Schilling creates 'dumper sticker'

news-rswa-dumperstickerUnder the Hook’s recent post about the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority discussing the idea of adopting a flow-control ordinance, one disgruntled commenter suggested the idea of creating “Dump RSWA” yard signs. That slogan seems to have caught the attention of conservative radio show host Rob Schilling, who is now offering “Dump RSWA” bumper stickers for sale on his blog.

Read more on: dumperstickerrswa


I haven't commented on this yet, but I've been meaning to thank Rob for taking my "Dump RSWA" idea and running with it. I have a number of reasons for not doing it myself, (not knowing of the great print on demand bumper sticker service that he found for one) and I'm ecstatic that someone took the idea and did something with it.

My political beliefs lean towards the left with a smattering of libertarian leavening. I quite often don't agree with Rob Schilling's positions on things, but in every interaction I've ever had with him, he has been respectful, attentive, and helpful even. I'm glad to have his voice on the radio in Central VA.

The situations we have with RSWA, RWSA, incredible government waste with projects like the Mall re-bricking, and much much more demand someone to stand up and ask serious questions about what's going on around here. Rob at least is doing that. If anyone else would like to try, send WINA or any of the other local stations a demo tape(or if you're a media savvy youngster an mp3).

No Ghost, forgive ME. Apparently your idea of constructive dialogue mirrors that of Mr. Schilling's.

To save you the trouble of a few mouse clicks (guess I was asking too much in my previous comment) and to answer your questions, I'll just reference a couple of recent posts from Rob's Schilling Show "blog":

"Perhaps Democratic Socialist Republic of Charlottesville Minister David Norris (Mayor) and Chairman Gary O’Connell (City Manager)..."
("Fuzzy" enough for ya?)

Rob accuses the Democratic Machine on council, fearing 22-year-old Andrew William's write-in council candidacy, of undermining the young African American Independent by, get this, appointing him to the Planning Commission!
"Now that Williams has applied for the Planning Commission, Norris and his posse comitatus have a prime opportunity to ââ?¬Å?kneecap” Williams’ Council candidacy by appointing him to the advisory body."

You wanted examples. I gave you two easy examples. Without name-calling or snotty insults (the hallmarks of...Greene Ghosts perhaps?). Since glibness is reserved for (let me see if I can get this right) stalinists, communists and socialists, I await your non-glib response (diatribe?) which I trust will be completely devoid of ad hominem attacks.

Whether or not you like Rob Schilling, he is at least attempting to draw attention to a local government matter that I think is of pressing concern for our community and obscure enough (do people really pay attention to trash debates) that it could be swept under the rug and an ordinance passed before people know what's up.

Personally, I would much rather know that my trash is going to a place where 90% of it is recycled, and I think the waste management businesses should have choice of where they take their trash (with regulatory limits; they can't illegally dump on some other property). Vanderlinde's business is 1. environmentally proper and reduces our waste; 2. makes recycling and minimizing landfill easier for thousands of people; 3. offers a competitive business proposal for our waste management vendors where they can not only do the right thing environmentally but actually save money in dumping fees. It could be a win-win for Charlottesville-Albemarle.

Perhaps RWSA could be looking at a public-private partnership, or into entrepreneurial activities (look at how JABA runs its non-profit with several businesses that bring in a revenue stream that creates funds that can then be used to assist others) that would create a revenue stream for them without creating a monopoly, removing choice from residents, and harming local businesses.

RWSA is in serious financial trouble. Just because Tom Frederick announced yesterday that RWSA is not pursuing flow control, I do not believe this is the end of the story. At the next possible opportunity and after the elections are over I predict it's return. We must all continue to get the elected officials on record, so we know exactly where they stand, and make sure that no one is elected that supports this, either for local or higher office, as Mr. Boyd is seeking the nomination the U.S. Congress.

And, we must stop wasting taxpayer dollars suing Mr. Van der Linde for RWSA's own incompetence. Privatize this organization with NO FLOW CONTROL. This will give us the most modern re-cycling opportunities at the best price.

Meant RSWA although the incompetence part is the same for both.

interesting how the only examples given of elected officials becoming "drunk with power" are left of center.

not like the Bushistas or President Cheney ever abused the privileges of office.

or that John Ensign abused the privilege of office

or that Mark Foley abused the privilege of office

or that Mark Sanford abused the privilege of office

or that Ted Stevens abused the privilege of office

or that Larry "wide stance" Craig abused the privilege of office

or that Tom Coburn abused the privilege of office

or that Michelle Bachmann is not drunk with power, or maybe just drunk

I do not what post you read, but I mentioned W (as well as Gov. Almond), and I do not think the King of Hawks, Robert McNanmara could hardly be described as a "lefty". Now, most of us know that King George III was simply a loon, and that Neville Chamberlain was a Conservative. Now, step back from the Kool-Aid...

Rowdy, you tend to look for things that are not there while failing to accept normal constructions of English grammar for what they are and ignoring local political history. YOU wrote: "...because he’s a shameless self-promoter and self-styled, small-town demagogue who..." Now, apparently you went to a government school (as did I, but when they had standards not eroded by edu-babble); but "self-styled" is an adjectival phrase - or simply an adjective - for which Merriam Webster defines as "self-proclaimed”, and for which Wikipedia describes as "awarding a style to oneself, often without adequate justification or authority." And, inasmuch as you claimed authorship of the sentence, YOU used ââ?¬Å?self-styled” to modify the word demagogue (as well as small-town, another adjectival phrase), which means that you claimed that Rob Schilling describes himself as a demagogue, as well as describing himself as a small-town one. I would respectively suggest that it is you who are a bit in ââ?¬Å?D'oh!” (It is ironic that you called me Ms. KRABAPPEL, herself a a jaded caricature of the American public school system...)

Now, a demagogue is defined by Merriam as ââ?¬Å?a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power.” First of all, Mr. Schilling is not a candidate for any elected position, nor does he hold any public office. Further, parsing is not your strong suit. Disagree and dislike are not interchangeable. Personally ââ?¬â?? and I believe the same can said about Rob ââ?¬â?? I like Dave Norris, but we both fundamentally disagree with how Mr. Norris perceives the role of government, which tends to be socialist, especially his sense that government should redistribute wealth through the power to tax, to make government our nanny, and to make the poor dependent on government, all of which are FACTUALLY foreign to the founding of this nation, as well as to many Americans. Calling Rob a Christo-fascist thug would be out of bounds for the very reason that that would have no basis in fact and would make him a demagogue, which, of course, he is not, by definition, nor made into one by innuendo.

Coming from you, as well as others not directly involved with the political machinations of city government, it certainly seems plausible that Mr. Williams would gain experience by ââ?¬Å?serving on an appointed board or two before making the future jump into electoral politics”, and, in an normal world, that might be the path to take. Oddly enough, however, your sensibility in this regard does not seem to apply to Kristin Szakos, who has no such experience, either.

Now, let's see how ââ?¬Å?stupidest” (I guess that was not ââ?¬Å?name-calling”) I am. In 1970, Charles Barbour, became the first Black was to City Council, and who served until 1978. From 1978 to 1980, no Blacks were elected to the City Council. In 1979, the local NAACP petitioned the City Council for a change in how city councilors were elected to have elections conducted primarily by wards with only one at-large seat in order to make the City Council more representative of community interests, including making it more likely that at least one Black would be elected and represent the some 20% of the population who are Black. A subsequent, ââ?¬Å?advisory” referendum was held on November 3, 1981, asking if the election of councilors should be changed from an at-large system to that of a councilor from each of the four wards and three at-large councilors. The measure passed and did so in three of the four wards and six of the city's eight precincts, with 70% passage in the Carver and Tonsler precincts. But after Mayor Frank Buck, a staunch opponent of the proposal, had said that the Council would be bound by the results of the referendum in The Daily Progress prior to the election, the City Council stated its intention to hold a second referendum during its November 16, 1981 meeting, which was defeated on May 4, 1982.

As a result of the uproar that ensued regarding the disavowal of the first referendum, the local Democratic apparatchiki ââ?¬â?? a valid term considering the circumstances of calling for a second referendum, because Democrats did not like the results of the first ââ?¬â?? banded together in 1981, and hammered out what later Vice Mayor Meredith Richards termed, on March 12, 2004, a ââ?¬Å?system of patronage” that would allow one ââ?¬â?? and only one ââ?¬â?? Black member on the City Council at any one time, which has been followed ever since. Now, you have a Black running as an independent, which has not been attempted since Margaret Cain lost in 1984, but who ran ââ?¬Å?against” Rev. E.G. Hall, who already held the Black council seat, unlike the situation this year. I dunno, being stupid and all, I would venture to posit, nevertheless, that that is not sitting well with the local Democratic party leadership, to which Dave Norris belongs. I have to admit, I was wrong, however, when I wrote earlier that it was not possible for Mr. Williams to be appointed to the Planning Commission AND still run for City Council, win, and serve on both bodies, as that is an exception to state law, according to City Attorney Craig Brown. Still, my money says he will be appointed to the Planning Commission and will withdraw from the election. In fact, just for sport, I will bet you $5...

I wrote that I was trying to encourage you to come to the table informed, rather than come to the table misinformed, as do Stalinists, communists, and socialists. While being glib might make you one of them, it is a faulty argument to argue that you are one solely by virtue of being glib, which I did not write. That you took it otherwise is entirely on you. Likewise, with the lemming thing. I was emphasizing that I am not a lock-step Democrat, which I suppose makes me a heretic, and therefore should be burned at the stake. Silly me...

Goat entrails are so yesterday, Cass, and I haven't pissed off Apollo, unless he is now taking a walk on the wild side and I did not get the message. But, you know, even I can get some things wrong, as proven by prior posts. I am, after all, nothing if not stupid. And the stupid point I was making, moreover, was that "(a)ny suggestion that a potential board appointment amounts to some sort of coercive measure is simply one of the stupidest things I have ever heard" is not quite so stupid, because it has been tried before, most recently by David Brown. Williams represents the biggest threat to the Democratic ticket, as he will siphon Black votes from the Democratic ticket, and Fenwick will get the "disgruntled" vote, mainly Republicans, single issue though he may be. So, I still look for an "odd" circumstance to develop between now and election that will affect the election. But, no well-timed accident. Being fair, as well as stupid, I owe Rowdy $5. Hawes knows how to collect it...


What is up with you and these silly grammar lessons? (I wonder if you are able to keep a straight face as you type that garbage?). Parse my language all you want. (Perhaps the Greene Ghost and Rob Schilling are the only two people in town allowed a little satirical flourish?) My point remains valid. The guy makes a living from using over-the-top rhetoric and touting conspiracy theories.

I am quite familiar with the recent historical analysis that you apparently lifted straight from Rob's recent blog on the subject. In this case, in my opinion, attempting to link past injustices (real or imagined) to the current situation is a little foolish. As for Kristin Szakos (who YOU brought up, not I), I agree that she could use a little more practical government experience. However, the immense experience Szakos does have as a community organizer and activist makes any comparison between her and Williams absurd.

"Now, you have a Black running as an independent, which has not been attempted since Margaret Cain lost in 1984, but who ran ââ?¬Å?against” Rev. E.G. Hall, who already held the Black council seat, unlike the situation this year. I dunno, being stupid and all, I would venture to posit, nevertheless, that that is not sitting well with the local Democratic party leadership, to which Dave Norris belongs."
Clearly, you 1) give the CURRENT local Democratic Party too much credit for being able to influence events, 2) don't know very much about the CURRENT makeup of the Democratic Party leadership (I have heard many who consider Dave Norris to be somewhat of an outsider in the Party), and 3) don't know very much about Dave Norris as a person. He has always welcomed all participants to the political process in the interest of a fuller and livelier debate.

Keep your money.

Thanks for not calling me a Socialist.

Are you kidding me?!

Rob repeatedly referring to the folks he dislikes as Stalinist, communist, socialist, etc.. (pick ANY show or Schilling blog post for examples) is not what I'd call constructive dialogue.

His conspiracy fantasies concerning the local DemocratIC Party are not only often contradictory but downright delusional. Again, pick ANY show or blog post.

Rob's hystrionics are in no way commensurate with the topics or issues at hand. This is Charlottesville freaking Virginia - not Richmond or Washington.

Schilling's a clown. His whiny abrasiveness made him a failure on Council, but I suppose it must work better on talk radio.

I don't know which is worse though - the people who listen to and give credence to his hysterics or his critics who let him get under their skin.

The best way to take Rob Schilling is the same way you deal with a stranger's screaming 5-year-old in front of you in the checkout line at the grocery store. Try to pay him no attention whatsoever and then forget everything he says as soon as you no longer have to hear his voice.

Um. Because he's a shamelesss self-promoter and self-styled, small-town demagogue who promotes divisiveness and rancor over constructive dialogue?

I have listened to enough of his shows to hear him say some really nasty things about some very good, hard-working people.

I've got it! "Dump Rob Schilling" stickers for sale on my blog! (if I had a blog...)

Wow- it just goes to show that someone is always quick to make a buck off of someone elses idea!

good for him. Someone has to hold these bozos accountable. It costs money to have bumper stickers made. I doubt Mr. Schilling is planning on getting rich selling bumper stickers. He took initiative to call attention to a completely insane course of action plotted by the evil Mr. Smithers.

In an earlier post, I mistakenly identified Mike Gaffney, writing instead Matt Gaffney. I should have been in bed at two in the morning...

Greene Ghost-- care to elaborate on your statement about David Brown? If I'm reading your sentence correctly, you are stating that David Brown recently attempted to use a board appointment in a coercive way.

I forget where I read it, but I seem to recall Athens' decline was marked by the willingness of the citizens to build up leaders for the sole purpose of watching them get knocked down. It ultimately devolved into what we now see on the national, state, and local levels, with lots of aggressive prose and confrontational commentary. RRP's first comment was a wry, throwaway line, which, for whatever, has become a personal affront to a Schilling partisan. I suspect Schilling would have gotten a chuckle from the remark.

As the sage Mr. Rodney King pointed out: Why can't we all just get along?

Let's start anew from the beginning, the point at which I responded to your ââ?¬Å?wry, throwaway line”, revealed as something other by your second. I do not know why you would use the term ââ?¬Å?shameless” in describing Rob Schilling's self-promotion. If you had a successful radio show, how would you go about getting there? I have never heard anything from Mr. Schilling labeling himself as a demagogue and I could not imagine anyone else doing so. If you meant to label him yourself in this manner, please explain why you would use this pejorative. It would appear that you simply disagree and dislike Mr. Schilling, as you have yet to provide any concrete examples to support your position.

Implying that Dave Norris is a socialist by a satirical, perhaps scathing, title, is not too far off the mark. He tends to act as if he knows what is good for Charlottesville and you don't, and has never really had a job for which the public trough has not been involved. As for the imperious Gary O'Connell, you seem to not know him very well...he's no Cole Hendrix, a well-respected public servant for over 25 years.

I know of no-one that Rob Schilling dislikes. As a listener to his show, you should know that he has never attacked any of his guests, even those with whom he disagrees. That I would call very constructive dialogue. I know of many, particularly local government officials, whose actions he questions, even disdains, especially those who refuse to come on his show and engage in any kind of dialogue. When public officials refuse to explain their actions, especially actions to which many citizens object, it certainly calls into question those actions. In Charlottesville, it often happens that the public is not sufficiently engaged and things just simply happen. Now, that Rob Schilling is making his presence known and has a following, it is no longer possible for the local government to simply ram things down our throats. Somehow, I get the impression that you think good government is that which gets away with whatever the public is unawares.

As for Andrew Williams independent candidacy for City Council, it is a no-brainer that if the City Council appoints him to the Planning Commission, that kinda takes him out of the council election this fall, smoothing the way for the Democratic slate. If Mr. Williams continues his run as an independent, that would be a serious threat to the anointed ticket. Of course, he will not be appointed to the Planning Commission without a quid pro quo deal: Mr. Williams is appointed to the Planning Commission, only if he withdraws his candidacy for the council. He cannot serve on both bodies. It's not like this kind of tactic has not been tried before.

So much for easy...

Glibness is not reserved for Stalinists (the word is capitalized), communists and socialists. I simply said that that attribute is a hallmark of those adherents because their position is inherently flawed and cannot be defended but by the use of fallacies and specious, if not disingenuous, arguments, and I was encouraging you to avoid being glib, which is defined as showing little forethought or preparation. And where did I stoop to ââ?¬Å?name-calling”?

And, now to Atticus:

The reason we "can't...just all get along" is because it is human nature for elected officials and so-called public servants to become drunk with power, however measured. You know, we tried to get along with the British, and Neville Chamberlain thought things had gone swimmingly at Munich. During the 60s, Bob McNamara led us deeply into Vietnam and kept trying to assure us how well things were going, until Walter Cronkite showed up and found out differently. And one day, in someone's distant memoir, it will be revealed that W really did get us into Irag to avenge Hussein's threat to assassinate his father.

Locally, Charlottesville officials thought it was a good idea for Gov. Almond to close the schools in 1959 in the name of that fuzziest of disingenuousness - states' rights. Wiping out Vinegar Hill of its black businesses and homes was yet another. The RSWA has proven its wastefulness and ineptness, yet Tom Frederick and Matt Gaffney are still "leading the way." Why on earth are they being allowed to do so?

Someone, at times, must stand up and say, "Enough is enough!"

Hey, Rowdy Roddy, do you have even one cogent and valid reason we should "dump" Rob Schilling. Have you even listened to any of his shows?

Give just one, specific example of promoting "divisiveness and rancor over constructive dialogue", as well as an example of him saying "some really nasty things about some very good, hard-working people", please. Thank you.

Forgive me, Rowdy Roddy, but I thought I had asked YOU for specifics. Who has Rob Schilling "disliked" (whatever place that fuzzy term might have in this discussion) to whom the label "Stalinist, communist, socialist, etc." has been applied? Given that we are talking about Charlottesville, surely there are those afoot who would proudly identify themselves as such. To which "conspiracy theories concerning the local DemocratIC (sic) Party" are you referring that appear to you to be "often contradictory but downright delusional." The fact is the local party apparatchiki adhere to a scripted "lock" that began when Mitch Van Yahres was elected to the council and took root when he became mayor in 1970, and became firmly entrenched by Francis Fife, all-in-all, a practice not too dissimilar from, say, Richmond or Washington...or, even Chicago, for that matter, albeit on a much smaller scale. How else does one explain the poster child of a dysfunctional office holder, Paul Garrett, with whom everyone regretfully has to deal while at the Clerk's office, but who himself nevertheless keeps getting "elected" because he holds a "black slot" in the world of Charlottesville politics? I will understand if you have not been around and an active participant in the local political process since the founding days of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Charlottesville, but you ought to have done your homework before rendering glib responses, the hallmark of Stalinists, communists and socialists. And, before you resort to that last arsenal of the disingenuousness that plagues many Democrats, liberals, and the like - ad hominem attacks - I am and have been a Democrat all of my life. I just happen not to be one of the lemming variety.

GG, are you insane?

"I have never heard anything from Mr. Schilling labeling himself as a demagogue and I could not imagine anyone else doing so. If you meant to label him yourself in this manner, please explain why you would use this pejorative. It would appear that you simply disagree and dislike Mr. Schilling, as you have yet to provide any concrete examples to support your position."

Are you for real?! Why on earth would someone label HIMSELF a demagogue? Of course it was I who labeled him thusly - I was expressing MY opinion, with TWO concrete examples (as you requested). Duh.

Perhaps I should have initially said that Schilling likes to label as Stalinist (I capitalized it the first time but inadvertently failed to do so the last - thanks for the spell-check anyway, Ms. Crabapple), communist, and socialist anyone with whom he "disagrees" rather than those whom he "dislikes" (a fairly silly parsing of my point if you ask me, but suit yourself). However, the fact remains that simply because you or Rob dislike (ok, disagree with?) Dave Norris does not make Dave Norris a communist. It's funny, your disdain for glib, ad hominem attacks seems to have certain well-defined boundaries. Rob calling Dave Norris and others in city government Stalinist/communist/socialist and your references to the local Democratic Party "apparatchiki" amount to legitimate "satirical" criticism (in your view). But I'll bet my calling Schilling a Christo-fascist thug would be out of bounds (in your view). Again, funny.

Andrew Williams is a well-intentioned young man who could use the experience of serving on an appointed board or two before making the future jump into electoral politics. His Council candidacy poses absolutely no "threat" to the Democratic ticket. Any suggestion that a potential board appointment amounts to some sort of coercive measure is simply one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Period.

Name calling/Insults (2 examples)...
1. You said my responses were glib. Then you said that glibness is THE hallmark of Stalinists, communists and socialists. I took that to mean that you were calling me a Stalinist, communist, or socialist. How would you have taken it?

2. "...I am and have been a Democrat all of my life. I just happen not to be one of the lemming variety."
I take that to mean that if I happen to approve of the current composition of City Council and think that the city is well-served by Council, then you just called me a lemming.
Again, how would you have taken it?

Don't get me wrong. I've been called worse - and probably will be again. Just don't pretend that a snotty jab is something more innocent than a snotty jab.

What, Nattering, was Spiro your hero?

Greene Ghost, re your statement below referring to Mr Williams:

"Still, my money says he will be appointed to the Planning Commission and will withdraw from the election. In fact, just for sport, I will bet you $5”Š"

How do you propose that he will be appointed to the Planning Commission and subsequently withdraw from the election, when there are no positions currently open on the Planning Commission? Is one of the sitting Commissioners about to have a well-timed accident? If so, which one?