Wednesday, April 2, 2014


Having belatedly reviewed  my blog on this April 2, I find that the last sentence of this paragraph to be ambiguous and very confusing.  
"I fail to find one factor about the three candidates on the Regular Democrat line that suggest that any of them have sufficient qualifications to fill the role of Councilors except that all are loyal Green party members. We have our fill of them on the Council."

To clarify I was not, although the shoe may fit, complaining per se about about Council members who are politically “Regular Organization Democrats” instead of ‘New Democrats”, or g*d forbid “Republicans”.

That sentence should have been written to read: We have had our fill of Councilors who seemed to lack the qualifications of understanding the issues on which they must make binding decisions. I would continue: Too often some appear to need advice from peers on how to vote, or make comments that are not germane to the issue but represent personal interests.

We cannot afford to run a city without a governing body that is capable of making rational logical decisions and not ones based on emotions or vindictiveness, or just being a player.

Unfortunately to the observer the lack of that quality is the impression that emits from many of the Council meetings over the past few years.

1 comment:

  1. You mean like when Greaves leans over to Reid and asks him how she should vote?

    The fourth ward obviously does not care a wit about who represents them.