www.fredbarkes.com

Make sure to visit http://www.fredbarkes.com/ to get information on why he should be re-elected.  Also note that there is no mudslinging on Fred Barkes' site.

The Bob Freeman Drinking Game

To play this game, choose a Bob Freeman article on columbuzz.  For the purposes of this game, an article refers to the actual article plus the comment section.

• Take a drink every time you see the word "shenanigans".
• Take a drink every time Bob calls someone a monster, a bitch, or an idiot.  Take two drinks if he calls someone a monster bitch or a monster idiot.  Take three drinks if he calls someone an idiotic monster bitch.
• Take a drink every time Bob refers to his campaign slogan "You can't put out a fire by throwing money on it."  Take two drinks if Bob actually tries to put out a fire by throwing money on it.
• Take a drink every time Bob refers to himself as "we".
• Take a drink every time you see the word "civil".  Take two drinks if Bob is actually civil to someone that disagrees with him.
• Take a drink if Bob actually allows you to make a negative comment on his article.  Take two drinks if he accuses you of being his archnemesis Mercman.  Take three drinks if he accuses you of being Jeff Barkes.  Take four drinks if he tries to track your IP address.  Take five drinks if he actually blocks your IP address.
• Take a drink every time you see the phrase "at the risk of repeating myself" or "let's be clear".
• Take a drink every time Bob writes something idiotic but he thinks it's brilliant.
• Take a drink every time a Bob-o-bot submits a glowing comment.
• Take a drink every time Bob is delusional in his article.
• Take a drink every time Bob makes a math mistake in his article.
• Take a drink every time you see the word "truth".  Take two drinks if Bob claims he never lies.
• Take a drink every time Bob violates the web site usage policy.  Take two drinks if Bob claims the usage policy doesn't apply to him.
• Take a drink every time Bob mentions nepotism or cronyism.  Take two drinks if he mentions any other ism.
• Take a drink every time you see the word "proof".  Take two drinks if Bob actually claims to have proven something.
• Take a drink every time Bob makes a lame excuse on why he couldn't get 10 signatures for his petition.
• Take a drink every time Bob insults the voters in his article.
• Take a drink every time Bob makes a baseless accusation in his article.

Disclaimer:  Please drink responsibly.

Bob's Campaign Slogan

You probably all know Bob's lame campaign slogan by now: "You can't put out a fire by throwing money on it."  I totally disagree with this statement.  Of course you can.  What if you dropped a ginormous number of pennies on a fire?  Wouldn't that do the trick by smothering the fire?  If we are talking paper money, what if the money was wet?  Would that work?  And of course we all know Bob's idea of fire protection:  an all volunteer bucket brigade.

Something I've Noticed

Bob wrote in a recent article on columbuzz: "At the risk of repeating myself, let's try to be clear."

Ignoring the fact that he repeats himself ad nauseum, I've noticed that he says let's and we a lot in his emails and rantings on his website.  I'm confused.  Does he have a running mate?  Is he talking about the other two stooges/moderators, Herman and Jeremy?  His wife?  The voices in his head?  His dog?  If he's talking about the other stooges, are they going to join him in the trustee's office if he wins?  If so, sounds like cronyism.  Will they run the trustee office like they do their website?

Did You Notice?

In my last post, I said "From what I've read on columbuzz, I believe Bob will attempt to raid the fire protection fund in order to free up more money for the poor relief fund.  I guess he could always ask Jimmy John's sandwich delivery drivers to provide fire protection (those who have heard the Jimmy John's fire radio commercial will get this joke)."

Did you notice that Bob did not dispute my statement in any of his comments he submitted for my last post?  Sure, he ranted and raved about his usual delusions, but nothing about this.  Interesting.

Bob is Still a Funny Guy

I just read Bob's new "article" on columbuzz and I'm totally shocked, absolutely no name calling at all.  He must be under the weather today.  But I still must respond to some of his campaign promises:

"With all the turmoil that’s been stirring here, it’s time to talk about what I will do if I win the election, and why you should vote for me."
Yeah, turmoil that YOU have been stirring!

"Any employee of mine will at all times be polite and professional or they will be looking for a job elsewhere."
As polite and professional as you are on your website?  Please.  Quite frankly, if you became MY boss, I would run from the building screaming.

"SBOA audits - This is the report card for the office. It’s every two years. If we perform our duties properly, they should be easy to pass. My goal will be to pass each one without issues."
Bob, you have difficulty with simple math.  I have no idea how you're going to pass an audit without issues.

"I will have one of the most transparent offices around."
You don't even make your website transparent but you will make your office transparent?  I doubt it.

"Poor relief and financial assistance - I plan to explore as many new ideas for ways to help people as possible."
From what I've read on columbuzz, I believe Bob will attempt to raid the fire protection fund in order to free up more money for the poor relief fund.  I guess he could always ask Jimmy John's sandwich delivery drivers to provide fire protection (those who have heard the Jimmy John's fire radio commercial will get this joke).

Quiet, Too Quiet

Bob sure is quiet over at columbuzz, too quiet.  I wonder what's going on.

Deep Fried Onions

I hope Bob Freeman likes the taste of the onions he keeps getting from The Republic.

Bob Freeman's Rant on Trustee Raises

Bob keeps ranting about Fred and Sandy Barkes' raises since 2003, so I decided to do a little investigating into the matter (since I know Bob will not).  Bob wrote on columbuzz "...very few are saying anything about the ridiculous raises the Columbus Township Trustee has been giving himself and his wife."  Obviously Bob doesn't understand the trustee budget process.  Here's the actual process from the trustee himself:

• The Trustee suggests a budget and meets with the Township Board (3 elected every 4 years) 1-3 times (more if needed) to agree on a budget.

• That budget then goes to the County Council for County approval.

• Then there are 2 public meetings before it gets final approval by the Township Board.

• It then goes back to the County and on to the Dept. of Local Gov. Finance.

• After the DLGF determines the monies they feel we will receive, we will receive the final approved budget.

• The Trustee then executes the final budget.

So the trustee can't just give himself and his wife raises.  There are checks and balances in the system.

Plus, Bob keeps repeating the same numbers over and over:  Fred Barkes' salary has increased 40% since 2003 and his wife Sandy's 52%.  On the surface, these percentages sound high, but when you analyze the numbers, which I'm about to do, you will see a much different story.  By the way, Bob claimed these percentages averaged out to 6% and 7% per year but the actual averages are 5% and 6%.  I'm sure it was just a math error, not a purposeful exaggeration.  Anyway, here is a table of Fred Barkes' raises by year:

YEAR  SALARY   CHANGE  NOTES

2003  $30,925

2004  $32,500  +5.1%   increased hours to full time

2005  $36,500  +12.3%  raise + salary adjustment

2006  $37,700  +3.3%   raise

2007  $40,000  +6.1%   raise

2008  $42,000  +5%     raise

2009  $42,000  0%      no raise

2010  $43,260  +3%     raise

The salary adjustment in 2004 was because of increased hours.  The salary adjustment in 2005 was because it was determined that the trustee was underpaid.  The dollar amount of the salary increase was $4000, $1000 raise and $3000 adjustment.  The method used to determine that the trustee was underpaid was that the County Auditor, County Treasurer, County Assessor, and Township Assessor salaries were compared (all are scheduled to work 40 hours) to calculate an hourly rate and then the rate was multiplied by 35 hours to determine the trustee's salary.  Now, to be fair, salary adjustments such as increased hours, being underpaid, and promotions should be factored out when determining and comparing average raises.  If I factor out the 2004 adjustment ($1575) and the 2005 adjustment ($3000), the total percent increase since 2003 is 22%, an average of 2.8% per year.

Now let's look at Sandy Barkes:

YEAR  SALARY   CHANGE  NOTES

2003  $27,210

2004  $28,200  +3.6%   raise

2005  $29,200  +3.5%   raise

2006  $32,000  +9.6%   raise + promotion

2007  $39,000  +21.9%  raise + promotion

2008  $40,000  +2.6%   raise

2009  $40,000  0%      no raise

2010  $41,200  +3%     raise

The salary adjustments in 2006 and 2007 were because of promotions.  The dollar amount of the 2006 salary increase was $2800, $900 raise and $1900 promotion.  For 2007, it was $7000, $2750 raise and $4250 promotion.  Again, if we factor these out, the total percent increase since 2003 is 24%, an average of 3.1% per year.

So 22% and 24% sound a lot better than 40% and 52%, don't you think?  And why didn't the great investigator Bob Freeman do an analysis on the numbers to get to the truth?  Good question.

Bob Freeman Worst Politician in History?

Since Bob likes to dig up old articles from The Republic, I thought I would check the archives for anything about him.  What I found, I believe, will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bob is the worst politician in history.  From what I could tell from the archives, I believe Bob has lost every single election he's ever entered.  Here's the list I've come up with:

2003 Columbus City Council District 2
2004 County Council At Large
2006 Columbus City Council District 3
2008 County Council At Large

He's 0-4, soon to be 0-5.  Quite the impressive record of futility.  He reminds me of the 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers or the 2008 Detroit Lions.

And how does Bob explain his losses?  Here's an excerpt from a Jan. 10, 2006 article in The Republic:  When Bob Freeman ran for Columbus City Council as an independent in 2003, he blamed his loss on his lack of party.  "I wanted to show you didn't have to be a Democrat or a Republican to win," he said on Monday.  "I was wrong."  When he ran as a Democrat a year later for Bartholomew County Council, he blamed a general sentiment in favor of Republicans.  Today, he has a feeling the "pendulum has swung the other direction," and the time is ripe for Freeman, still a Democrat, to rise.  Notice that he blames everything but himself, although I'm shocked that he admitted he was wrong about something.

Now did Bob learn anything from his defeats to entice more voters to vote for him?
After the 2004 defeat, Bob wrote in a letter to The Republic: "The people who are content with what we have, once again, came out on top. So, we get to have a few more years the same ol' stuff, where nobody plans ahead or ruffles any feathers."  Sounds to me like he's insulting the voters.  That's a sure fire way to get more votes in the next election.

In a 2005 letter to the editor, Bob wrote:  "George W. Bush is a dangerous war criminal and should be treated as such."  Well, Bob just lost a lot of Republican voters and probably some Independents too.

Then, in a bitter letter to the editor after his defeat in 2008, Bob wrote:  "Apparently, a majority of the people aren’t ready for the same sort of changes locally that they are nationally. A majority of the voters are content with the County Council that we have currently.  Apparently, it’s OK to not plan ahead, even when they know months ahead of time that revenue will be cut. Apparently, it’s fine to hold off important votes until after an election so it doesn’t interfere with an incumbent’s chance of re-election.  Apparently, it’s OK to deny raises next year for employees instead of cutting other non-essentials. Apparently, it’s fine to have a County Council that follows the whims and demands of a party leader. Apparently, the voters are content with this.  Apparently, people think we can survive four more years of this."  Sounds to me like he's insulting the voters yet again.

And then on columbuzz not too long ago, Bob wrote: "That explains some of the troubles I have getting people to see the truth. Maybe it isn't so much the message being sent as it is a lack of proper equipment necessary to receive that message. That could very well explain some voting patterns too."  Uh, Bob, calling the voters a bunch of idiots is not a good political strategy.

So is Bob the worst politician in history?  I'll let you be the judge.  But I've come up with one other explanation for his futility.  Maybe Bob doesn't really care if he wins or loses.  I've noticed that Bob seems to have a huge ego, one that needs to be fed constantly.  So when Bob rants and raves on his little website, you see all the Bob-o-bots comment on his articles to feed his ginormous ego.  They hang on his every word, tell him he walks on water, and attach their lips to Bob's backside.  He may lose elections, but at least he'll still have his minions.

Thanks

I would like to thank everyone for visiting my blog since its inception.  The web traffic here has really skyrocketed over the past week!  Keep sharing the web address with your family and friends!

Bob Just Doesn't Get It

Latest Bob rant:
"I can't even get the people that have been accused of these things to do any more than deny them.
No proof they aren't true; no reasons to justify what has been said and PROVEN; no response except to call me a liar. They call me a liar even when I didn't write or post the article!  More importantly, there is nobody that wants to come to the defense of those people these stories and facts are about.  Why would anyone defend this crap? They wouldn't. They know this stuff is true. They see the proof we have provided."

I keep trying to tell Bob that he's the one with the outrageous accusations, so he has the burden of proof.  And as I pointed out before, his so called proof is mostly "I heard this" and "I heard that" and "I got an anonymous email and they said this".  And it's too funny he's saying he didn't write the "Bannergate" article, Herman did.  Maybe he didn't, but he is a moderator, so he could have stopped it.  I'm surprised that Herman could even write an article with his lips attached to Bob's backside 24/7.

Don't you just love it when someone makes Bob/Herman look stupid like in the "Bannergate" article, and Bob responds by ignoring the topic and then goes on a rant about something else.  Sounds like a Usage Policy violation, not staying on topic!

Bob; Political Genius?

I can't take credit for this one.  This was written by someone I know.  Enjoy.

“I am not a Bible thumper, but there are three verses (paraphrased here) that I have tried to live my life by: 1) He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone; 2) Do not point out the splinter in someone else’s eye when you have a log in your own; and 3) Judge not, lest you be judged.  Bob apparently has not read or has ignored these poignant recommendations.  I have found over the years that the people who yell the loudest about their opponent’s perceived failings or about their own self righteousness usually have the biggest logs in their eyes.

I do not know Bob, but the posts on his blog fit the “log” profile to a tee.  I do not know Bob, but I have known Fred and Sandy Barkes for years and they are the most caring, principled people I know.  They would never stoop to the sewer which is Bob’s political strategy because they have a sense of decency and humanity.  If a member of Bob’s family was the devil himself, the Barkes’ would not try to deflect from the issues in the race and slime Bob’s family.  I saw what Bob did regarding The Barkes’ son’s addiction problems and that is despicable.

I went to a funeral this week of a 25 year old boy who accidentally took his own life with drugs.  He was a good, caring boy who loved everyone—but he had an addiction problem.  His mother did everything she could to get him help.  The doctors and psychiatrists did everything they could to try to help him, but it didn’t work.  His Mom is a judge in Marion County.  Did the papers pick this up and call Mom a scum or an incompetent judge because she could not help her son?  Did any other judge, lawyer, or litigant criticize her or slime her because she could not make her son overcome his addiction.  No, because they are not gutter dwellers and have the common intelligence to know that as parents we do the best we can and what our kids do, or their struggles, are not necessarily a reflection on us, our talents, our work, etc.

I see that Bob is a Democrat.  So am I.  I am ashamed of Bob’s anti-Democratic, Karl Rovian approach to politics.  I guess that Bob has not done any research of the recent polling in this country that shows that the American people are so tired of this name-calling and factual distortion.  They want politicians to be cordial and civil and engage in rational, intelligent political discourse—not relish in the angst of parents of children who struggle.

So Bob is a Democrat.  But what I have seen of Bob’s “strategy” is to parrot Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh who are the antithesis of a Democrat.  Since it appears that Bob sucks from the Beck/Limbaugh teat, he cannot be a true Democrat.

Bob—if there are truly issues that permeate the trustee race, then let’s hear about them without the invective.  If not, then please shut up"

Bob's Compassion on Display

Bob claims to have compassion for drug users, but check out his quote from a comment on columbuzz:

"And people talk about the report of the dope being in the trustee's house as being so long ago.
I wonder if he has even gone to court yet. Or served his sentence. Or stopped making or using meth.
Eighteen months isn't a very long time for some things. It's a very long time if you're hoping people will forget."

So glad that Bob has such compassion for people with addiction issues.

Statement from Fred Barkes on Bob's Attacks

I would like to make a few statements about the people Bob Freeman has attacked during the past several months. He has found that there are very few issues with which to win so he attacks anything and anyone he can, especially my family and my employees.

In reference to my wife Sandy: Anyone that really knows her finds her to be a very kind and caring person.  She loves God and her family very much and it is tearing her apart to see any of us attacked in the manner that my opponent has. She has a heart condition and I fear for her health and well being.

Roxanne, a trusted employee, was attacked, called names and told she was incompetent. She confronted him at which time he apologized and has backed off most of his attacks.

Briana, also a trusted employee, was attacked in similar fashion and called a whore. She ran in the same party but that did not stop him.

Rodney (Fire Chief) has repeatedly been called many names, time and time again over the past year just because he works for me and a couple of firefighters don’t like him. My opponent insists that the volunteer membership should choose the Fire Chief but what he refuses to understand is that they do exercise that right. Prior to 2009 he was elected chief three times. At that time, the chief’s position was allowed to be chosen by the volunteers, giving me as trustee, a list of up to three candidates. The list given me contained only one name, Rodney. The same process will have to be followed again in the departments yearly election on December 5^th.

In the meeting held on September 13, 2010 Rodney exploded when a comment was made by my opponent.  This was after all the accusations that have been made and the reference to his wife as a whore. My opponent again attacked Rodney for the explosion. The Trustee Advisory Board and myself, knowing most of the attacks my opponent made on Rodney, are behind him 100%. He has the right to defend himself and his wife, even though he should have chosen a different course of action.  My opponent's unprofessionalism does not excuse Rodney's.  I do believe most people would understand the position Rodney was in.

Bob's Faulty Logic

In a comment on his latest attack on Fred Barkes, Bob says:
"I find it ironic that drug use is one factor that can get you denied help from the Trustee...  Do as we say and not as we do?  They won't help others with drug problems but they will allow their son with the problem to live in their home."

I'm sorry Bob, but his makes no sense.  If Fred Barkes' son had received assistance from the trustee while using drugs, then you would have an argument.  And Bob ignores the fact that there's a very good reason why drug users are denied help.  Most taxpayers don’t like the idea of supporting someone’s drug habit by paying their rent so they can use money that would normally go towards rent to be used to buy drugs.  Are you really helping them or just enabling their addiction?  It is unfortunate that it has to be this way, but the trustee must make difficult decisions at times.

Now let's suppose that the trustee changes this policy and allows drug users to receive assistance.  Bob would be the first to write an article titled "Trustee Allows Drug Users to Use Taxpayer Money to Buy Drugs".  No matter what he does, the trustee can't please everyone.  If he allows drug users to receive assistance, then the taxpayers are upset for using tax money to buy drugs.  If he does not allow them to receive assistance, then the drug users are upset.  I think Bob is showing his naivete on this issue.

Bob on Mudslinging

I said on my blog:
MAYBE Bob Freeman is a liar and a mud slinger.

Bob says in a comment on my blog:
Definitely not.

Bob says in a comment on columbuzz:
You know, I am being called a mudslinger and of running a smear campaign. I agree.

So Bob, which is it, are you a mudslinger or not?


Bob also says:  It would be mud slinging if it were false or exaggerations.  It isn't.

Obviously, Bob doesn't understand the definition of a mudslinger:
mudslinger:  one that uses offensive epithets and invective especially against a political opponent
epithet:  a disparaging or abusive word or phrase
invective:  of, relating to, or characterized by insult or abuse

Sorry Bob, you're a mudslinger!

Bob is Now Attacking One of Fred Barkes' Sons

How can Bob stoop so low.  It's just unbelievable that Bob is now attacking Fred Barkes' son for a drug possession arrest from March of 2009.  How exactly is this relevant to the trustee campaign?  And Bob claims he's not a mudslinger.  In my opinion, he is getting desperate since he knows he will most likely lose the election.  I just can't imagine someone like him as the trustee.  It would be a disaster for Columbus Township.

Again, if you are as appalled by this as I am, contact the advertisers on Columbuzz and voice your displeasure.  Let the Bartholomew County Chair of the Indiana Democratic Party Gary James Bell know that Bob's tactics are unacceptable.  You can contact him at (812) 342-6550 or rbgjbell@sbcglobal.net.

Statement from Fred Barkes:
My family, like so many families, has been affected by the very real problem of drugs in America. Our son has struggled with addiction.  We love him and pray for his well-being daily.

The drugs were found in a duffle bag he carried with him. Unlike the portrayal my opponent sets forth, the various materials to produce drugs found on my property were scattered in different locations.  I nor my wife knew these items were on the property. To be honest, we would not recognize they could be used to produce drugs if we saw them.  We thank the people of Columbus for their understanding in this matter.

Fred Barkes on Bob's SBOA Audit Claims

"The State Board of Accounts audited the office this year for 2008 & 2009. Every penny, in every FUND (5) was accounted for. The discrepancy was caused by missed transferees (every transfer of money required 4 postings and some were missed). The SBA could not identify them and neither could we. If wrongdoing was identified, I would have been arrested, on the spot."

"Bob accused me of stealing $310,000. Had that been the case, I would have been arrested on the spot by the State Police and the State Board of Accounts."

An Open Letter From The Real Jeff Barkes

My name IS Jeff Barkes and I approve this message.

 

First, I would like to personally thank the administrator of this blog.  The administrator possesses the clarity of thought and perception about this election which, after months of name calling and mud-slinging against my parents, I no longer possess.  Also, as to my alleged authorship of this blog, anyone who knows me can attest, I am neither as smart nor witty as this administrator.  Mr. Freeman's accusations that I am the author only show his paranoia and delusions about the world around him. It also shows his penchant for baseless allegations.

 

I can not answer every allegation, exaggeration, and lie he has posted about my parents.  There are simply too many.  Allow me to answer the latest.  Mom did attend the calling of a person for whom assistance was given.  However, Mr. Freeman does not give the full story, only the part that suits his purposes.  There are two sisters who lost a father.  One sister contacted the office for assistance.  Mom personally worked with her to make the arrangements for the funeral.  During that process Mom came to know the sister and developed a genuine fondness for her.  Mom then attended the calling to pay her respects.  The second sister is the one complaining to Mr. Freeman's campaign.

 

Upon hearing this complaint, Mom wrote a letter to the sisters expressing her concern and regret that she may have offended them.  There is a hole in Mr. Freeman's insinuation that the Trustee's office will do this to you if you dare ask for assistance.  How did Mom know to write a letter to those sisters?  She knew because that is the only calling of the kind she has attended.  It also shows Mom's motive.  If it was to lord the assistance over them, she would have attended others.  She attended simply to express sympathy for their loss.

 

After receiving Mom's letter, the sister who complained to Mr. Freeman's campaign called Mom at her office and cursed her repeatedly.  The accusation that Mom told the lady she would get hers when she meets her maker simply doesn't compute with someone who wrote a letter apologizing if she caused any anguish.  I file this under the lie category of the Freeman campaign's spin efforts.

 

Here is something you won't read on Columbuzz.  The sister Mom went to see at the calling visited Mom after hearing the Freeman campaign's allegations.  She explained that the complaint did not come from her and thanked Mom for all she did.  So Mr. Freeman, tell the entire story, not just one side. 

 

Mr. Freeman is an internet "Tough Guy".  He sits behind his computer and throws out lies, allegations and exaggerations hoping something will stick.  He would not come to my face and say the things he says from the safety of the internet.  That is not a challenge (as he might spin it) it is just a statement I believe to be true.

 

I offer Mr. Freeman the following challenges:

 

1)  Post a link to this blog on your site.  That way readers who want to see both sides may.  Civics 101 could tell you a democracy is supposed to be an exchange of ideas.  So far your actions have shown you do not believe in these principles.

 

2)  Print this letter on your site in its entirety along with a link.  If you are capable of being the civil servant you claim to be you will not run from dissenting voices.  Along those lines, stop censoring dissention on your site.

 

3)  If you choose to do neither, stop masqueraiding your site as media.  Because it is not.  Pull your sponsorships during the duration of the campaign.  Place a "Paid for by Bob Freeman for Trustee" disclaimer on your site like the law requires.

 

4)  Try to refrain from calling the Trustee or his employees names.  Do not work around that by saying "so and so acted like a (insert derogatory name here)".  You can simply say you do not agree with their actions.  Proper public discourse demands it.  I think most people in Columbus Township demand that of their Trustee too.

 

To any reading this, supporter of Fred Barkes or not, tell your friends of this site.  Help people make informed decisions.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jeff Barkes