That phrase, used by Attorney General Eric Schneiderman last week in Kingston, really resonates with me. Isn’t that what we all want? Are there Americans who believe we should have a few super-rich citizens and millions who can’t afford basic health care? That we should cut funding for health insurance for our struggling neighbors so that we can give the super-rich a tax break and make them even richer?
Apparently some people, and not just the super-rich, feel that way. I don’t understand. But I do trust that the vast majority of my fellow Americans reject such greed. We need shared prosperity.
Attention Saugerties conservatives
It’s that time of the year again. Someone is going to e knocking at your door to ask you to sign his or her petition for County Legislator. Please be advised that there are only three (3) bonafide individuals who have been officially endorsed by the Town of Saugerties Conservative Party and the Ulster County Conservative Party to carry such Conservative petitions. They are:
Mary Wawro in District 1; Joe Maloney in District 2; and Dean Fabiano in District 3.
Anyone else who approaches any Conservative and requests that they sign their petition is not endorsed by the Conservative Party. Under the Election Law, anyone who is not officially endorsed by a political party can circumvent the political process by carrying his or her own petition — known as OTB (Opportunity to Ballot). This is an attempt to steal the endorsement away from those candidates who have been officially endorsed and results in a costly primary.
With that said, I urge all registered Conservatives to pleas support only those individuals who have overwhelmingly been endorsed by the Conservative Party — Mary Wawro (District 1); Joe Maloney (District 2); and Dean Fabiano (District 3). Thank you.
George Heidcamp, Chair,
Saugerties Conservative Party
1st Vice Chair, Ulster County Conservative Party.
Holding my nose
Poor Bob Lippman, people got angry with him! I often say: “Anger is a way of punishing yourself for other people’s: stupidity, vileness, repugnance, repulsiveness…whatever fits the situation. In Mr. Lippman’s case, I’d choose repugnance, perhaps vileness, but I wouldn’t punish myself by getting angry — it’s bad for one’s health! As I would if Mr. L vomited nearby to me, as he did, hold my nose, which is what I’m doing.
In the week that we celebrate the 241st anniversary of this nation’s founding, I propose we all take a moment and think about two things. First, we need to all remember that with very, very few exceptions, the people who cast their votes last November, no matter which candidate they voted for, did so because they believed they were acting in the best interests of this country, a country they love. No one was trying to harm our nation; no one wanted to see out nation lose its prestigious place on the world stage; no one wanted our leader to be perceived as possibly harmful to this country’s best interests. Everyone who voted, however they chose to use their vote, did so because they believed their choice was for the country’s good. That is why we must respect one another and one another’s opinions. Our neighbors are not our enemies. (The press is not the enemy either, just to be clear.) Our right to free speech was intended for the civil exchange of ideas and opinions, not for excoriating one another and deriding those who hold opinions we dislike. We must respect that each of us only wants what is best for the country we love; we must always remember that no one wants to see our nation, or the office of President; weakened, damaged, or destroyed. And yet…
The second thing we need to remember is this: when a president shows, repeatedly, that he is not willing to comport himself in a manner befitting the gravity of the office he holds; when a president shows he is not willing to respect the very constitution, and the rights of a free press, that he has sworn to uphold; when a president shows he is unconcerned about maintaining the safety of our nation’s electoral process in the face of disruption by a foreign adversary; when a president cares more about his personal financial interests than the norms that have applied to the highest office of public service in the nation, then it is time for all of us to rethink what our votes have wrought.
To say that he is inexperienced in the ways of Washington as a means of excusing behavior that virtually everyone outside the White House says is questionable is now, five months in, tantamount to saying he is incapable of learning or changing when given new information and evidence. At any level, in any job, those inadequacies would render a person unfit to continue in his or her position. The president, undeterred by the calamity and confusion his social media behavior elicits, continues to behave in ways that both his supporters and detractors say is unseemly and counterproductive. But worse than that, he becomes pugnacious when his inappropriate behavior draws condemnation. It is time for us to come together and push our representatives to insist on a restoration of dignity and respect, appropriate comportment, and upholding of traditional norms in the White House. This is not a party issue. This is not a partisan distraction. This is about America’s position as a world leader politically, ethically, and morally.
Deidre J. Byrne
Disappointed with Price Chopper’s bike rack
After a number of requests over many months Price Chopper in Saugerties finally installed a bicycle rack.
I gave information what constitutes a good bike rack, web references for more information, and illustrations of good and bad bike racks. I gave simplified guidance on getting a good bike rack: get a rack that holds a bicycle at least two places. All this was ignored, and the worst type of bike rack was installed; one that only holds front wheel. This type of bike rack can warp wheels, is unusable for bicycles with panniers on a front rack, and can lead to theft: thief leaving locked front wheel, taking rest of the bike.
Following a number of requests over several months when this rack disintegrated into rusty bits and pieces, this rack was finally replaced. Again, I gave information on what constitutes a good and bad bike rack, and gave simplified guidance: get a bike rack that holds bicycle in a least two places. Again all this was ignored. The same type of inadequate bike rack, only smaller, was installed; one that only holds bicycle front wheel.
This rack is not only inadequate, it is awkward to use where installed. One must route the bicycle around bollards that are stored in the way of the rack, push propane cylinders out of the way, and then secure the frame to the bike rack (not lock front wheel only). I am very disappointed.
Medicaid for all
This letter is in response to a young man who shouted “Medicaid is for losers” while I was carrying a sign in the Saugerties parade stating “Medicaid for All.”
It’s too bad this young man didn’t walk just a block over where the tenants of Saugerties senior housing lined the parade route, many with walkers and some in wheelchairs, some of whom inevitably may be Medicaid beneficiaries.
It’s unfortunate how citizens shout ignorant slogans not understanding that most of the Medicaid recipients are elderly people, people in nursing homes and people of all ages with serious disabilities.
Losers? I ask you!
Jo Galante Cicale