Once again, the Poughkeepsie Journal endorses the Good Ol Boys in the State Senate.
First, It was Larkin over Delarose for some misleading reasons pertaining to vagueness.
First, It was Larkin over Delarose for some misleading reasons pertaining to vagueness.
From what I understand, Larry went into great detail on some of the issues they focused on and yet, the Editorial Board sites that Delarose was vague. Whatever.
Now it’s Frank’s turn. Assemblyman Tommy Kirwin, has been weaseling through election cycles with the same tactics as if the formula will always work. Not this time. Just as with Delarose, Skartados has some sharp points for serious change in the Assembly, and his private sector success story? Untouched. What a paper!
The Editorial Board thinks Tommy’s “lack of” is reason enough to let him continue to “Fight on” for another term. Everyone knew going in, that the paper was going to do this…but why so brazen?
Tom's claim to fame? Voting against the budget! I also voted against the City budget twice. I was out voted and it passed, but I voted against it…should I tout that and run for Assembly?
Now it’s Frank’s turn. Assemblyman Tommy Kirwin, has been weaseling through election cycles with the same tactics as if the formula will always work. Not this time. Just as with Delarose, Skartados has some sharp points for serious change in the Assembly, and his private sector success story? Untouched. What a paper!The Editorial Board thinks Tommy’s “lack of” is reason enough to let him continue to “Fight on” for another term. Everyone knew going in, that the paper was going to do this…but why so brazen?
Tom's claim to fame? Voting against the budget! I also voted against the City budget twice. I was out voted and it passed, but I voted against it…should I tout that and run for Assembly? Puh-Leez !
I read the papers editorial with dismay as they showed a second time who they serve…themselves. Albany needs an enema and the Poughkeepsie Journal isnt interested. Delarose and Skartados will be the ones who usher economic change to their two districts and will surely pay attention to their constituency in a different fashion than what you’ve seen of late.
What happens when one or both of these fine candidates of change wins and the board has to face them for the next term? Will they be shunned by the office holder like Kevin Cahill has done to the Kingston Freeman? Hmm, maybe there’s something to that!
I read the papers editorial with dismay as they showed a second time who they serve…themselves. Albany needs an enema and the Poughkeepsie Journal isnt interested. Delarose and Skartados will be the ones who usher economic change to their two districts and will surely pay attention to their constituency in a different fashion than what you’ve seen of late.
What happens when one or both of these fine candidates of change wins and the board has to face them for the next term? Will they be shunned by the office holder like Kevin Cahill has done to the Kingston Freeman? Hmm, maybe there’s something to that!
100th Assembly District that includes the cities of Beacon and Poughkeepsie in Dutchess County and the towns of Marlboro, Shawangunk and Lloyd in Ulster County.
12 comments:
They also endorsed good old boy Cahill. Say what you want about the Freeman, but they have the guts to say we shouldn't vote for any of these guys.
First, Kirwin is an Assemblyman, not a Senator.
Second, when did you EVER vote against the budget? What years?
Yes, the Freeman said "Throw em all out"
I would expect no less, even if Kevin were working the local food bank since Kevin has cut the Freeman off. I give them a pass.
and 9:07...My opinion posting states that Tommy Boy is an Assemblyman.
And look back at the record, I believe I voted against the budget in 2003 and 2004.
No fanfare from anyone. Wasnt expecting it.
I just thought to pass along this little diddy from the Record:
"It is no surprise that incumbent Senator Larkin leads the pack of local state legislators in spending on expenses. The Times Herald Record article in today's edition notes that Larkin has spent over 1.2 million dollars in the last 18 months running his office. If we want to be serious about cutting spending there's a good place to start. How many small businesses run on much less than that to try to make a living and pay their employees. The days of long term incumbents free spending with our hard earned tax dollars will come to an end on November 4th. It's definitely time for a change."
The Record also says Cahill spent the most among local assemblymen.
Vote them all out, including Hinchey and Cahill. Sorry it's all or nothing, you can't pick and choose.
We need to clean house in NY and Washington!!
Vote them out just because they are incumbents? Where is the sense in that? I think the Poughkeepsie Journal's endorsement of Assemblyman Kevin Cahill is the most thoughtful, logical endorsement of a candidate I have seen in a local paper in quite some time. It convinced me to support him and I have never voted for him before. We want change and being in a position of power gives one a chance to influence others.
Read this from the endorsement.
Albany is built on the seniority system to some degree and, with all its faults, it does mean over time someone like Cahill can rise from the rank-and-file and take over chairmanship of an important committee such as energy. That wouldn't necessarily be a good thing if Cahill had a poor record on energy and environmental policies. But he has stellar record in these regards and, in this new position, he has a better chance of effecting change.
http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008810230303
ththey endorsed all the incumbents so what's new. they endorsed kevin who supports silver all the way and therefore supports new york city all the way. he claims to oppose school property tax also but has accomplished nothing since silver opposes this matter. he is useless as something on a bull. the freeman came out against kevin and everyone knows the freeman & kevin have no muse for each other other than they opposed all republicans this democratic rag which is only good for toilet paper.
Yes! Vote them out just because they are incumbents! Also vote them out because they are ancient as the hills. I will be running for the hills if these fossils are able to continue to use my tax paying dollars for no good use. We need change and we need it now!
Couple of issues I have with all the incumbents at the moment include: inpoorely funded playgrounds. I have kids and expect to have a decent playground for them to visit however none exist in my community. When was the last time you saw a cop out setting a speed trap along our most used roads? Hardly! On some occasion you may find one on the highway but I've seen many a driver zoom past schools when the vicinity speed limit is 15mph. The list goes on, but do you see any of these incumbents making sure that my concerns as a citizen are being heard?
I feel sorry for the aldermen of this city. The mayor drafted up a new budget which leaves everyone gasping for air and the aldermen had to try to clean up the mess. Sure, our taxes have gone up, but do you know how much they would have gone up without the vote the way it did? I suggest a total reality check from everyone reading this blog because change has to be the way forward. If we stick behind in the dark ages, the dark is going to swamp us and engulf everything that we want. Economy is on the way, will we allow our leaders of the future to help?
8:18. Vote them out because they're incumbents in the majority party in Albany and they've done little to make government improve. If Cahill and his pals in the majority had guts, they'd elect a new speaker, push aside Silver, and really get into reforming government. But they won't take that chance, because if they fail, Silver will marginalize them and they won't get a dime for their districts, which is what really gets them re-elected. As long as Shelly is in charge, he takes care of people like Cahill.
Record followed the Freeman and said don't elect any incumbents in the majority. Now Cahill has another newspaper to bad mouth.
Cahill did not stop dealing with the Freeman because of their editorial endorsements. Cahill stopped dealing with the Freeman because their reporting was sloppy, inaccurate and maliciously false.
One example: They reported him at an illegal meeting, editorialized on it twice, criticizing him for being there, even though he was not at the meeting.
They repeatedly editorialized and reported slanted stories about Albany based on questionable third hand reports and refused to report corrections when factual errors were made.
There were other instances, as well. The Freeman refused to invest in honest, good reporting. Cahill rightfully decided that he did not want to participate in their mis-information machine, no matter what their political leanings.
Post a Comment