Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Dozens of residents spoke Tuesday night, some to criticize the Leesburg supervisor, others to show him support.
Opposing sides in the now-years-long debate about what, if anything, should be placed on the Loudoun Courthouse lawn during the Christmas holiday season turned out Tuesday night to lash out at or give their support to Supervisor Ken Reid (R-Leesburg). The most recent blow up occurred after Reid referred to the local group of atheists opposed to the county’s taxpayer-funded Christmas tree display at the courthouse as “terrorists” and “fanatics.” In addition to the tree, the display includes a crèche, a menorah and Santa Claus. Reid apologized again Tuesday evening, but not until speakers weighed in the display and his comments. Rick Wingrove, who organizes the Northern Virginia Atheists website, said that as a veteran who has not committed …
Monday, December 3, 2012
Leesburg supervisor later apologizes for remarks in response to courthouse holiday display debate.
Loudoun has again managed to make its decisions regarding courthouse lawn holiday displays a hot topic this year. The county has for several years debated what types of displays would be permitted and how individuals or groups could apply to create the displays. The long tradition had been for a local group to place a nativity scene at the Loudoun County Courthouse in Leesburg, but in recent years, that arrangement has been questioned as the state potentially sanctioning religion. At one point, unattended holiday displays were permitted on a limited number of spaces at the courthouse by application. The resulting Santa Claus in a skeleton suit and signs with flying spaghetti monsters were widely criticized, so Loudoun’s Board of …
A reader criticizes the Leesburg supervisor for his comments and the board for not speaking against him.
Monday, December 3, 2012
Editor, Leesburg/Ashburn Patch: Supervisor Ken Reid (R-Leesburg), in defense of Eugene Delgaudio – currently the subject of a criminal investigation – opined recently that his colleague has been singled out for criticism because of his "views." It was a curious statement, since everyone who has been critical of Mr. Delgaudio has made it clear that it is his behavior, not his “views,” that are unacceptable in a public official. We expect in a democracy that citizens will disagree with some of the views held by our representatives, and vice-versa. However, when a public official descends to the level of name-calling and defamation of the citizens he or she is supposed to represent, we are no longer talking about differences of opinion; we …