Thursday, October 26, 2006
Doctrine of Preemption
Does it bother anyone else that Councilor Bloom's little preemptive speech before last night's open forum session - 1) equated those who wish to speak for 2 minutes to council with those who wish to annihilate Israel via the ol' slippery slope rhetorical trick? 2) basically told the residents of North Adams that the council of MA's smallest city is far too serious and busy to hear anything except munincipal issues?
For pete's sake. The council should at least lend an ear for 2 freakin' minutes when a resident takes the time to show up to their meetings.
If there is nothing for the council to act upon, what the heck is the harm? And the council might actually learn something new from someone... God forbid.
Having sat in the gallery of a few average council meetings, there are rarely more than a handful of folks there, and very rarely does any visitor have anything to say.
If this is about decorum, I can only suggest that the councilors get over themselves. Aside from Chris Tremblay's efforts to shake up the traffic commission, what the hell else have they done recently other than vote on pre-ordained proposals and budgets? Help me out here. Has a councilor other than Tremblay introduced one interesting idea in the year 2006? Seriously. ¶ 1:13 AM
For pete's sake. The council should at least lend an ear for 2 freakin' minutes when a resident takes the time to show up to their meetings.
If there is nothing for the council to act upon, what the heck is the harm? And the council might actually learn something new from someone... God forbid.
Having sat in the gallery of a few average council meetings, there are rarely more than a handful of folks there, and very rarely does any visitor have anything to say.
If this is about decorum, I can only suggest that the councilors get over themselves. Aside from Chris Tremblay's efforts to shake up the traffic commission, what the hell else have they done recently other than vote on pre-ordained proposals and budgets? Help me out here. Has a councilor other than Tremblay introduced one interesting idea in the year 2006? Seriously. ¶ 1:13 AM
Comments:
<< Home
The estimate is that the Rudddinistas had 20 sipporters there--- including Buddington-May (Sr) Lee - Rudd (jr) and the senior as well---if everyone talked their tqo minutes-- that would have been 40 minutes- total --but did they-?????--NOPE - they sent a 12 year old kid and an elderly lady uo to do their dirty work time and sat on their thunbs- which apparently were up their collectibe asses---I have never witnessed child or elderly abuse of this kind before--probably doesn't meet the standard of the law----but it was pretty pathetic---chbpod
# posted by 
: 11:45 PM
: 11:45 PM
Your comment contradicts the sentiments you expressed in your letter to the editor.
You said quite clearly that you resent residents making the council chambers their playground.
As a councilor, you should shut up and listen. And when you do comment, stick to the issues, not the people involved.
You said quite clearly that you resent residents making the council chambers their playground.
As a councilor, you should shut up and listen. And when you do comment, stick to the issues, not the people involved.
As usual Greg can't read---I did resent them tryong tp puty on the agenda a reolsution that had nothing to do with municipal interest----however they had the opportunity to speak under Open Forum as allowed by the Chair--- I resented that too----however, when they had there opportunity--they didn't use it-----I did shut up and I did listen----stick to the issues??? they never presented them---no evidence--no resolution-- nada---- chbpod
# posted by : 9:54 AM
: 9:54 AM
I have never witnessed child or elderly abuse of this kind before
If that is an issue, and not a personal attack on your part, call the cops.
But I have never ever seen nor heard you engage in honest debate with those who do not have the power to fire you or squash you politically, so why should you start now?
If that is an issue, and not a personal attack on your part, call the cops.
But I have never ever seen nor heard you engage in honest debate with those who do not have the power to fire you or squash you politically, so why should you start now?
I am cobfused-- didn't you say that I was fired?? maybe that was John-- I get you guys confused---honest debate---with you??? why???
you are not going to change my minde- nor am I yours---what's the point???---oh by the way nice of you not to print my entire quote which said that I don;t believed that ir met the standard of the law---you really are a worthless piece of shit---and a phoney as well-----if you were so supportive of the Riddinistas -why weren't you there??? and raise your voice???// you say you have been to Council meetings-----and what did you contribute---- what did you raise as an issue during Open Forum??? I guess you are just too chicken shit to be known--chbpod
you are not going to change my minde- nor am I yours---what's the point???---oh by the way nice of you not to print my entire quote which said that I don;t believed that ir met the standard of the law---you really are a worthless piece of shit---and a phoney as well-----if you were so supportive of the Riddinistas -why weren't you there??? and raise your voice???// you say you have been to Council meetings-----and what did you contribute---- what did you raise as an issue during Open Forum??? I guess you are just too chicken shit to be known--chbpod
# posted by : 9:12 PM
: 9:12 PM
Gee Clark, I guess everyone will take the quote out of context since they don't know how to use their mouse to scroll 3 inches up. And since you admit that it does not meet the legal standard, you seem to admit that your choice of words is just an attack on a resident(s)
And no, I *asked* if you had been fired as a town adminstrator in NH. (IIRC, a Transcript election bio of you mentioned a stint as a town official during the '80s. Am I getting you confused with another councilor?) I did say you had been fired by the NA voters once before.
Chris, actually, a few people did have something to say and were quickly belittled. My advice to Clark, to "shut up and listen" is a very sound strategy when extreme personalities are involved.
But the original point of the post was Bloom's "who will be the next person to waste our time with a national issue" speech. It wasn't about you, really. You have made it clear that you are willing to listen to residents, even if they are a little over the top, unlike our one other blogging councilor who "resents" people wasting his precious meeting time.
And it sounds like the sitting councilors have potentially started reconsidering their "open forum" policy. That would be a major political mis-step on their part. Residents don't like having things taken away.
And no, I *asked* if you had been fired as a town adminstrator in NH. (IIRC, a Transcript election bio of you mentioned a stint as a town official during the '80s. Am I getting you confused with another councilor?) I did say you had been fired by the NA voters once before.
Chris, actually, a few people did have something to say and were quickly belittled. My advice to Clark, to "shut up and listen" is a very sound strategy when extreme personalities are involved.
But the original point of the post was Bloom's "who will be the next person to waste our time with a national issue" speech. It wasn't about you, really. You have made it clear that you are willing to listen to residents, even if they are a little over the top, unlike our one other blogging councilor who "resents" people wasting his precious meeting time.
And it sounds like the sitting councilors have potentially started reconsidering their "open forum" policy. That would be a major political mis-step on their part. Residents don't like having things taken away.
Precious meeting time- is not an issue to me---it's the topic because it is of national- international interest not municipal---and it's partisan politics---that's what I resent----
I did shutup and listen---- and expected to hear a whole lot more----I had seen Buddington's web page on impeachment and have read most of it on my show--------but I expected May and Buddington--and a whole passle of others-- to articulate more specifically their position instead of being mute------under Open Forum I can do nothing but shut up and listen---actually it was John Barrett who was quoted in the paper as saying this would be a waste of time-----Open Meeting was designed to give citizens and opportunity to bring issues of municipal interest to the attention of the Council----- which subsequently might be placed by a Councilor on the agenda---it is theoretically possible that one councilor might have been moved and persuaded by the presentation---and put the resolution on the agenda---doubtful but theoretically possible----waste of time- nope I had plenty of time available to listen----clearly there are those that think that the Bush presidency has a direct bearing on North Adams---maybe it does in a cosmic sense---but on the governance of the city--- I don;t think so----and there are some pretty liberal Democrats on that Council who can;t stand George Bush---and I guess they too thought that an impeachment resolution was inappropriate----they should not have left Max May and Rosemary Thomas out to dry--- they should have backed them up---with "evidence"---if they were not abused---- they were at least used---the CityCouncil is not a soap box-----nor should it be-----that's my opinion-- and I guess it's also that of the rest of the Council---fired from the Council? -yup-- re-hired? yup- stint as a town adminsitrator in the early 80's? (in MA not NH) fired? nope---just to set the record straight-- chbpod
Post a Comment
I did shutup and listen---- and expected to hear a whole lot more----I had seen Buddington's web page on impeachment and have read most of it on my show--------but I expected May and Buddington--and a whole passle of others-- to articulate more specifically their position instead of being mute------under Open Forum I can do nothing but shut up and listen---actually it was John Barrett who was quoted in the paper as saying this would be a waste of time-----Open Meeting was designed to give citizens and opportunity to bring issues of municipal interest to the attention of the Council----- which subsequently might be placed by a Councilor on the agenda---it is theoretically possible that one councilor might have been moved and persuaded by the presentation---and put the resolution on the agenda---doubtful but theoretically possible----waste of time- nope I had plenty of time available to listen----clearly there are those that think that the Bush presidency has a direct bearing on North Adams---maybe it does in a cosmic sense---but on the governance of the city--- I don;t think so----and there are some pretty liberal Democrats on that Council who can;t stand George Bush---and I guess they too thought that an impeachment resolution was inappropriate----they should not have left Max May and Rosemary Thomas out to dry--- they should have backed them up---with "evidence"---if they were not abused---- they were at least used---the CityCouncil is not a soap box-----nor should it be-----that's my opinion-- and I guess it's also that of the rest of the Council---fired from the Council? -yup-- re-hired? yup- stint as a town adminsitrator in the early 80's? (in MA not NH) fired? nope---just to set the record straight-- chbpod
# posted by : 3:21 PM
: 3:21 PM<< Home
