the beacon citizen network | beacon, ny
How To Really Get Involved In Beacon Politics
I recently asked if there was something wrong with the Democratic Party in Beacon. I asked this because it seemed to me that the Democratic Committee was attempting to disenfranchise Democratic Candidates who weren't hand picked by the party and were making their primary and fund raising challenges very difficult. The local Democratic Party Boss, Charles Kelly, replied that they could only pick 8 people out of 17 applicants but failed to state that all the Committee members running, including him, were self-appointed as part of the 8. I suggested some reforms that would make the nomination process more democratic and responsive to the people. But Boss Kelly didn't respond to these and suggested that the best way to get involved was to go to meetings, ignoring my suggestion and the whole online community forum concept at the same time. I thought it would be helpful to point out that there are other ways for members here to really get involved in Beacon Politics – circa 21st Century. Here are seven suggestions.
1. Don't Let Politicians Substitute Meetings for Real Community Involvement
If our politicians wanted the involvement of the 14,000 members of our community, they would have meetings at Dutchess County Stadium. When Boss Kelly states that if one wants to become involved in local politics they should attend a meeting, he knows that only a few people will show up and that the vast majority of residents will be left out of the process. If politicians were really interested in a democratic process they would use electronic forums to gather and synthesize the views of the community.
2. Be Citizen Journalists
Take the attitude of a journalist. By this I don't mean be a political partisan commentator. Rather, don't take a politician's words for granted but look at the body of public record and examine it, and when this record is not readily available do a little digging. For example, I wondered if Boss Kelly's dismissal of suggestions to reform Beacon politics was just a one time event, or whether there was a history of disdain for the citizens of Beacon. I started looking at past City Council and Workshop minutes and it didn't take me long to find another example. In August of 2006, Boss Kelly is on record advocating that the City not mention "Hiddenbrooke" when floating a bond issue to the public for the purchase of "Hiddenbrooke." He said that the city should use the phrase, Open Space, because if the actual use – the purchase of Hiddenbrooke – was used in the referendum it would be defeated. That's respecting the public, the voters of Beacon and the democratic process.
I've got other questions about conflicts of interest surrounding other incumbents running for office and some new candidates as well -- about council members receiving variances for personal real estate ventures, about council members receiving consulting fees for representing other communities competing for business with Beacon, about candidates receiving city monies in lawsuits against the city. In a town without a working press, investigating these and other events responsibly and reporting is another way to get involved in the local political process.
3. Reward Responsiveness
Most of the philosophical issues that are the mainstay of national party politics are irrelevant to local politics in Beacon. Whatever the personal views of local politicians might be, issues of choice, health care, gay marriage, and the effectiveness of torture aren't part our small town decision-making. (Advocating stronger gun control ordinances in Beacon would be interesting however. I'd like to see the Democrats here make that a priority, or at least answer why they don't.) Both Republican and Democratic members of the Council seem to be for the local meat and potatoes meals of environmental protection, open spaces, improvement of Main Street and the Waterfront, safer neighborhoods and sensible real estate development. I actually see little difference between the views of either party when it comes to the issues affecting the town that the Council or the Mayor has some control over.
So what criteria should be used to pick our elected leaders and how do we get involved? There are of course many things to consider including simple things like how effective that person will be when advocating for the city and its residents. But if one wants to get involved, one criterion might be to ask questions and see how responsive the candidate is, in person, or for most voters, online. Mayor Gold is pretty good at this. He comes online regularly here and on the other discussion board, even in the face of opposition from old-timers. And Randy Casale and John Forman are always ready with an answer for issues that arise online. I'm a Democrat through and through, but Randy and John deserve support for just being helpful and respectful, even to citizens they don't know. They don't ask citizens to come to them like Boss Kelly. They don't ignore the online community like Sara Pasti. They reach out to the citizens of Beacon on their own, jumping in when they feel they can be helpful.
4. Facilitate Online Dialogue
A while back I suggested that candidates for office use BCN as an outlet to state their political positions and why they were running for office. If they wanted to make that forum more of a town hall, then comments from BCN members would be welcome, but if the candidates were shy about online dialog, just their views would be welcome. Not a single candidate responded, and in fact, the person who organized the local city website was quite vocal about working against such a forum. I found this quite ironic because the development of the new website didn't involve the community it was serving at all. Her reason was she didn't like me, which is like saying that the League of Women Voters shouldn't sponsor voter education because someone doesn't like one of their board members. As I said before, I could care less who moderates such a forum, and urge one of you to step up so that we and other voters and Beacon have a chance to get to know our candidates. Is anyone game or is apathy the order of the day? It's a good way to get involved.
The last three ways to get involved are self-explanatory.
5. Fight for Open Government and the Democratic Process
6. Try to Reform a System that Needs a Transfusion
7. Share Your Opinions on Community Discussion Boards
1. Don't Let Politicians Substitute Meetings for Real Community Involvement
If our politicians wanted the involvement of the 14,000 members of our community, they would have meetings at Dutchess County Stadium. When Boss Kelly states that if one wants to become involved in local politics they should attend a meeting, he knows that only a few people will show up and that the vast majority of residents will be left out of the process. If politicians were really interested in a democratic process they would use electronic forums to gather and synthesize the views of the community.
2. Be Citizen Journalists
Take the attitude of a journalist. By this I don't mean be a political partisan commentator. Rather, don't take a politician's words for granted but look at the body of public record and examine it, and when this record is not readily available do a little digging. For example, I wondered if Boss Kelly's dismissal of suggestions to reform Beacon politics was just a one time event, or whether there was a history of disdain for the citizens of Beacon. I started looking at past City Council and Workshop minutes and it didn't take me long to find another example. In August of 2006, Boss Kelly is on record advocating that the City not mention "Hiddenbrooke" when floating a bond issue to the public for the purchase of "Hiddenbrooke." He said that the city should use the phrase, Open Space, because if the actual use – the purchase of Hiddenbrooke – was used in the referendum it would be defeated. That's respecting the public, the voters of Beacon and the democratic process.
I've got other questions about conflicts of interest surrounding other incumbents running for office and some new candidates as well -- about council members receiving variances for personal real estate ventures, about council members receiving consulting fees for representing other communities competing for business with Beacon, about candidates receiving city monies in lawsuits against the city. In a town without a working press, investigating these and other events responsibly and reporting is another way to get involved in the local political process.
3. Reward Responsiveness
Most of the philosophical issues that are the mainstay of national party politics are irrelevant to local politics in Beacon. Whatever the personal views of local politicians might be, issues of choice, health care, gay marriage, and the effectiveness of torture aren't part our small town decision-making. (Advocating stronger gun control ordinances in Beacon would be interesting however. I'd like to see the Democrats here make that a priority, or at least answer why they don't.) Both Republican and Democratic members of the Council seem to be for the local meat and potatoes meals of environmental protection, open spaces, improvement of Main Street and the Waterfront, safer neighborhoods and sensible real estate development. I actually see little difference between the views of either party when it comes to the issues affecting the town that the Council or the Mayor has some control over.
So what criteria should be used to pick our elected leaders and how do we get involved? There are of course many things to consider including simple things like how effective that person will be when advocating for the city and its residents. But if one wants to get involved, one criterion might be to ask questions and see how responsive the candidate is, in person, or for most voters, online. Mayor Gold is pretty good at this. He comes online regularly here and on the other discussion board, even in the face of opposition from old-timers. And Randy Casale and John Forman are always ready with an answer for issues that arise online. I'm a Democrat through and through, but Randy and John deserve support for just being helpful and respectful, even to citizens they don't know. They don't ask citizens to come to them like Boss Kelly. They don't ignore the online community like Sara Pasti. They reach out to the citizens of Beacon on their own, jumping in when they feel they can be helpful.
4. Facilitate Online Dialogue
A while back I suggested that candidates for office use BCN as an outlet to state their political positions and why they were running for office. If they wanted to make that forum more of a town hall, then comments from BCN members would be welcome, but if the candidates were shy about online dialog, just their views would be welcome. Not a single candidate responded, and in fact, the person who organized the local city website was quite vocal about working against such a forum. I found this quite ironic because the development of the new website didn't involve the community it was serving at all. Her reason was she didn't like me, which is like saying that the League of Women Voters shouldn't sponsor voter education because someone doesn't like one of their board members. As I said before, I could care less who moderates such a forum, and urge one of you to step up so that we and other voters and Beacon have a chance to get to know our candidates. Is anyone game or is apathy the order of the day? It's a good way to get involved.
The last three ways to get involved are self-explanatory.
5. Fight for Open Government and the Democratic Process
6. Try to Reform a System that Needs a Transfusion
7. Share Your Opinions on Community Discussion Boards
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by john fasulo on -
I have been AWOL from this site for quite awhile... no one reason, a number of projects taking up lots of time. I have to say, after reading these comments by "Charlene"... I'm more convinced than ever that, "Charlene" is actually a group of people pooling there "talent." As for this particular posting, I have to agree with "Charlene"on all of the above points.
The fact that we don't have a daily press presence in Beacon is a big plus for politicians. Maybe what this site needs is a page called "The Watchdog" or "Whistleblower." Maybe an online Towne Cryer; someone walking or driving around shouting, "here ye here ye here ye...Redemican party wants to....fill in the blanks..
-
Permalink Reply by Josie Gray on -
There are some good points here, i.e. #3. People seem to need the labels of a major political party to be understood by most voters, but in reality the differences between Republican and Democratic positions at our City level are unclear to me. In fact, there are frequent party-flippers. The distinguishing factors that I've noticed the most over the years are the council members who want to create an open, inclusive and responsible local government against those that don't seem to take a deep interest in making good choices, prefer business as usual, and think their job is just to say no to anything that involves spending money in the near-term, without looking at the broader impact or suggesting alternatives.
I am interested in hearing candidates and incumbents address their positions and ideas on the concrete issues that the council faces, as well as issues they can add to the agenda that will move this City forward. Which of them have taken the time to study the waterfront/harbor plan, transportation study, and the Comprehensive Plan for the City, all prepared at much cost and with many hundreds of hours of citizen involvement? Are they ready to implement or at least intelligently debate the recommendations? Are they prepared to tackle the tough-to-solve long-term (and potentially costly) issues now that others are willing to sweep under the rug, i.e. water, sewer, energy and transportation infrastructure, affordable housing, etc? (So far, among the new candidates, George Mansfield is leading the way in this regard.)
Back when Steve was my Ward 4 Councilman, I cheered him not only because he actually showed up at my door (that man sure does know how to pound the pavement) and respond to my emails but because he was the first and last of my Ward reps to actually send out regular newsletters to his constituents about what he was doing. Not to mention that he was the one to start up the first city website in the first place. Steve has always been committed to transparent government and hard work. I haven't always agreed with his approach or decisions, but I know he is working hard to be the best Mayor he can be and is not content to just show up for photo ops at the elementary schools.
As for why no one responded to your original candidates forum, Charlene, that is obvious. You have not earned the trust of the BCN community to handle something of that importance.
-
Permalink Reply by Henry on -
Nice job Kelly
Charles P. Kelly said:The above reply from Stacey WK is not her response but my reply sent inadvertently. Charlie Kelly .Please do not attribute any of these statements to her.Thanks
Stacey WK said:Point 1. Charlene, you do not respresent all 14,000 members of our community nor do you represent the whole on-line community. You are a self-selected spokesperson who does not use your real name. Democracy requires transparency.
Point 2. Name calling, e.g. "Boss Kelly" is not journalism--it is immaturity. Journalists check their "facts" before publishing. My support for the phrase Open Space over the specific reference to "Hiddenbrooke" stems from my support for Hiddenbrooke as well as the Settlement Camp. I feared that some might think we were choosing one over the other. Fortunately, we got the public endorsement for Open Space from the citizens through an election and were able to acquire both with the State of New York purchasing the Settlement Camp.
Point 3. Your failure not to see the differences between the Democrats and Republicans locally is due to your allofness, inexperience and lack of knowledge, not due to the facts. Your claim to be a "Democrat through and through" is suspect when you do not reveal your true identity. Your public support for two Republican candidates (one for city council and one for county legislature) and criticism of two incumbent democratic council members and candidates further raises an issue of your credibility as a "Democrat through and through".
Point 4. Candidates' failure to respond to your challenges, such as an on-line dialogue, may be more a function of your disdain for those who disagree with you than candidates unwillingness to "use electronic forums to gather and synthesize the view of the community." In fact, you do have some worthy ideas to discuss and debate, but your name-calling, sarcasm and manifested immaturity is a big turn-off to those who wish to engage those ideas.
Point 5. The Fight for Open Government and the Democratic Process begins with transparency. Charlene, you need to become a public person if you are going to be taken seriously in a democratic dabate. Who are you? Are you a registered Democratic voter and are you registered in Beacon. You cannot be a credible participant in a public democratic dabate and keep your anonymity.
Point 6. The 2009 Democratic Party represents reform. It is the progressive voice of the people. We do not only claim this, we stand for elections to demonstrate it.
Point 7. I am sharing and hopefull I will know soon who I am sharing with. I will not continue to debate a closet Republican who claims to be a Democrat, who may not even be a person and who may not even be registered to vote. Ante up, Charlene.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlene Vesuvius on -
"As for why no one responded to your original candidates forum, Charlene, that is obvious. You have not earned the trust of the BCN community to handle something of that importance."
Josie, it is not only not obvious but just strange, wacky and plain stupid. I actually have been part of the BCN community almost from its inception. Whose trust is it exactly that I haven't earned, and more importantly why do I need to earn the trust of you or some other individuals of an online community to ask political candidates to participate in a forum here? Is there some steering committee on this site I'm not aware of? Are the candidates part of the BCN steering committee? Do I need to earn their trust for them to respond to something so obvious and so simple as posting their positions before voters?
Josie Gray said:There are some good points here, i.e. #3. People seem to need the labels of a major political party to be understood by most voters, but in reality the differences between Republican and Democratic positions at our City level are unclear to me. In fact, there are frequent party-flippers. The distinguishing factors that I've noticed the most over the years are the council members who want to create an open, inclusive and responsible local government against those that don't seem to take a deep interest in making good choices, prefer business as usual, and think their job is just to say no to anything that involves spending money in the near-term, without looking at the broader impact or suggesting alternatives.
I am interested in hearing candidates and incumbents address their positions and ideas on the concrete issues that the council faces, as well as issues they can add to the agenda that will move this City forward. Which of them have taken the time to study the waterfront/harbor plan, transportation study, and the Comprehensive Plan for the City, all prepared at much cost and with many hundreds of hours of citizen involvement? Are they ready to implement or at least intelligently debate the recommendations? Are they prepared to tackle the tough-to-solve long-term (and potentially costly) issues now that others are willing to sweep under the rug, i.e. water, sewer, energy and transportation infrastructure, affordable housing, etc? (So far, among the new candidates, George Mansfield is leading the way in this regard.)
Back when Steve was my Ward 4 Councilman, I cheered him not only because he actually showed up at my door (that man sure does know how to pound the pavement) and respond to my emails but because he was the first and last of my Ward reps to actually send out regular newsletters to his constituents about what he was doing. Not to mention that he was the one to start up the first city website in the first place. Steve has always been committed to transparent government and hard work. I haven't always agreed with his approach or decisions, but I know he is working hard to be the best Mayor he can be and is not content to just show up for photo ops at the elementary schools.
As for why no one responded to your original candidates forum, Charlene, that is obvious. You have not earned the trust of the BCN community to handle something of that importance.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlene Vesuvius on
-
Making the critic the issue is a time tested tool of politico's. Blame the press. Accuse the critic as being a member of the opposition. Question the questioner. I'm not running for office, Boss Kelly. You are! Take the heat and answer the questions. We in the electorate are not idiots and resent being treated this way. I'm just going to just dig deeper and deeper and report the facts. I'll let the voters make their own conclusions. And not just about you, but other candidates alike -- and not just Democrats, but Republicans as well. And if you didn't like the way the council minutes reported your statements about the Hiddenbrooke vote, you had ample opportunity to correct the minutes. Maybe you can still restate the minutes. I would if I were you, because your statement as reported is just embarrassing.
Charles P. Kelly said:The above reply from Stacey WK is not her response but my reply sent inadvertently. Charlie Kelly .Please do not attribute any of these statements to her.Thanks
Stacey WK said:Point 1. Charlene, you do not respresent all 14,000 members of our community nor do you represent the whole on-line community. You are a self-selected spokesperson who does not use your real name. Democracy requires transparency.
Point 2. Name calling, e.g. "Boss Kelly" is not journalism--it is immaturity. Journalists check their "facts" before publishing. My support for the phrase Open Space over the specific reference to "Hiddenbrooke" stems from my support for Hiddenbrooke as well as the Settlement Camp. I feared that some might think we were choosing one over the other. Fortunately, we got the public endorsement for Open Space from the citizens through an election and were able to acquire both with the State of New York purchasing the Settlement Camp.
Point 3. Your failure not to see the differences between the Democrats and Republicans locally is due to your allofness, inexperience and lack of knowledge, not due to the facts. Your claim to be a "Democrat through and through" is suspect when you do not reveal your true identity. Your public support for two Republican candidates (one for city council and one for county legislature) and criticism of two incumbent democratic council members and candidates further raises an issue of your credibility as a "Democrat through and through".
Point 4. Candidates' failure to respond to your challenges, such as an on-line dialogue, may be more a function of your disdain for those who disagree with you than candidates unwillingness to "use electronic forums to gather and synthesize the view of the community." In fact, you do have some worthy ideas to discuss and debate, but your name-calling, sarcasm and manifested immaturity is a big turn-off to those who wish to engage those ideas.
Point 5. The Fight for Open Government and the Democratic Process begins with transparency. Charlene, you need to become a public person if you are going to be taken seriously in a democratic dabate. Who are you? Are you a registered Democratic voter and are you registered in Beacon. You cannot be a credible participant in a public democratic dabate and keep your anonymity.
Point 6. The 2009 Democratic Party represents reform. It is the progressive voice of the people. We do not only claim this, we stand for elections to demonstrate it.
Point 7. I am sharing and hopefull I will know soon who I am sharing with. I will not continue to debate a closet Republican who claims to be a Democrat, who may not even be a person and who may not even be registered to vote. Ante up, Charlene.
-
Permalink Reply by Philomena on -
Charlene Vesuvius said:We in the electorate are not idiots and resent being treated this way.
CV, just to clarify - haven't you mentioned in posts in other discussions that you are a part-time resident in Beacon, sorta like a weekender, and that you live full-time in NYC ? So that you are not actually eligible to vote in Beacon ? I think you mentioned that maybe you own some rental properties ? Not 100% sure, though. Granted that you at times have some some thought-provoking (or primarily just provoking) things to say, but maybe that "We in the electorate" should be "The electorate of Beacon", since I'm pretty sure you're not part of that "We". But nice that you don't think everyone in Beacon is an idiot, as most of your posts seems to imply or flat-out state.
Now, in your typical BCN fashion, I'm sure you'll now start name-calling me, etc...
-
Permalink Reply by Susan Ruckdeschel on -
Beacon politics are very discouraging - all politics are discouraging. While I used to be involved, walking door-to-door to get candidates elected, and attended as many meetings as my busy, nationally traveling schedule would allow; I even had my own aspirations for a (short) while there. Presently, I refuse to expend any more energy than this blog will allow on politics. Not that I do not care - I love this town, and care deeply for its future, I feel that my energy is better spent working with kids, writing books, helping financially challenged folks learn to be self-sufficient. There's a wonderful community garden located at 17 South Avenue, in back of St. Andrews Church on South Avenue (begging to be weeded) - www.beacongarden.info. Soon we'll need to think about starting another garden on the other end of town, so that local residents challenged by the rising costs of food will have access to their own - nobody should be without food, or be even challenged by it; there is plenty for everyone, albiet challenged by powers that like us to think otherwise.
Sort of like politics - plenty to go around, and yet just enough for the Powers that Be.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlene Vesuvius on
-
No, I'm not going to call you a name. But are you really more concerned about where I vote, than what our candidates for office say and do? The President of the Beacon Arts Community Association (BACA) is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. Does that disqualify her from helping out? The Vice President of BACA also is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. None of the principals of Hudson Beacon Glass are residents of Beacon and or vote in Beacon. Do you think this disqualify these concerned citizens from care about Beacon and the direction its civic leaders take us?
Philomena said:Charlene Vesuvius said:We in the electorate are not idiots and resent being treated this way.
CV, just to clarify - haven't you mentioned in posts in other discussions that you are a part-time resident in Beacon, sorta like a weekender, and that you live full-time in NYC ? So that you are not actually eligible to vote in Beacon ? I think you mentioned that maybe you own some rental properties ? Not 100% sure, though. Granted that you at times have some some thought-provoking (or primarily just provoking) things to say, but maybe that "We in the electorate" should be "The electorate of Beacon", since I'm pretty sure you're not part of that "We". But nice that you don't think everyone in Beacon is an idiot, as most of your posts seems to imply or flat-out state.
Now, in your typical BCN fashion, I'm sure you'll now start name-calling me, etc...
-
Permalink Reply by Philomena on
-
Charlene Vesuvius said:No, I'm not going to call you a name. But are you really more concerned about where I vote, than what our candidates for office say and do? The President of the Beacon Arts Community Association (BACA) is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. Does that disqualify her from helping out? The Vice President of BACA also is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. None of the principals of Hudson Beacon Glass are residents of Beacon and or vote in Beacon. Do you think this disqualify these concerned citizens from care about Beacon and the direction its civic leaders take us?
Philomena said:Charlene Vesuvius said:We in the electorate are not idiots and resent being treated this way.
CV, just to clarify - haven't you mentioned in posts in other discussions that you are a part-time resident in Beacon, sorta like a weekender, and that you live full-time in NYC ? So that you are not actually eligible to vote in Beacon ? I think you mentioned that maybe you own some rental properties ? Not 100% sure, though. Granted that you at times have some some thought-provoking (or primarily just provoking) things to say, but maybe that "We in the electorate" should be "The electorate of Beacon", since I'm pretty sure you're not part of that "We". But nice that you don't think everyone in Beacon is an idiot, as most of your posts seems to imply or flat-out state.
Now, in your typical BCN fashion, I'm sure you'll now start name-calling me, etc...
Actually, I'm not concerned at all, really, anything about you - I was just curious and asking a for a simple clarification, considering that "We in the electorate..." comment. If you notice, I didn't question your right to raise the points you have made, or anything like that, which your reply somewhat implies. But, if you don't want to answer the question, no problem, that's certainly your prerogative.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlene Vesuvius on
-
Sorry, I thought you had something to say and were making a point. Nevermind.
Philomena said:Charlene Vesuvius said:No, I'm not going to call you a name. But are you really more concerned about where I vote, than what our candidates for office say and do? The President of the Beacon Arts Community Association (BACA) is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. Does that disqualify her from helping out? The Vice President of BACA also is not a resident of Beacon and does not vote in Beacon. None of the principals of Hudson Beacon Glass are residents of Beacon and or vote in Beacon. Do you think this disqualify these concerned citizens from care about Beacon and the direction its civic leaders take us?
Philomena said:Charlene Vesuvius said:We in the electorate are not idiots and resent being treated this way.
CV, just to clarify - haven't you mentioned in posts in other discussions that you are a part-time resident in Beacon, sorta like a weekender, and that you live full-time in NYC ? So that you are not actually eligible to vote in Beacon ? I think you mentioned that maybe you own some rental properties ? Not 100% sure, though. Granted that you at times have some some thought-provoking (or primarily just provoking) things to say, but maybe that "We in the electorate" should be "The electorate of Beacon", since I'm pretty sure you're not part of that "We". But nice that you don't think everyone in Beacon is an idiot, as most of your posts seems to imply or flat-out state.
Now, in your typical BCN fashion, I'm sure you'll now start name-calling me, etc...
Actually, I'm not concerned at all, really, anything about you - I was just curious and asking a for a simple clarification, considering that "We in the electorate..." comment. If you notice, I didn't question your right to raise the points you have made, or anything like that, which your reply somewhat implies. But, if you don't want to answer the question, no problem, that's certainly your prerogative.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlene Vesuvius on
-
Today, I was listening to NPR and commentary by Alan Chartok, political scientist and president of WAMC/Northeast Public Radio. Dr. Chartok, as progressive a voice as there is when it comes to politics, was talking about Carolyn Maloney's challenge to Kirsten Gillibrand despite the Democratic Party Machine's efforts to do everything possible to discourage primary challenges for this Senate seat. Dr. Chartok pointed out that primaries invariably lead to stronger candidates and it was shameful for Democratic Politicians to not want the people to have a voice. It's a lesson for Boss Kelly and a reminder that when the Boss claims that he is a progressive, he is nothing of the sort.
-
Permalink Reply by Charles P. Kelly on -
Nice try CV, but it will not fly. Charlie
Charlene Vesuvius said:Today, I was listening to NPR and commentary by Alan Chartok, political scientist and president of WAMC/Northeast Public Radio. Dr. Chartok, as progressive a voice as there is when it comes to politics, was talking about Carolyn Maloney's challenge to Kirsten Gillibrand despite the Democratic Party Machine's efforts to do everything possible to discourage primary challenges for this Senate seat. Dr. Chartok pointed out that primaries invariably lead to stronger candidates and it was shameful for Democratic Politicians to not want the people to have a voice. It's a lesson for Boss Kelly and a reminder that when the Boss claims that he is a progressive, he is nothing of the sort.
© 2010 Created by Kelly Kingman
