Stan Deatherage's Integrity as a Commissioner is Challenged by Dr. Tom Penders | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: Usually this category is reserved for folks who want to get something off the their chest. Well this day, the Publisher wises to tender a few thoughts to his readership so we will, in turn, reverse roles, and this time the column will be: Words from the Publisher. To that effect, we beg your indulgence.

    My response to the Doctor's allegations, which were published in the Beaufort Observer on October 15, 2010, is below these comments. The Doctor's allegation is below my response. If Beaufort County's Medical Community wishes for the Beaufort County Commissioners to listen to them, they have a divergent way of expressing it.

    As one might agree, Dr. Tom Penders has a strange way of winning friends and influencing people, or ... he is heavily vested in my defeat at the polls. What people like Dr. Penders could never understand is that there are many other issues, and many other minds on how to deal with them. When this issue passes, there will be others, and if I am still serving the public, I will deal with each one as I see fit ... As I am elected to do so by those of a like mind that trust my path as their political voice.


It's important to get some things right

    My father once told me, "you best get a man's name right. It could be the only thing he ever owns." My father was a good salesman, but a man of profound integrity. To that end Dr. Tom Penders, my name is Deatherage not Deathridge. I've been an elected official for 14 years, and some folks know that about me. You obviously don't.

    In that same vein of "It's important to get some things right," you never make reference of what someone said - in this case what you stated that I said - without stating a reference of where you are quoting it from (i.e. a newspaper, an online publication, etc.). It makes you appear insincere. That is not a good starting point when one is stressing a salient point, as I suppose you were attempting to do in your previous post.

    Next you just can't jump from the hearsay: "I understand that Stan Deathridge (was) SHOCKED, SHOCKED that anyone would suggest that a politician would accept money when offered to support his or her cause. Apparently Stan does not believe that he is accountable to the voters", without stating some reasonable fact developing why I should not have been "SHOCKED," or why I was "SHOCKED" for that matter.

    Your stating the hearsay that I was "SHOCKED" was the crux of your thesis as to why "Stan does not believe that he is accountable to the voters." Really Dr. Penders, shouldn't you have better developed your point of my aloof nature, which only referenced the hearsay fact that I was "SHOCKED, so that other reasonable readers might better understand why you feel the way you profess? From the standpoint of straight communication, it's a pretty big jump to cast aspersions that I "do not believe I am accountable to voters" without a more developed thesis from you.

    Those who know me, and have elected me four times to date, obviously believe that I am accountable to them, or they would not have voted for me.

    Furthermore, I have never, and would never take money from interested parties in matters that will need my decision, my vote. And what makes you believe that I may would have taken money from interested parties on this issue? Is this some sort of transferal of ego being manifested in your pledge to have county commissioners assure the public what every honest politician, without question, would never do?

    So, without hesitation, I will sign your pledge. Furthermore, and at the risk of the perception of arrogance, I am one of the few truly honest politicians to have served this county in the last two decades, and I have a habit of eventually rooting out those who are not. This has long been my "New Solutions to Old Problems" that you made jest of in your post to the Beaufort Observer.

    In conclusion, I take a very dim view of hypocrisy, and rest assured, I will take a good hard look at anyone that takes money from any of the special interest entities that make up this conundrum of the mismanagement of this very public asset - the hospital. Also without fail, I will take a good hard look at those interested parties that offered them money as well.

    If you knew anything about me, which you don't, you would have known that.


Hospital merger
October 25, 2010 | 04:57 PM

Hood,

The Medical Staff at the Hospital has requested a pledge from the Commissioners that they will not accept political donations from any of the bidding entities. I understand that Stan Deathridge SHOCKED, SHOCKED that anyone would suggest that a politician would accept money when offered to support his or her cause.

Apparently Stan does not believe that he is accountable to the voters.

I suggest that the people vote him out. That would be one new solution to an old problem that Stan might understand!

Tom Penders
Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )



Comments

( October 27th, 2010 @ 9:01 am )
 
To our growing readership,

The best tried and true rule to dealing with complex issues, of a public nature, is "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." Me thinks the Doctor had best stop digging.

The probable merger of the county hospital is a complex issue, and it will be brought to resolution. Making an argument out of something he might of heard that I could have said about my being 'SHOCKED' about signing some lame pledge is pure conjecture, and makes the Doctor appear somewhat disingenuous.
( October 26th, 2010 @ 12:33 pm )
 
Dr. Penders,

It seems you are playing a dishonest game of semantics, because I’m sure you know the definition of integrity: “a concept of consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcomes.” Despite what you say, obviously, you were questioning my father's integrity by saying in your letter to Mr. Richardson, "Apparently Stan does not believe that he is accountable to the voters." Again, you questioned his integrity, in your comment below, by saying that you were attacking my father’s 'responsiveness,' 'reasonableness,' and 'objectivity.' It scares me a little that you would try to manipulate a fact pertaining to your own behavior; since, in your profession, you are trusted to help rearrange the thoughts and behaviors of others. Just admit it: You were questioning his integrity; and, now, I’m questioning yours.
Somebody said:
( October 26th, 2010 @ 7:07 am )
 
Stan,

Thank you for your pledge. The vote on the future of the Hospital is one that is critical to the health of the folks that you represent. I believe that your pledge makes the ultimate vote more credible. I'm sure that you would agree that the decision to be made should be made solely in the interest of what is best for the healthcare of our neighbors and ourselves.

I've not attacked your integity, by the way, just your responsiveness to a reasonable request for objectivity in dealing this issue.

Regards,
Tom Penders



Candidate Hood Richardson Challenges the Veracity of Senator Basnight's Comments on his Record Words with the Publisher, Op-Ed & Politics School board to fight full disclosure of bad teachers


HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

Biden wants to push this in public schools and Gov. deSantis says NO
this at the time that pro-Hamas radicals are rioting around the country
populist / nationalist anti-immigration AfD most popular party among young voters, CDU second
Barr had previously said he would jump off a bridge before supporting Trump

HbAD1

 
Back to Top