What does that mean? We can strike anytime...anywhere!
It also means more spelling errors.
The good with the bad I guess...
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
To the Teachers
To the teachers who were offended by my letter to the Star which stated that none of them would be at another town meeting until it was time to pad their pockets. There will be another town meeting in May.
Prove me wrong!
Prove me wrong!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Why McCain Lost
American Thinker
By Jewish Odysseus
John McCain's incoherent, C- campaign did not deserve to win the Presidency this year. On the other hand, America doesn't deserve the punishment an Obama presidency is about to inflict upon us. Unfortunately, as a great Democrat once said: Life isn't fair.
John McCain, a genuine American war hero with a long, moderate-to-conservative voting record, has just been trounced by the callowest, least-accomplished, most far-left candidate in modern history. It is important to understand how we got here.
The first thing that needs to be said is this: John McCain is really a Reagan Democrat. He joined the Republican Party in Arizona years ago because people like him (patriotic, military background, self-consciously anti-Communist) had no future in the Democratic Party, and he remained a Republican since then, but anyone who watches his demeanor and speeches cannot avoid the conclusion that this is a man much more comfortable with traditional lunch-bucket arguments and policies than the generally more abstract, data-based analyses favored by Republicans.
Conservatives must understand McCain's candidacy in its full context: McCain's nomination represented the joint successes of two independent and mutually hostile projects -- the Media/Political Left's project, and McCain's own.
McCain represented a shrewd strategic choice by the leftist "hive"-he nearly won the nomination in 2000, when he had half as many GOP votes in the GOP primaries as Bush did. That near-death experience should have been a wakeup call to our slumbering "state party activists" to vaccinate their parties against any future Democrat pollution/manipulation. But, unfathomably, they stayed in their comas, and, sure enough, in 2008 the GOP primary candidate who got the 2d most GOP votes became the GOP candidate. He repeatedly positioned himself as "the anti-Republican Republican." And now we wonder why he had trouble making Republican arguments while running as a Republican?
McCain's own project planned to draw massive numbers of "moderate" Democrats and independents over to the Republican side. He had been calculating and executing this strategy since at least as far back as the early 1990s (when he and John Kerry were allies in normalizing relations with Vietnam). McCain's uber-rationale was this: America wanted a moderate leader who would seek out support from the other side, a task which in theory should have been made much easier if the Democrats nominated a far-left candidate. Sure enough, the Democrats did. Unfortunately, the far-left candidate had two unusual, (but by March 2008 easily foreseeable) advantages: he had no recognizable voting record in higher office to hang around his neck to define him; and he had a gigantic money advantage (well over 2-1) with which to savage McCain and glorify himself. This was a completely unprecedented situation, since by definition newcomers are generally unable to drum up the funds to compete with entrenched powerful pols. Obama in fact outspent McCain by a ratio heretofore reserved for shoo-in incumbent Presidents over mismatched challengers.
With these advantages, Obama was able to attack McCain's strategy directly, by in fact making McCain out to be the "risky," even "ideological" choice versus the reasonable, moderate, bi-partisan Obama. Result: McCain was unable to get independents or centrist Democrats not named Lieberman to support him (or at least get them known!) And, quite foreseeably, the media hive has been bursting with stories about "lifelong Republicans who are planning to vote for Obama."
Speaking of the hive, it needs to be said the 2008 election actually saw the culmination of two of their long-term projects, with McCain's nomination being the first. To a lot of media/political types, the Clintons represented a heart-breaking concession to evil capitalism. The Clintons gladly partnered with big business, and almost never manifested the type of red-meat soak-the-rich attitude that had energized the Democrat left for decades. Not only did the Clintons win twice, but they explicitly, smugly, repeatedly lectured the Left that that was the only way Democrats could possibly win. The Left hates, hates, HATES being told that undiluted Leftism is a political loser. Therefore, their second project was to ensure the nomination of a genuine leftist for the Democrats.
History will show that Hillary Clinton was an eminently suitable candidate for the Left, but through a combination of shrewd analysis and execution by Obama's campaign and frankly astounding incompetence, over-confidence and lack of discipline by her own, all topped off by some mischievous and fickle big-money Hollywood backstabbing, the Hillary candidacy finished as nothing more than high-priced roadkill: the most inevitable nomination in modern times was aborted, and the far-left was energized in a way not seen since LBJ withdrew in 1968.
With both the media/political hive projects of 2008 successfully completed, the media/left effectively held a "checkmate" position since March -- no matter what happened, they would get their way in November. Of course, they would do everything to make sure their true choice was elected, but even a docile McCain "who knew his place" and would sign off on Democrat legislation would be acceptable to them. This understanding was what had conservatives so dispirited until August 29.
Enter Sarah Palin. The Palin choice represented an unthinkable occurrence to the hive: McCain had forgotten who his benefactors were, and was instead listening to Republicans. The energizing of the right and the demonizing by the now-wounded hive were almost physically equal-and-opposite effects. The Palin choice restored a strategic parity to the campaign, wherein McCain had a strong, viable shot at repeating Bush's previous electoral wins, and appeared to even open up a few Dem-leaning states such as Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.
But McCain the Reagan Democrat zoned out and failed a critical test a few weeks later. What was he thinking when he declared on September 15 when he declared the US economy "fundamentally strong"? What was he thinking when he announced on September 24 he was suspending his campaign, including the upcoming September 26 debate appearance, after the financial crisis broke? Did he think the majority democrats would cave in and make him a conquering hero? Did he think it was a one-day crisis that would blow over, and make him look as if he had worked some magic on it? Indeed, as the Obama ads relentlessly drilled, he appeared confused, erratic, and out of touch -- his big moment of crisis in the middle of the campaign, and he blew it. He choked. And everyone forgot about Obama's horrendous response to Russia's Georgia invasion just a month earlier.
At that point, McCain had a month to restore his campaign, but being avalanched by paid Obama ads and the unpaid hive ads (remember the 2004 comment by Newsweek's Evan Thomas that the liberal media support is "worth maybe 15 points" in the polls), he would need to do it the unfamiliar way -- he'd need to argue for it, using information and persuasion, and punchy confrontations in the remaining debates. So how did he use those weeks?
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, McCain never mentioned Obama's "bitter clingers" comment
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Jeremiah Wright's incendiary sermons.
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's breaking his word to use public campaign financing (a McCain signature issue on which he had relentlessly beat up fellow Republicans!)
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's plan to "bankrupt" the US coal industry. (and where was McCain's research staff on that San Francisco interview, which had been posted on the internet for 9 months before they noticed it?! Simply inexcusable.)
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's "price of arugula" comment, a nice populist dig waiting to be made.
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never cited the Clinton campaign's many tough arguments against Obama -- he could have just quoted Hillary!
That was McCain's (and our) downfall: You can't bring moderation to an ideology fight. An honorable, sincere moderate who is behind really hasn't a chance against a cynical ideologue who is ahead. Obama simply dissembled at the debates, while McCain's tongue-tied references to Ayers, ACORN, Khalidi, "most liberal senator," etc., sounded unfairly abrupt, even desperate. Maybe they were? To the bitter end, McCain refrained from "bringing Jeremiah Wright into the campaign," even though Hillary had...Why not?
It wouldn't have looked moderate enough.
So here we are, on the verge of the greatest accomplishment by the American Left since...Well, maybe ever. To them, the Clintons represented the Menshevik phase, while Obama represents the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. So, to quote the original Bolshevik himself, what is to be done?
First, the Republican Party needs to relentlessly reform its state electoral rules to ensure that those voters choosing the Republican candidate are genuine Republicans who have the best interests of the Republican Party at heart. This self-evident corrective of course should have been completed by early 2001. It wasn't, so here we are, with a self-admittedly weak-on-economics candidate trying to talk his way through a financial meltdown. It has been pathetic. Second, we as voters and activists need to re-examine the emphasis we place -- or don't place -- on communication skills. Conservatives need to rediscover the importance of communication and argument in our representatives. It is important to note that the only Republican in recent history who received any compliment from the media hive was Ronald Reagan, who they labeled "The Great Communicator." This was of course an apparent put-down, since they were writing off Reagan's successes as the result only of his hypnotic, inscrutable speeches. But that non-compliment-compliment was the hive's acknowledgment that Reagan had been effective against them.
Going back to Bush 41 in 1988, the Republican's have nominated a string of candidates who have been at best "poor" in communications. As the 1960's Left demographic takes its seats in the highest offices of the media, academia, entertainment, arts, "public policy" think tanks, polling organizations, even business and finance, we have to assume that every one of our initiatives will be maligned, marginalized and targeted for oblivion, while the most crackpot schemes of the Left will be given respectful and favorable commentary. In this environment, we simply cannot afford any more tongue-tied leaders who are unable to argue their way out of a paper bag.
The author blogs at jewishodysseus.blogspot.com.
By Jewish Odysseus
John McCain's incoherent, C- campaign did not deserve to win the Presidency this year. On the other hand, America doesn't deserve the punishment an Obama presidency is about to inflict upon us. Unfortunately, as a great Democrat once said: Life isn't fair.
John McCain, a genuine American war hero with a long, moderate-to-conservative voting record, has just been trounced by the callowest, least-accomplished, most far-left candidate in modern history. It is important to understand how we got here.
The first thing that needs to be said is this: John McCain is really a Reagan Democrat. He joined the Republican Party in Arizona years ago because people like him (patriotic, military background, self-consciously anti-Communist) had no future in the Democratic Party, and he remained a Republican since then, but anyone who watches his demeanor and speeches cannot avoid the conclusion that this is a man much more comfortable with traditional lunch-bucket arguments and policies than the generally more abstract, data-based analyses favored by Republicans.
Conservatives must understand McCain's candidacy in its full context: McCain's nomination represented the joint successes of two independent and mutually hostile projects -- the Media/Political Left's project, and McCain's own.
McCain represented a shrewd strategic choice by the leftist "hive"-he nearly won the nomination in 2000, when he had half as many GOP votes in the GOP primaries as Bush did. That near-death experience should have been a wakeup call to our slumbering "state party activists" to vaccinate their parties against any future Democrat pollution/manipulation. But, unfathomably, they stayed in their comas, and, sure enough, in 2008 the GOP primary candidate who got the 2d most GOP votes became the GOP candidate. He repeatedly positioned himself as "the anti-Republican Republican." And now we wonder why he had trouble making Republican arguments while running as a Republican?
McCain's own project planned to draw massive numbers of "moderate" Democrats and independents over to the Republican side. He had been calculating and executing this strategy since at least as far back as the early 1990s (when he and John Kerry were allies in normalizing relations with Vietnam). McCain's uber-rationale was this: America wanted a moderate leader who would seek out support from the other side, a task which in theory should have been made much easier if the Democrats nominated a far-left candidate. Sure enough, the Democrats did. Unfortunately, the far-left candidate had two unusual, (but by March 2008 easily foreseeable) advantages: he had no recognizable voting record in higher office to hang around his neck to define him; and he had a gigantic money advantage (well over 2-1) with which to savage McCain and glorify himself. This was a completely unprecedented situation, since by definition newcomers are generally unable to drum up the funds to compete with entrenched powerful pols. Obama in fact outspent McCain by a ratio heretofore reserved for shoo-in incumbent Presidents over mismatched challengers.
With these advantages, Obama was able to attack McCain's strategy directly, by in fact making McCain out to be the "risky," even "ideological" choice versus the reasonable, moderate, bi-partisan Obama. Result: McCain was unable to get independents or centrist Democrats not named Lieberman to support him (or at least get them known!) And, quite foreseeably, the media hive has been bursting with stories about "lifelong Republicans who are planning to vote for Obama."
Speaking of the hive, it needs to be said the 2008 election actually saw the culmination of two of their long-term projects, with McCain's nomination being the first. To a lot of media/political types, the Clintons represented a heart-breaking concession to evil capitalism. The Clintons gladly partnered with big business, and almost never manifested the type of red-meat soak-the-rich attitude that had energized the Democrat left for decades. Not only did the Clintons win twice, but they explicitly, smugly, repeatedly lectured the Left that that was the only way Democrats could possibly win. The Left hates, hates, HATES being told that undiluted Leftism is a political loser. Therefore, their second project was to ensure the nomination of a genuine leftist for the Democrats.
History will show that Hillary Clinton was an eminently suitable candidate for the Left, but through a combination of shrewd analysis and execution by Obama's campaign and frankly astounding incompetence, over-confidence and lack of discipline by her own, all topped off by some mischievous and fickle big-money Hollywood backstabbing, the Hillary candidacy finished as nothing more than high-priced roadkill: the most inevitable nomination in modern times was aborted, and the far-left was energized in a way not seen since LBJ withdrew in 1968.
With both the media/political hive projects of 2008 successfully completed, the media/left effectively held a "checkmate" position since March -- no matter what happened, they would get their way in November. Of course, they would do everything to make sure their true choice was elected, but even a docile McCain "who knew his place" and would sign off on Democrat legislation would be acceptable to them. This understanding was what had conservatives so dispirited until August 29.
Enter Sarah Palin. The Palin choice represented an unthinkable occurrence to the hive: McCain had forgotten who his benefactors were, and was instead listening to Republicans. The energizing of the right and the demonizing by the now-wounded hive were almost physically equal-and-opposite effects. The Palin choice restored a strategic parity to the campaign, wherein McCain had a strong, viable shot at repeating Bush's previous electoral wins, and appeared to even open up a few Dem-leaning states such as Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.
But McCain the Reagan Democrat zoned out and failed a critical test a few weeks later. What was he thinking when he declared on September 15 when he declared the US economy "fundamentally strong"? What was he thinking when he announced on September 24 he was suspending his campaign, including the upcoming September 26 debate appearance, after the financial crisis broke? Did he think the majority democrats would cave in and make him a conquering hero? Did he think it was a one-day crisis that would blow over, and make him look as if he had worked some magic on it? Indeed, as the Obama ads relentlessly drilled, he appeared confused, erratic, and out of touch -- his big moment of crisis in the middle of the campaign, and he blew it. He choked. And everyone forgot about Obama's horrendous response to Russia's Georgia invasion just a month earlier.
At that point, McCain had a month to restore his campaign, but being avalanched by paid Obama ads and the unpaid hive ads (remember the 2004 comment by Newsweek's Evan Thomas that the liberal media support is "worth maybe 15 points" in the polls), he would need to do it the unfamiliar way -- he'd need to argue for it, using information and persuasion, and punchy confrontations in the remaining debates. So how did he use those weeks?
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, McCain never mentioned Obama's "bitter clingers" comment
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Jeremiah Wright's incendiary sermons.
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's breaking his word to use public campaign financing (a McCain signature issue on which he had relentlessly beat up fellow Republicans!)
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's plan to "bankrupt" the US coal industry. (and where was McCain's research staff on that San Francisco interview, which had been posted on the internet for 9 months before they noticed it?! Simply inexcusable.)
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never mentioned Obama's "price of arugula" comment, a nice populist dig waiting to be made.
- 3 debates, 4.5 hours on national TV face-to-face with Obama, never cited the Clinton campaign's many tough arguments against Obama -- he could have just quoted Hillary!
That was McCain's (and our) downfall: You can't bring moderation to an ideology fight. An honorable, sincere moderate who is behind really hasn't a chance against a cynical ideologue who is ahead. Obama simply dissembled at the debates, while McCain's tongue-tied references to Ayers, ACORN, Khalidi, "most liberal senator," etc., sounded unfairly abrupt, even desperate. Maybe they were? To the bitter end, McCain refrained from "bringing Jeremiah Wright into the campaign," even though Hillary had...Why not?
It wouldn't have looked moderate enough.
So here we are, on the verge of the greatest accomplishment by the American Left since...Well, maybe ever. To them, the Clintons represented the Menshevik phase, while Obama represents the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. So, to quote the original Bolshevik himself, what is to be done?
First, the Republican Party needs to relentlessly reform its state electoral rules to ensure that those voters choosing the Republican candidate are genuine Republicans who have the best interests of the Republican Party at heart. This self-evident corrective of course should have been completed by early 2001. It wasn't, so here we are, with a self-admittedly weak-on-economics candidate trying to talk his way through a financial meltdown. It has been pathetic. Second, we as voters and activists need to re-examine the emphasis we place -- or don't place -- on communication skills. Conservatives need to rediscover the importance of communication and argument in our representatives. It is important to note that the only Republican in recent history who received any compliment from the media hive was Ronald Reagan, who they labeled "The Great Communicator." This was of course an apparent put-down, since they were writing off Reagan's successes as the result only of his hypnotic, inscrutable speeches. But that non-compliment-compliment was the hive's acknowledgment that Reagan had been effective against them.
Going back to Bush 41 in 1988, the Republican's have nominated a string of candidates who have been at best "poor" in communications. As the 1960's Left demographic takes its seats in the highest offices of the media, academia, entertainment, arts, "public policy" think tanks, polling organizations, even business and finance, we have to assume that every one of our initiatives will be maligned, marginalized and targeted for oblivion, while the most crackpot schemes of the Left will be given respectful and favorable commentary. In this environment, we simply cannot afford any more tongue-tied leaders who are unable to argue their way out of a paper bag.
The author blogs at jewishodysseus.blogspot.com.
And So it Goes...
Well he we are at the dawn of a new chapter in American History. The question is; where will it take us? What does this election mean?
I would first like to recognize the brilliance of the Obama Campaign, as well as the milestone that has been reached in this stage of American History. Our first black President...perhaps the divide now will finally heal.
Where are we going? How will Obama govern? These are the questions we need to now ask ourselves.
Many of the Pundits on TV last night began discussing (once it became clear McCain had lost) whether this meant that the country had moved from Center Right, to Center Left. I think we are still a Center Right Country, but 58 million people decided that they wanted something different. Really, this election signifies the end of the old guard in Washington. The McCain's, Bidens, Franks, Reids, they are all on their way out the door. The dawn is setting on this period of American Politics, and to quote Kennedy, "Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans".
This is in fact a new age for America, and the next generation of leaders is beginning to emerge across this great country. If will be a battle of news ideas versus deep-rooted tradition. Our morals will be challenged, even changed.
The America of the future faces tests not only of it's ever evolving world view, but a test of the values we have held dear for generations. The value of our grandparents. The incoming generation, to quote Palahniuk are "The middle children of history, no great wars, no great depressions. Our great war is a spiritual war, our great depression is our lives." We live detached from the world around us even though we are connected like never before. We breath fiction into reality, because in our worlds they can be one and the same. We don't know real pain, merely inconvenience and disappointment. The great nation that our parents and grandparents built has sheltered us from the pain that exists outside our borders. Our only exposure being from the 24/7 news shows that change faster than we can blink; YouTube videos that we can turn off if they show something that we do not like, and go back to our world, our fantasies, where the pain cannot touch us.
In the 1930's and 1940's when this country was facing world wars and poverty this nation fought together, bleed together, held each others starving children in their arms together. They hoped together, they prayed together, and ultimately they found faith together. They got through the tough times and came out stronger, more unified. Changed.
My generation for the most part has lacked for nothing. We have either been provided for by our parents, or by the government. We have been taught either directly or indirectly that we are entitled to everything life has to offer whether we have worked for it our not.
That is the new battle in America. Will we allow ourselves to become complacent and reliant on the state, or will we bring in a new dawn in America that shows the world what can be achieved through hard work, determination, creativity, and unification?
If Obama does one thing as President I hope it is this; that he does work to unify the country. I hope he leads the fight in setting aside our differences so that we can work together to bring meaningful change to this country instead of pushing an ideology of the few, so that we can pull ourselves out of the rut of state reliance, entitlements, and again lead the world with our wealth, or innovation, and our might.
Time will tell. Obama is only the first step in what my generation has to offer this country. Will we rise to the challenge and shape a new future, or will we fall back on the past?
I would first like to recognize the brilliance of the Obama Campaign, as well as the milestone that has been reached in this stage of American History. Our first black President...perhaps the divide now will finally heal.
Where are we going? How will Obama govern? These are the questions we need to now ask ourselves.
Many of the Pundits on TV last night began discussing (once it became clear McCain had lost) whether this meant that the country had moved from Center Right, to Center Left. I think we are still a Center Right Country, but 58 million people decided that they wanted something different. Really, this election signifies the end of the old guard in Washington. The McCain's, Bidens, Franks, Reids, they are all on their way out the door. The dawn is setting on this period of American Politics, and to quote Kennedy, "Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans".
This is in fact a new age for America, and the next generation of leaders is beginning to emerge across this great country. If will be a battle of news ideas versus deep-rooted tradition. Our morals will be challenged, even changed.
The America of the future faces tests not only of it's ever evolving world view, but a test of the values we have held dear for generations. The value of our grandparents. The incoming generation, to quote Palahniuk are "The middle children of history, no great wars, no great depressions. Our great war is a spiritual war, our great depression is our lives." We live detached from the world around us even though we are connected like never before. We breath fiction into reality, because in our worlds they can be one and the same. We don't know real pain, merely inconvenience and disappointment. The great nation that our parents and grandparents built has sheltered us from the pain that exists outside our borders. Our only exposure being from the 24/7 news shows that change faster than we can blink; YouTube videos that we can turn off if they show something that we do not like, and go back to our world, our fantasies, where the pain cannot touch us.
In the 1930's and 1940's when this country was facing world wars and poverty this nation fought together, bleed together, held each others starving children in their arms together. They hoped together, they prayed together, and ultimately they found faith together. They got through the tough times and came out stronger, more unified. Changed.
My generation for the most part has lacked for nothing. We have either been provided for by our parents, or by the government. We have been taught either directly or indirectly that we are entitled to everything life has to offer whether we have worked for it our not.
That is the new battle in America. Will we allow ourselves to become complacent and reliant on the state, or will we bring in a new dawn in America that shows the world what can be achieved through hard work, determination, creativity, and unification?
If Obama does one thing as President I hope it is this; that he does work to unify the country. I hope he leads the fight in setting aside our differences so that we can work together to bring meaningful change to this country instead of pushing an ideology of the few, so that we can pull ourselves out of the rut of state reliance, entitlements, and again lead the world with our wealth, or innovation, and our might.
Time will tell. Obama is only the first step in what my generation has to offer this country. Will we rise to the challenge and shape a new future, or will we fall back on the past?
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Coupe D' Etat
Coupe D' Etat: The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority.
If you were at the Town Meeting on Monday November 3, 2008 that is what you witnessed. Town Meeting, the governing body of the Town and Voice of the People was infiltrated and suppressed by an (union) organized group employed by the Seekonk School Department.
I said it in the meeting, and I will say it again here. Half of the people in attendance last night will not step foot in another town meeting until it becomes time to pad their pockets yet again. It is a disgrace, and a gross manipulation of the democratic process.
Never have I seen Town Meeting go against both the recommendations of the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee. Especially when they are both in agreement with each other. Instead Robert McLintock stood up before every question was put to vote and in effect directed the back half of the room on how to place their votes. That is not democracy. That is an organized group of people hijacking democracy.
Robert McLintock in every town meeting I have ever attended has preached fiscal conservation. Last night he did an about face, and showed himself to be a complete hypocrite, and that he is nothing more than a whipping boy for the unions. He should resign in shame as soon as he possibly can.
With all respect to Michael Carol, our town administrator, because I think he is doing a great job, this is what happens when you have a Department Head in the town who is not a resident. Dr. Emile Chevrette could care less about the financial stability of the town. He doesn't live in it! All he cares about is sucking up to the unions and solidifying his power-base in the town while he is collecting a 130 thousand dollars a year to do it.
If you think it is over after this, think again. If state aid really does crumble next year, the residents of Seekonk could very well be faced with a Prop 2 1/2 override question being presented to them. Think of what the School Department, backed by the teachers union, will do to get that vote passed, or if it does not pass, think of what will happen to our schools when teachers get laid off in order to balance the budget.
I have two children. I understand the importance of a good education. But we need to set our limits. We need to understand the REALITY that money is not going to come flowing into the town. The teachers need to remember that their paychecks, benefits, retirement pensions, are all funded by tax payer money. My money, your money, your grandparents money. They do not work in the private sector, they work in the public sector, and therefore are not entitled to the pay increases and benefit levels of a private sector worker. I should also point out that in this economy, even private sector employees are lucky to see raises from their employers and often pay a higher portion of their benefits than these teachers do.
These teachers may get their raises this year, but once that budget is passed, they should start looking around and crossing their fingers hoping that it will not be them that gets a pink-slip handed to them next year. Maybe if they had not forced their selfishness on the town it would be in a better position to help them, or least be more willing to help them. For me...when the time comes... I will remind them that they are getting exactly what they deserve.
So I urge every voting member of Seekonk to attend the Special Town Meeting on Saturday November 8th. Let YOUR voice be heard. If you don't agree with me that is fine, but at least the voters of Seekonk would get the chance to let their own voices be heard, and not the voice of a powerful few.
If you were at the Town Meeting on Monday November 3, 2008 that is what you witnessed. Town Meeting, the governing body of the Town and Voice of the People was infiltrated and suppressed by an (union) organized group employed by the Seekonk School Department.
I said it in the meeting, and I will say it again here. Half of the people in attendance last night will not step foot in another town meeting until it becomes time to pad their pockets yet again. It is a disgrace, and a gross manipulation of the democratic process.
Never have I seen Town Meeting go against both the recommendations of the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee. Especially when they are both in agreement with each other. Instead Robert McLintock stood up before every question was put to vote and in effect directed the back half of the room on how to place their votes. That is not democracy. That is an organized group of people hijacking democracy.
Robert McLintock in every town meeting I have ever attended has preached fiscal conservation. Last night he did an about face, and showed himself to be a complete hypocrite, and that he is nothing more than a whipping boy for the unions. He should resign in shame as soon as he possibly can.
With all respect to Michael Carol, our town administrator, because I think he is doing a great job, this is what happens when you have a Department Head in the town who is not a resident. Dr. Emile Chevrette could care less about the financial stability of the town. He doesn't live in it! All he cares about is sucking up to the unions and solidifying his power-base in the town while he is collecting a 130 thousand dollars a year to do it.
If you think it is over after this, think again. If state aid really does crumble next year, the residents of Seekonk could very well be faced with a Prop 2 1/2 override question being presented to them. Think of what the School Department, backed by the teachers union, will do to get that vote passed, or if it does not pass, think of what will happen to our schools when teachers get laid off in order to balance the budget.
I have two children. I understand the importance of a good education. But we need to set our limits. We need to understand the REALITY that money is not going to come flowing into the town. The teachers need to remember that their paychecks, benefits, retirement pensions, are all funded by tax payer money. My money, your money, your grandparents money. They do not work in the private sector, they work in the public sector, and therefore are not entitled to the pay increases and benefit levels of a private sector worker. I should also point out that in this economy, even private sector employees are lucky to see raises from their employers and often pay a higher portion of their benefits than these teachers do.
These teachers may get their raises this year, but once that budget is passed, they should start looking around and crossing their fingers hoping that it will not be them that gets a pink-slip handed to them next year. Maybe if they had not forced their selfishness on the town it would be in a better position to help them, or least be more willing to help them. For me...when the time comes... I will remind them that they are getting exactly what they deserve.
So I urge every voting member of Seekonk to attend the Special Town Meeting on Saturday November 8th. Let YOUR voice be heard. If you don't agree with me that is fine, but at least the voters of Seekonk would get the chance to let their own voices be heard, and not the voice of a powerful few.
Monday, November 3, 2008
The Coal Comment
Obama's comment about coal is very interesting and believe it or not could turn out to be devastating.
Why?
Pennsylvania. One of, if not the biggest, producers of coal in the world. And...it is a battle ground state. If McCain takes Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida it could very well cost Obama the election. McCain over the weekend has closed the gap and even passed Obama in quite a few of the battle ground states.
Real Clear Politics right now puts Obama with 278 EV's to McCains 132 EV's (Electoral Votes). With 128 EV's up for grabs. Seems dismal if you are a McCain Voter until you realize that Obama was up as high as 356 EV's earlier in the week, and Friday he had 311 in his corner.
One of the biggest things that any political strategist is going to look at in polling is "trending". If a candidate is trending up in the polls the campaign is happy, if they are trending down, that is bad, especially when it is consistent over a period of time. In politics a week is like 7 dog years.
In order for McCain to win he needs to take Fl,GA,OH,PA, and either NC or VA. He has closed the gap in NC and both Candidates are Polling at 47.8% each with 4.4% either undecided or voting for a third party. So that is a state to watch.
PA Polling is less promising with Obama enjoying a 51.3/43.7 lead. Which is why this coal remark could be so devastating. The Philly area is pretty much the only part of the state that is an Obama Strong-hold. But if Western PA comes out in droves, and Philly doesn't that could turn the tied in McCains favor, and make for a very long election night.
Also watch NH. It's only 4 electoral votes, but Obama is holding a fairly comfortable 10 point lead there. If NH ends up going to McCain, that could be very indicative of where some of the other battle grounds states, and former "Red States" might end up going. NH should be in first. So we may have a good idea if the "Bradly Effect" is in play after all.
Why?
Pennsylvania. One of, if not the biggest, producers of coal in the world. And...it is a battle ground state. If McCain takes Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida it could very well cost Obama the election. McCain over the weekend has closed the gap and even passed Obama in quite a few of the battle ground states.
Real Clear Politics right now puts Obama with 278 EV's to McCains 132 EV's (Electoral Votes). With 128 EV's up for grabs. Seems dismal if you are a McCain Voter until you realize that Obama was up as high as 356 EV's earlier in the week, and Friday he had 311 in his corner.
One of the biggest things that any political strategist is going to look at in polling is "trending". If a candidate is trending up in the polls the campaign is happy, if they are trending down, that is bad, especially when it is consistent over a period of time. In politics a week is like 7 dog years.
In order for McCain to win he needs to take Fl,GA,OH,PA, and either NC or VA. He has closed the gap in NC and both Candidates are Polling at 47.8% each with 4.4% either undecided or voting for a third party. So that is a state to watch.
PA Polling is less promising with Obama enjoying a 51.3/43.7 lead. Which is why this coal remark could be so devastating. The Philly area is pretty much the only part of the state that is an Obama Strong-hold. But if Western PA comes out in droves, and Philly doesn't that could turn the tied in McCains favor, and make for a very long election night.
Also watch NH. It's only 4 electoral votes, but Obama is holding a fairly comfortable 10 point lead there. If NH ends up going to McCain, that could be very indicative of where some of the other battle grounds states, and former "Red States" might end up going. NH should be in first. So we may have a good idea if the "Bradly Effect" is in play after all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
