Archive for April, 2007
Friday Photos — More of My Kids
April 27th, 2007 | 3 Comments | Posted in » Pictures
I guess I’ll make it two weeks in a row to post some Friday photos. Here’s a few new ones of my kids.
One Bummed Chiefs Fan…
April 25th, 2007 | 15 Comments | Posted in » In the News..., KC Chiefs
I rarely post on sports here, but I can’t help but do so right now. I’m not even remotely happy with my favorite football team.
So far this offseason, it’s been made known that they’re going to trade Trent Green (as much as I hate to admit it, that’s understandable). Then, Will Shields retired (yeah, outside of the organization’s control, I know).
But today’s news? Well… it’s unacceptable… irritating… maddening… depressing… all at once. They’ve ditched Dante Hall?!? And to the RAMS?!?
You’ve gotta be kidding me. Trading the X-factor… the human joystick… one of the biggest fan favorites on the team?!?
Herm… HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND?!?
Are You Prepared?
April 25th, 2007 | Comments Off | Posted in » In the News..., Just For Fun...
Here’s a good “are you prepared” question for you… what will you do in the event of an alien invasion?
Oh come one… you don’t know already?
Well, don’t despair… these guys have it all figured out.
Watch Out Superman…
April 24th, 2007 | Comments Off | Posted in » In the News...
Watch out Superman… scientists have discovered Kryptonite.
Friday Photos — On the Job
April 20th, 2007 | Comments Off | Posted in » Pictures
It’s been a while since I’ve posted a Friday photo, so thought I’d get back in the routine and post a couple I took while on the job.
The first is something I never like to see (a shattered pole, taken after a severe storm last year). I thought it made an interesting shot, though.
This is a shot from last winter, taken inside a substation.
Missouri Mess, Part 5: The Q&A
April 17th, 2007 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues, In the News...
As was hinted at in my previous post (perhaps I should have stated it outright), I had heard a Q&A on the MBC’s April 10th Executive Board meeting was forthcoming, and hoped it would answer some questions in regard to the dismissal of David Clippard. At least to some extent, it has. Check it out here.
I have to ask… why in the world wasn’t this made available at the same time as the report? I know people were frustrated with the lack of information coming from the Executive Board on this (I was definitely part of that group), but shouldn’t those responsible for releasing the report have seen that putting it out there by itself would result in yet more frustration? Since this FAQ was apparently in the works, shouldn’t they have either simply held off another day in order to publish both simultaneously, or at least let everyone know it was coming? I’m still very frustrated with how this entire situation has been handled.
Anyway… thoughts on the Q&A.
One of the big questions most people (again, including me) have had was why David was not allowed to address the Board. The Q&A answers that he was aware of the report’s contents prior to the meeting, that he was approached to resign prior to the meeting, and that our MBC President believed that excluding him was important to allow for candid deliberation. The Q&A also states that after the decision was made to dismiss David, that several of the Board went to David’s office to discuss the matter with him and inform him of the decision. During that discussion, David asked why he was excluded from the meeting, and he was given reasons (presumably, those stated in the Q&A). They did not offer him the opportunity to address the Board at this point, nor did he ask to address them… somewhat understandable given that the decision to dismiss was already a done deal.
While the reasoning is now clear, I still believe that David should have been given the opportunity to address the entire Board at some point during this process. Maybe not during deliberations, but definitely during the report presentation, and probably also once the decision to dismiss him had been made.
My biggest question after reading the Q&A? Since I’m left with the impression that the lawsuit was a major issue behind the firing (I sensed this from the sanitized report, as well), I have to ask… why wasn’t this addressed by the Board way back in 2004? Or was it, and I simply missed it? What was David’s explanation for his handling of the situation? Did he misunderstand how much authority he had in handling the situation? Was he confused in what he was communicating to the Board about the suit? Is it possible he simply misunderstood the confidentiality issues? Where were the attorneys in all of this to ensure this was handled properly?
It certainly seems to me that there were mistakes made by many in this entire process. It’s entirely possible that David deserved dismissal. But I simply can’t see how the Executive Board could be without fault in this as well.
Of course, I’m just speaking as an interested observer. Hopefully everyone will learn from this and do better in the future.
The future of our convention may hinge upon it.
Missouri Mess, Part 4: The Report
April 16th, 2007 | 1 Comment | Posted in » Baptist Issues, In the News...
Okay. So the sanitized version of the investigative committee’s “report” is available. After reading it, I find myself more confused than ever, and more frustrated with this situation than ever, specifically in regard to the dismissal of David Clippard (if you’ll recall, the report was to address a much broader topic than just David).
Check it out for yourself here, and tell me that I’m just nuts and that this whole situation makes perfect sense to you now. Please. I’d rather know I’m crazy than be left wondering whether I’ve lost my mind and just thought I saw half a page devoted to whether David Clippard really put Don Hinkle in a headlock or not. Seriously, that’s in there… at least I think so, assuming I haven’t actually gone mad.
Anyway, best I can tell, from the heavily-edited, devoid-of-details page that relates specifically to David’s dismissal, the main reasons for his dismissal appear to be:
- poor morale amongst MBC staff, attributable to David
- harm to Missouri Baptists’ reputation due to David’s comments and conduct
- that David has been less than forthright with information
- that David has poorly managed the sexual harassment lawsuit brought upon him and the MBC by Carol Kaylor
- that David exhibited a divisive spirit toward the committee
These allegations are interesting, I suppose, but with so few supporting details, we’re still left trying to connect the dots to figure out just why David was fired. You’d think that this group, being made up of Missouri Baptists, would realize that this is the Sho-Me state, and would show us some details. But the details simply aren’t there, and we’re left guessing.
Here’s what I’d put on the list as relevant, were I to venture my guess (although I have no idea to what extent these issues played):
- Don Hinkle’s work at the Pathway, particularly some of his editorials, apparently upsets MBC staff sometimes. David appears to be held to task for his management of Don and the Pathway’s work. (BTW, it appears Don’s job is on the line next, if I’m interpreting page 9 of the report correctly.)
- David’s comments at the 2006 MBC Meeting regarding Islam brought attention to the MBC as a whole, in a rather negative light in secular media. I would presume this is at least part of that referred to by the Missouri Baptists’ reputation bullet.
- The sexual harassment lawsuit and subsequent settlement appear to play a large role in this. Even the sanitized report makes clear that David may have taken action in the case that was not authorized by the Executive Board.
Strangely, I find myself wondering if the secular media reports were really all that far off. Again, though, we’re given almost no details, so at this point, how could anyone tell anyway?
*SIGH*
I do hope more information is forthcoming.