Chris Johansen filed the following complaint with the New York State Comptroller:
This complaint takes place in the Town of Olive in Ulster County New York. I am reporting the use of town funds and services being used to sponsor an event put on by the town Democratic committee.
On Sept 12th of this year the town Democratic committee (ODC) put on the annual event called Olive day. There are as many as 30 booths rented to anybody who wants one with checks made out to the O.D.C..There is a booth that sells beer for the O.D.C.. These are just some of the money makers for the O.D.C. at this event.
Services that the Town payed for at this event include.
1. There are 7 or 8 town police officers there to put on a bike rodeo for the children.
2. There are two town laborers and a town truck picking up garbage all day
3. This garbage is deposited in a town highway dump truck which on Monday hauled it to Resource recovery in Kingston where it was dumped
On 10/13/09 at a public town board meeting I voiced this complaint. The supervisor with his three democratic board members advised me that Olive day was a town event. He did not explain why my check for booth space is made out to the O.D.C.
The O.D.C. deposits thousands from Olive day while the town picks up the bill for the Expenses.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Democratic Party Shenanigans in the Town of Olive
I just received this e-mail from a friend who lives in the Town of Olive:
>When googling "fundraiser for the Olive Democrats at Davis park ny" you see this,..
Ulster County Democrats
Sunday, September 9—Olive Day, Davis Park, West Shokan. Sunday, September 9—Esopus Democrats Annual Picnic, Freer Park, Noon--? ...ulstercountydemocrats.blogspot.com/ - Cached - Similar
but when you click on it and go there, you see they deleted that blog post and now it just starts at the last blog being Tuesday, August 4, 2009, LOL,... you have them running to cover there tracks!
(are tax payers picking up the tab for Esopus Democrats Annual Picnic, Freer Park also?)(and how far up that ladder does this scam go?)
>When googling "fundraiser for the Olive Democrats at Davis park ny" you see this,..
Ulster County Democrats
Sunday, September 9—Olive Day, Davis Park, West Shokan. Sunday, September 9—Esopus Democrats Annual Picnic, Freer Park, Noon--? ...ulstercountydemocrats.blogspot.com/ - Cached - Similar
but when you click on it and go there, you see they deleted that blog post and now it just starts at the last blog being Tuesday, August 4, 2009, LOL,... you have them running to cover there tracks!
(are tax payers picking up the tab for Esopus Democrats Annual Picnic, Freer Park also?)(and how far up that ladder does this scam go?)
Glenda McGee Tells It Like It Is
Dear Editor,
In a small town it seems there is a personal nature to an election that is unfortunate and I think unwise.
When voting for your personal interests means not voting for people you are friendly with and have happily done town business with, an election challenge to incumbents can be misinterpreted as a personal affront. But is that wise?
When voting I disavow "feelings" and assess the best economic choice that serves my fiscal well being. I swear I would vote against my own son if I thought he was going to raise my taxes. "Sorry, kid."
The team challenging our Town of Olive incumbents is running on the Republican and Conservative lines this year.
They have made a commitment to a hiring freeze and a frozen budget. They will actually refuse the health care package and will not take a health care buyout.. Vince Barringer, running for supervisor, will take a ten thousand dollar pay cut as well. I really appreciate that.
Because the Republican / Conservative candidates are making a clear commitment to thrift at their own personal cost, I am convinced that this year I should vote the Republican Conservative ticket for the first time.
By the way, these candidates will require a town board majority to halt the growing town budget burden.
These are new and scary times. We New Yorkers will soon pay a huge government mandated obligation to make up the pension shortfall of the New York State employees. Spam and water for dinner anyone? The tax burden we face will be enormous and will threaten the home ownership of those who live on the fiscal edge. Federal spending on the "Stimulous Package" has lowered our dollar index value from 99 to 75 in the past eight months. Yikes, there goes the buying power of the American dollar.
When I vote for Vince Barringer and the rest of the Republican/Conservative ticket November 3rd., I will not be voting against anyone. I will be voting for my economic survival.
Sincerely,
Glenda Rose McGee
In a small town it seems there is a personal nature to an election that is unfortunate and I think unwise.
When voting for your personal interests means not voting for people you are friendly with and have happily done town business with, an election challenge to incumbents can be misinterpreted as a personal affront. But is that wise?
When voting I disavow "feelings" and assess the best economic choice that serves my fiscal well being. I swear I would vote against my own son if I thought he was going to raise my taxes. "Sorry, kid."
The team challenging our Town of Olive incumbents is running on the Republican and Conservative lines this year.
They have made a commitment to a hiring freeze and a frozen budget. They will actually refuse the health care package and will not take a health care buyout.. Vince Barringer, running for supervisor, will take a ten thousand dollar pay cut as well. I really appreciate that.
Because the Republican / Conservative candidates are making a clear commitment to thrift at their own personal cost, I am convinced that this year I should vote the Republican Conservative ticket for the first time.
By the way, these candidates will require a town board majority to halt the growing town budget burden.
These are new and scary times. We New Yorkers will soon pay a huge government mandated obligation to make up the pension shortfall of the New York State employees. Spam and water for dinner anyone? The tax burden we face will be enormous and will threaten the home ownership of those who live on the fiscal edge. Federal spending on the "Stimulous Package" has lowered our dollar index value from 99 to 75 in the past eight months. Yikes, there goes the buying power of the American dollar.
When I vote for Vince Barringer and the rest of the Republican/Conservative ticket November 3rd., I will not be voting against anyone. I will be voting for my economic survival.
Sincerely,
Glenda Rose McGee
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Pro-Bailout Republicans Lost and Should Step Aside
I wrote the following blog on the Republican Liberty Caucus site and reproduce it here.
Walter Weyl was one of the three founders of the New Republic, all of whom were pivotal in the creation of so-called “state activist liberalism”, an Orwellian phrase if there ever was one. Weyl was a professor at the Wharton School of Business and advocate of socialism. His book, New Democracy, is not as popular today as Herbert Croly’s and Walter Lippmann’s, his partners’. But Weyl’s book is the most prophetic and forthright. In it he argues (unlike Croly and Lippmann who were not so explicit) that Progressivism (the ideology of Theodore Roosevelt -R- and Woodrow Wilson -D-) would lead to socialism.
The culmination of Weyl’s ideas has occurred. The close linkage between the Progressivism of the Rockefeller Republicans (of whom Theodore Roosevelt was the first) and the social democracy of the Democrats (that traces back to Franklin Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan) is now evident. With the bailout we see that both Progressivism and social democracy are, as Weyl knew and advocated, complementary versions of socialism.
One side effect of this is we now know what to call them. They are not “liberals”, which is what libertarians should be called. They are not “Progressives” because no ideology is more conservative than socialism. Nor are they “social democrats” because they do not believe in democracy, preferring pandering to Wall Street and other special interests, especially public sector unions, failed manufacturing firms and banks to democracy. Rather, they are SOCIALISTS. I therefore say to you now:
KNOW YE BY THESE PRESENTS THAT HENCEFORTH I, MITCHELL LANGBERT, REFUSE TO CALL ROCKEFELLER REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS BY ANY OTHER THAN THEIR TRUE NAME: SOCIALISTS.
A second side effect is that there is an important struggle ahead: to retake control of the GOP. In the early twentieth century the GOP was the party of Progressivism. William Howard Taft was what today would be called a conservative, and Theodore Roosevelt bolted the GOP to start the Progressive or Bull Moose Party by which time he was aggressively socialist. William Jennings Bryan had captured the Democrats in 1896 on behalf of populism, and these ideas found final articulation not in the Progressivism of Wilson, who was for most of his life a Bourbon or laissez faire Democrat, but of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The fact is that most of FDR’s ideas had already been advocated by TR in 1912.
The GOP never recovered from the harm that TR did. Subsequent presidents, Harding and Coolidge, were not ideologically astute and did absolutely nothing to alter the Progressive institutions that Roosevelt and Wilson had initiated. Hoover was a Progressive from the time he had worked for Woodrow Wilson as his food industry price fixing Czar during World War I. The New Deal was just a continuation of Hoover’s failed Progressive ideas such as using public works to cure unemployment. Eisenhower did nothing to reduce government and added his share, such as the Interstates. Goldwater and Reagan were a departure, but George W. Bush was part of the Progressive tradition, and waited until several years into his office to make it clear.
We are left with a situation where socialist extremists are in control of both parties. The pro-bailout Republicans of McCain and Bush and the socialist Democrats constitute a twin-headed hydra. We can win, though, because a healthy 30 percent of America still favors freedom. If we align ourselves with various other interests, such as the religious, we can win.
But there is a big fight ahead. Liberty Republicans need to think about how to convince the Rockefeller Republicans to move to their true home–the Democratic Party. Yes, let’s get rid of them. They predominate in the unwinnable Blue states anyway, and the public will not care if oil, health care and insurance executives align themselves with the party of greed, the Democrats.
In any case, we have a good argument: the pro bailout Republicans lost because of their ideas. They have failed. They should step aside.
Mitchell Langbert blogs at http://www.mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.
Walter Weyl was one of the three founders of the New Republic, all of whom were pivotal in the creation of so-called “state activist liberalism”, an Orwellian phrase if there ever was one. Weyl was a professor at the Wharton School of Business and advocate of socialism. His book, New Democracy, is not as popular today as Herbert Croly’s and Walter Lippmann’s, his partners’. But Weyl’s book is the most prophetic and forthright. In it he argues (unlike Croly and Lippmann who were not so explicit) that Progressivism (the ideology of Theodore Roosevelt -R- and Woodrow Wilson -D-) would lead to socialism.
The culmination of Weyl’s ideas has occurred. The close linkage between the Progressivism of the Rockefeller Republicans (of whom Theodore Roosevelt was the first) and the social democracy of the Democrats (that traces back to Franklin Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan) is now evident. With the bailout we see that both Progressivism and social democracy are, as Weyl knew and advocated, complementary versions of socialism.
One side effect of this is we now know what to call them. They are not “liberals”, which is what libertarians should be called. They are not “Progressives” because no ideology is more conservative than socialism. Nor are they “social democrats” because they do not believe in democracy, preferring pandering to Wall Street and other special interests, especially public sector unions, failed manufacturing firms and banks to democracy. Rather, they are SOCIALISTS. I therefore say to you now:
KNOW YE BY THESE PRESENTS THAT HENCEFORTH I, MITCHELL LANGBERT, REFUSE TO CALL ROCKEFELLER REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS BY ANY OTHER THAN THEIR TRUE NAME: SOCIALISTS.
A second side effect is that there is an important struggle ahead: to retake control of the GOP. In the early twentieth century the GOP was the party of Progressivism. William Howard Taft was what today would be called a conservative, and Theodore Roosevelt bolted the GOP to start the Progressive or Bull Moose Party by which time he was aggressively socialist. William Jennings Bryan had captured the Democrats in 1896 on behalf of populism, and these ideas found final articulation not in the Progressivism of Wilson, who was for most of his life a Bourbon or laissez faire Democrat, but of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The fact is that most of FDR’s ideas had already been advocated by TR in 1912.
The GOP never recovered from the harm that TR did. Subsequent presidents, Harding and Coolidge, were not ideologically astute and did absolutely nothing to alter the Progressive institutions that Roosevelt and Wilson had initiated. Hoover was a Progressive from the time he had worked for Woodrow Wilson as his food industry price fixing Czar during World War I. The New Deal was just a continuation of Hoover’s failed Progressive ideas such as using public works to cure unemployment. Eisenhower did nothing to reduce government and added his share, such as the Interstates. Goldwater and Reagan were a departure, but George W. Bush was part of the Progressive tradition, and waited until several years into his office to make it clear.
We are left with a situation where socialist extremists are in control of both parties. The pro-bailout Republicans of McCain and Bush and the socialist Democrats constitute a twin-headed hydra. We can win, though, because a healthy 30 percent of America still favors freedom. If we align ourselves with various other interests, such as the religious, we can win.
But there is a big fight ahead. Liberty Republicans need to think about how to convince the Rockefeller Republicans to move to their true home–the Democratic Party. Yes, let’s get rid of them. They predominate in the unwinnable Blue states anyway, and the public will not care if oil, health care and insurance executives align themselves with the party of greed, the Democrats.
In any case, we have a good argument: the pro bailout Republicans lost because of their ideas. They have failed. They should step aside.
Mitchell Langbert blogs at http://www.mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
