‘Grady Patterson: The Prequel’

ince Treasurer Grady Patterson
declined to face his challenger in tonight’s "debate," here’s the next
best thing to his being there. I really had intended this to be sort of
a "Director’s Cut," dumping in all the video I shot during the
interview. But that was too much for YouTube to handle.

So I just gave you another short clip. The one you saw before was
from near the end of the interview. This is from the beginning.

To set the scene: In this clip, I happened to turn on the camera
right in the middle of Mr. Patterson saying he wanted to tell us about
all the "new" things they were doing in the treasurer’s office. You can
follow it from there.

Note that my little camera only shoots three minutes at a time, so
if a clip stops in the middle of something interesting, I can’t help
it. I can turn it back on a few seconds later, but crucial material can
still be lost.

Note also how my technological prowess grows. I’m now putting music on
my intros. Impressive, huh? Even if it is just stuff that’s in the
public domain.

20 thoughts on “‘Grady Patterson: The Prequel’

  1. Steve

    I don’t often take the Lord’s name in vain,
    but “Je$us Chri$t on a Crooked Crutch!!!!”
    Anyone who votes for Grady Patterson is a complete moron.
    Let me ask a few simple questions:
    Would you let him balance your checkbook?
    Would you give him your paycheck every week and let him come up with a budget for you?
    Would you let him invest your parent’s retirement funds?
    If you answered YES to any of these questions, please send me your money. You’re going to lose it anyway.
    Interesting that the news side of The State ran what could only be called a puff piece about Grady in the paper today. What’s their motive?
    Also, if your secondary intent for posting these videos is to make Cindi look foolish with her inane questions, you’re doing a heck of a job.
    It was asked before, Brad – did Grady drive himself to the interview? Did he appear in good health? Did he come alone or did he have handlers at his side? Why are you hesitating to give us YOUR impression of Grady Patterson. Afraid of the repercussions if he miraculously wins?

  2. Brad Warthen

    I’m not hesitating. I’m just behind. I have yet to write my posts on either Treasurer candidate, either gubernatorial candidate, superintendent of ed candidate Karen Floyd, congressional candidate Ralph Norman, and I think there are one or two others. I hope to catch up by the end of the week. John Spratt comes in tomorrow. Stuff keeps happening faster than I can write about it.
    I can put up videos a lot more quickly than I can write the posts.
    As always with Brad Warthen’s Blog, there’s more to come.

  3. ChrisW

    I just finished reading the Scoppe (and the State newspaper’s) tirade against Eckstrom, and I seriously wonder if she is unhinged. Her lack of proportion and the absence of reasonableness are shocking.
    It is fortunate for the Eckstrom campaign that the State’s opinion page is not held in high esteem. And after this childish display, it is clear the State’s reputation as a home for minor journalist intellects is well founded.

  4. Brad Warthen

    Chris, a question: You ever spend much time sitting down and talking with Rich Eckstrom? I don’t know; maybe you and he are great buds. If so, ask your pal whether he thinks he did anything wrong in the state van incident. If he says “no,” ask him to justify it for you. Then, go to the lengths that Cindi did, which is to give him the benefit of the doubt and ask him to clarify his statement. See what he says.
    Then, if you can still vote for him, you go do that.

  5. EdGrebs

    Eckstrom is a dirtbag, and deserves to be turned out of office without thanks. That this man could use public assets for personal gain in such a calculated and brazen way speaks volumes about his lack of character and larcenous heart. He needs to be transformed into a dim memory on November 7th. The State is a home for minor intellects? As my ol’ gran’dad used to say: Write ‘er down, ‘at’s a hard sayin’ son! Ed

  6. Chris W

    Hey Brad..
    I did just that. And I asked the atty general if any laws were broken, and he said no, and you’re your own paper said just the other day that no laws were broken.
    I have 40 autos in my business. About 10 of those autos go home with the employees, and they use them at their pleasure. When the car sits in the driveway all weekend, I make out like a bandit. When they go on summer vacation, I don’t do as well. But I GAVE them the car for their use. They keep track of the mileage for the IRS…but for Petes sake…it is a car for their use. It is part of their compensation. I don’t tell them they can go here, or can’t go there…IT IS FOR THEIR USE!
    Your writer is unhinged about this issue and Mr. Eckstom in general. I suspect SHE will be proven wrong by the polls on Nov 7th…but the juvenile logic by which she avoided the debate ending comments by Theodore can not be mistaken for anything other than personal bias against Eckstrom. Theodore waited till his closing argument before launching a broadside against Eckstom, making SERIOUS charges about Eckstrom (even invoking the sensibilities of his teenage daughters) and without a shred of proof the State has allowed those charges to stand. Your Ms. Scoppe sat right there, and her sense of fair play and honor were never prodded. Unlike most people watching that debate, Scoppe has the ability to right a wrong, or investigate a charge. But no…she has made VAN GATE some high point in her career…and it is simply ridiculous.
    The voters in SC are not nearly as dumb as she supposes…so in the end all will be ok.

  7. LexWolf

    “The voters in SC are not nearly as dumb as she supposes…so in the end all will be ok.”
    And what a great thing that is! This is precisely why the State has a fairly dismal record with its preferred candidates (that’s not necessarily the candidates they wind up endorsing in the end but the ones they started out with in Spring).
    Fortunately for us all, most voters make up their own minds instead of voting according to what The State’s editors and columnists think they should want.

  8. Brad Warthen

    Ummm … Chris W, in what way would Cindi’s column “be proven wrong” on Election Day? Is someone going to provide evidence on that day to refute the facts as she presents them? That’s the only way that could happen. And if someone has such evidence, please do all of us voters a favor and step forward now. Why wait?

  9. Chris W

    I think you know very well what I mean. (Even though that posting is ample evidence I should never post before having coffee)
    Evidence? Your own paper said it was not illegal. Where is the atty gen’s opinion saying it was illegal? Where is a private lawyer’s SIGNED statement finding it is illegal and the reasons why that it is illegal?
    The burden is on you! That Scope woman made VanGate the biggest crime of the century…is it too much for you guys to decide what was illegal, and publish it?
    And don’t forget that honorable people are waiting on Scoppe’s next scoop…the Eckstrom attacks on Theodore’s daughters….the how, the why and the when. I can’t wait for tomorrow’s edition! What headlines there will be!
    Oh wait…this is the State…sorry. What was I thinking!?

  10. Brad Warthen

    A bit overwrought, aren’t we? Have that coffee, take a deep breath, and get a little perspective. Are you related to this guy or something? “Biggest crime of the century?” Come on. It was one column, she wrote what she wrote, and I am unaware of any inaccuracies in it. She is writing about other things now, things that are a bigger deal than that. To her, at least, if not to you.
    This reminds me of the way Hodges loyalists used to hyperventilate every time we criticized him — which we did a lot more, and in stronger terms, than about this guy. And he deserved it, too, just as Mr. Eckstrom does.

  11. Chris W

    I just don’t get it. You say something is illegal. The officials say it is not. You stand behind your statements as if there were no burden of proof. You offer no proof, just a claim.
    You devote half a page to her column and Theodore’s endorsement. You have half a dozen articles on it…and yet u act like it was one throw away line.
    He uses the debate, with Scope just inches away from him, to make false claims…and your paper does nothing.
    I agree, this is not the most important issue in the world. But you can set it straight with just a few words…but you refuse too. These things damage your credibility…and for what reason? What gain? Pettiness…that is all. She hates Richard, and her petty attacks are so obvious. Even the Theodore people giggle at their coverage.
    I just don’t understand. Or maybe I do.
    At least I thank u for your time.

  12. Chris W

    PS. And for the record, I have met Eckstom 4, maybe 5 times in my ife. I have never donated money to him or done business with him. I just don’t like injustice.

  13. Ed

    Speaking of canards, it seems to me that the practice of giving state government employees cars for their use just begs for the kind of abuse we saw from Mr. Eckstrom. Are there any written guidelines delineating which personal uses are appropriate and which aren’t? It seems like it would be obvious that using state vehicles to get to/from work and run around locally would be OK while a vacation trip to Minnesota would not, but it mustn’t be obvious to some, because here we are. Until we either stop giving people cars, OR we get very specific about appropriate use versus inappropriate use, we’re going to continue to be disappointed by people like Eckstrom. Ed

  14. Chris W

    Hey Ed,
    As I understand it, there are no regulations. The drivers only have to keep records, and it is a taxable benefit by the IRS. The car is PART of their compensation!
    There is no provision for payment…and one constitutional officer recently told me he had no idea where he would even take a check.
    This is part of their pay. We don’t tell them how to spend their money… to shop at Bilo, not Kroger, etc. To eat at Zesto, not Burger King. Why do we think we can tell them where they can drive when they were given the car to drive for their personal use!
    But the State has written articles and endorsements based on something that is not fact…it is not illegal. That Scoppe woman even talked about prosecution!!! She is unhinged, and has no facts to support her claim.

  15. Ed

    Chris, I agree wholeheartedly that Scoppe is a frisbee. I’ve learned to avoid reading anything she writes. You are probably correct in what you say about the provision of cars to state employees too. I really have a problem with Eckstrom driving his state car to Minnesota for vacation, but as you’ve laid it out, I oughtn’t have a problem with it, especially if the vehicle is just part of his compensation package. But I’d feel a LOT better about things if we’d just stop giving people cars or whatever other perks and pay them outright whatever we think they’re worth. It would make things a lot clearer and less muddy when it comes to ethics involved in the use of said perks. This Eckstrom thing doesn’t sit well with me. Everytime I think about it I remember the problem we had in Lex county with Solicitor Donnie Myers and his drunken driving escapades in a government vehicle. This loser actually used his sick wife as an excuse for his drunken driving. What a despicable human being. One would think that if he really cared about his sick wife he wouldn’t have put himself or her in a position wherein he thought it necessary to drive drunk “to go get her medicine.” But again, this is the kind of crap we open ourselves to when we pay with perks rather than cash outright. Ed

  16. Wayne

    Several things, Though Mr. Patterson’s comments may appear labored they are factual and accurate. As to his age , he is some decade and a half younger than Strom Thurmond was while in office. Mr. Thurmond held on thanks to excellent staff. I see no reason to believe Mr. Patterson can’t do the same. Or we can elect an opportunist.
    As to Mr. Eckstrom, it does not matter if his use of a state vehicle for personal reasons was a misdeamnor or a felony. IT WAS WRONG, WRONG WRONG!!! His apparent failure to fully grasp that is very troubling.

  17. David Byrd

    Chris, Keep up the good work and you too Cindi, keep asking the same questions over and over and over about Mr. Esckstrom and his ride out west, we get it!!!!! He had a laps of good judgement. Has anyone stopped to think why our best and brightest don’t step into the politics? It might be that the smart ones know that they are not perfect and that the will at some point or another make a wrong decesion even a bone head decesion and so many people scream “it’s illegal” and want to make them a criminal. Mr. Eckstrom made a mistake and he will lose some credibilty and some votes, lets move on.

  18. Just Maybe

    Maybe if the socialistic State Newspaper were not involved in the debates there would be more participants.

  19. Lee

    Mr. Patterson disqualified himself from the office of Treasurer when he sat idle while Governor Hodges looted the retirement system and put the state illegally in debt.

Comments are closed.