Reply With QuoteHey Mark is that what I said for the Primary? New info I didn’t know she was a Notary but I did state in my post regarding a Notary.
Hey Mark,
I believe I stated that, not as clearly as you did though. I did not know she was a Notary, but thank you for being clearer in your post.
Hey Mark is that what I said for the Primary? New info I didn’t know she was a Notary but I did state in my post regarding a Notary.
No worries Shortstuff, and thanx for clarifying.Originally Posted by shortstuff
Thank you Mark, you are so gracious
Received a copy of the Lancaster Sun in the mail. Don't know why as I am not a subscriber.
Regardless, the paper did have excellent bio coverage on Lancaster Republican and Democrat candidates vying for elected positions in the 2019 Election.
I have read the article Lee.
As you know, I have already endorsed in most of the races, but am still neutral in "The Thrilla-in-Manilla" race for Supervisor. With that disclaimer, I offer
JUST MY OPINION:
Last year the Democrat and Republican parties underwent leadership changes during the spring and fall respectively.
The public narrative for the shift from Tarapaki to McCracken was then, and remains now, clouded in some mystery.
The Republican narrative for the shift from Heath to Sojka, was, and remains, as clear as Easter bells.
Since those leadership changes, from my vantage point as a taxpaying "blank" and as a political junkie, I have intently watched the 2019 political campaign take shape.For Lancaster to be a better place, it needs two strong political parties. Up until now, the Republican Party has not been very strong, and has to change before Lancaster can become a better place. As long as the Republican Party is run by the same old closed patronage bunch, only watching out for their own wallets and perks, the Republican Party will continue to lose elections, and Lancaster will not reach its full potential.
The Republican Party should not tell the taxpayers and residents what their problems are. It needs to hear those problems directly from the people themselves, and then to offer solutions. The Republicans can do that by creating a way for the people of Lancaster, not just Republicans, but all people, to speak their minds directly to the Party, and to voice their concerns, express their ideas, and to make their suggestions, and have the party seriously listen to them.
It is simple, no more campaigns based on BS soundbites and old boy interests. It is time that the Republican Party hear the people, and address their concerns with platforms and candidates who will put the people of Lancaster first, and then, to stand by and fully support those candidates.
The kick-off of the campaign, IMHO, came in pages the March 7 edition of "The Sun," with a juxposed positioning of the candidates, and the presentation of one of the most curious political "Orders of Battle" that I have ever witnessed.
Taking each side in turn:
The Republicans preemptively, endorsed Dawn Gaczewski for Supervisor and Bob Leary and Bruce Stutz for Town Council.
Concurrently, like swimmers diving into a lake on a crisp autumn morning, the Lancaster Republicans true to their "inclusive, not exclusive," promise, kept faith with its "Lancaster First and Always" philosophy, and endorsed Democrat Diane Terranova for Town Clerk, whom Sojka characterized as "the best candidate...regardless of party."
No need to parse sentences, search for shaded words, or apply hypothetical war games. With clarion purpose, The Lancaster Republicans under Sojka's leadership promised, and delivered.
The presentation of the Democrat ticket, in my mind, raises more questions than it answers.
My first question is "Why did it fall to the Democrat Vice Chairman, Ron Giza, to do his party's candidate roll-out?"
Whether Chairman McCracken felt awkward because of the inevitable linkage to his position as a high-profile, six-figure-a-year salaried, Water Authority appointee, or perhaps self-conscious because of his wife's candidate status, Mr. McCracken's silence was not only conspicuous, but curious.
More concerning, if "The Sun" article represents a full journalistic exercise, I note that Ron Giza spoke exclusively for all of the Democrat candidates, while the article is replete with direct quotes from Ms. Gaczewski, Ms. Terranova, and Mr. Leary.
In that connection, I am compelled to observe that there exists the possibility that the voices of Democrat candidates are being suppressed and controlled, and that these candidates are being 'handled,' by what some may consider to be a Democrat Party machine.
My second question: "What on earth happened to the 2015 Democrat "Dream Ticket," which won an incredible landslide?"
That very same "Dream Ticket," which four years ago was represented as a "New Leadership" generation has in 2019 been replaced with, in the words of Vice Chairman Giza, "a good fresh group," comprised of "some veterans," who have "experience in their own ways," which they "want to take...to another level."
Giza's words do not exactly reflect a compelling argument for the election of the 2019 slate, nor does it explain the reason(s) for the different direction that the Democrat Party is apparently taking.
World War One is said to have been a "demographic disaster," because of the excessive premature death for an entire generation of English manhood. For this generation of Lancaster Democrat leadership, the 2019 personnel shift is not the political equivalent of such a demographic disaster for the Democrat Class of 2015; it may be liken to wanton political genocide.
As Matt Walter observed of Diane Terranova, "For reasons beyond my comprehension, her own Democrat Party chose not to endorse her," I further ask, "For reasons beyond my comprehension, why did the Democrats endorse McCracken, Maciejewski, and Mazur?"
It was painful to read the seemingly feeble Giza interview, searching and stumbling throughout, in an apparent struggle to find words reflective of functional adequacy.
Of Mr. Ruffino, Giza said "I don't think you will get a short sentence out of Ron."
Personally, I would just like to get one unshaded word from Ruffino.
Without resurrecting old issues at this point in time, I am curious to know whether Ruffino's rather bi-polar, tax and spend, then, zip swerve to conservative fiscal policies, legislative temperament, reflects a "Cork on a stormy sea" approach to governance, or is part of an internal Ruffino philosophy of experimental "Five Year Plans" in the tradition of the Marxist-Socialists.
Of Ms. McCracken, Giza's comment that she wants "to implement ideas and thoughts from her time as an advisory member to a member who is able to vote on the decision making process," awkwardly suggest to me that her so-called ideas may have never merited serious consideration, and that her election may be a self-aggrandizing opportunity to impose upon the town, those McCracken ideas which few seemingly liked in the first place.
Giza's further comment that she "wants to be a part of going to the next level," only confirms my concerns stated above, and may be compounded with a suspicion that reflects a simple, self-desire to get an elected promotion.
Regarding Maciejewski, of all of Giza's hesitant words, his cautious "I THINK" which seem to qualify his knowledge of Ms. Maciejewski's exposure to, and familiarity with, "the process," say it all: The tenuous musings of an advocate presenting a less-than mediocre case.
If those comments were not enough, Giza's observation that she "knows the ins and outs," suggest to me a reminder of her connections to the inner political ring; a player, riding on the inside of the "Old Boys Network."
With respect to Mr. Mazur, I hold that he offers a DEMOCRAT name, a "Republican" label, and some rather amateurish credentials, but little else. IMHO, his selection, is a poor imitation of the "New Republican" commitment to be "all-inclusive," and is a thinly veiled, pathetic appeal to the cheap, petty, small town politics, which honors legacy over competence.
Moreover, his selection resurrects in my mind, the specter of the infiltration games that the Democrats seemed to have played with the Conservative and Independence parties.
On just a note regarding courtesy, Supervisor Coleman's service was never acknowledged by Giza, nor was she thanked. No big deal, but what happened to the Democrats' appreciation for "strong women," as exemplified by their 2015 mantra, "A Woman's Touch?"
Ah, the fleeting loyalty of self-serving identity politics.
Summing up, it strikes me that the Republican made a sincere doctrinal shift, along with a genuine leadership change.
The Democrats, IMHO, appear to have muddied their "philosophy," rejected the wishes of their own voters, and staged a coup, all to perhaps strengthen and protect the "Friends and Family" status quo.
Again, the above commentary is just my opinion, but what do I know?
Last edited by mark blazejewski; March 7th, 2019 at 11:39 PM.
I also found it interesting and uncharacteristic that it was Democratic Party vice Chair Ronald Giza who was the spokesperson submitting and commenting on the bio information, on the candidates qualifications and on the party's agenda and direction.
I found it equally interesting that the Democratic Party chose the Lancaster Sun to make its initial endorsed candidate announcement.
By not endorsing incumbents Terranova and Gaczewski it appears Chair McCracken is making the statement that he is back and taking the Democratic Party into a different direction.
Mark as always, your gift with words is appreciated. I find also interesting that Mr. Ron Giza has chosen to be the spokesperson for his candidates not McCracken. One definitely could speculate that he may have felt it a conflict of interest considering his wife Kristen is running for Town Council.
I have been to numerous Planning Board meetings and have witnessed first hand how Kristen operates as a Planning Board member, I was impressed with her delivery, interpretation(s) and impartial comments towards the issues presented. She was respectful at all times to those who were at the podium, insightful and knowledgeable. What I found impressive was her inquisitive nature, if she did not understand or wanted a better understanding of something she asked the question(s). IMO throughout her years on the Planning Board, she will be an effective Town Council Member. I do support her candidacy for the Town Board seat. She is qualified and I wish her well.
The other Democrat candidates, I have no data on. I do find it interesting that they had chosen NOT to support Terranova, who I think is a viable and excellent person to rerun for her seat. Her affinity with Poloncarz does cause me to pause though. If I had to question, why was she not the chosen one for the Democrats then?
The insight Mark on the Republican leadership at its current state, I do have to question a few things you mentioned regarding the leadership but will not elaborate. But to endorse Dawn G. after all of the negative support the Conservatives & Republicans had towards her in her first run as Town Council truly fits some of the narrative Mark you mentioned with the Democratic leadership, "why the flipflop" to supporting her now considering the Democrats have thrown her to the curb? Dawn's record speaks for itself:
Dawn voted YES to every Tax Override resolution put before the board
Dawn voted YES to the 2017, 2018, and 2019 Annual budget resolution no matter what the tax increase was (now I was told that she was voting more Conservatively-well they does not reflect that at all)
Dawn went to a resident's home to investigate a FOIL request which is the responsibility of the Village Clerk not the Events Coordinator
Dawn had withheld money due to the Food pantry patrons for the holiday season which wasn't received until the following spring, NOW this was highlighted extensively and thereby was suddenly received. The question often remains is would that money have shown up if it wasn't the investigative nature of those who reside in the Village? Now take that a step further, can she function as the Town's CEO and be fiscally prudent and responsible with a gigantic budget?
IMO Ron Ruffino will make the better Town Supervisor. Ron does have an ego, he needs to put that ego and direct it to an open honest campaign. One of the things I do know for sure with Ron Ruffino, he is not in bed with other politicians or stakeholders to advance his political career. He has, and his record proves that, been more fiscally conservative the last 5 years. His negative(s) is his tenure under Bob Giza and the Colecraft issues, this will be his stigma during his campaign trail.
Bob Leary is an amazing person. I have high regard and respect for him and his family. It is an honor to have gotten to know him and Irene throughout the years. His loss of the Independent Line twice is a factor in his upcoming election run. I would suggest he target the Independent voters and the Blank voters. It is no secret that the Democrats hijacked the Independent Line, they had a plan and it was a good one no matter how you feel about it. Strategic actually, now this takes the power away from the Conservative endorsements. It is no surprise that Ralph Lorigo is not getting many Democrats coming to get the Conservative Endorsement. That was stated in the Bufnews. IMO Leary needs to focus on those two parties (I & B) as he is already guaranteed his support from the R & C voters. He needs to become a household name like Colby did.
May the games begin. But Lancaster deserves the best at the helm.
Silly Shortstuff!!!
...and...
Just sayin'.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; March 9th, 2019 at 10:39 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions