trying to negotiate a deal that Ms. Yates disagrees with, so he is trying to get her out of the way. Bender wants her to disregard her instincts as a mother, her instincts to love and to protect her child for the rest of her child’s life.

The Portsmouth establishment wants to put the MRDD scandal behind it, just as it wants to put the Marting rip-off behind it. If it weren’t for The Sentinel and John Welton, the public would have remained in the dark about the rape of the taxpayers in the Marting deal and of the rape of a five-year-old girl at the MRDD.

Bender wants this mother to put this behind her, but there is something much more important to this mother than money. Does this make her over-protective? One public agency, the MRDD, neglected to protect her daughter from a predatory male pervert. No male member of the Portsmouth legal establishment, Stanley Bender, is going to dictate to her what is best for her daughter. What is best for her daughter is her, her mother. This mother knows what’s best for her daughter. Her daughter was sexually raped at one public agency. Her mother is determined that she is not going to be raped legally in another.

Teresa Mollette