Mrs. Beasley is curious to know why you continue to count votes. Are you still waiting to find out if you won? Check with LWV they can tell you who won.
They decided to lose everything. They decided to target Eunice-lol-Then blame the NNTP for your stupidity? Of course Michael should have won. Alot harder when you're purposely left off "team" pieces"? As PDQ stated there is no I in team. Wait to you hear who these stunads want to run for Supervisor.
Mrs. Beasley is curious to know why you continue to count votes. Are you still waiting to find out if you won? Check with LWV they can tell you who won.
I think it is fair to expect to see the total tally almost 4 weeks after the election. Of course they may be really bogged down with work at the board of elections.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
So what has been accomplished with regards to good governance in the town? We are all waiting to find out, right? In the mean time some of us do not suck the blood from the taxpayers on a daily basis and some of us do not get our sustenance from government to survive and pay the bills. It is curious that so many of you have besmirched someone's motives simply because they disagree with you and belong to the party of Reagan, and want to stay there. I don't see why so many of you are that filled with hate towards the Republican party that you want to destroy it, and maybe I just see it differently because it is not about "me" it is about something bigger. The smaller of you don't realize that you have done exactly what you set out NOT to do, but have such egos that you will never admit it. I don't see why an independent business person who is a contributing member of society would bother. Get some more state patronage lawyers in there, that will solve everything! *chuckle*
I will offer a prediction. The Republicans will not come back into power in this county or town within a decade. You will be stuck with one party rule of the NNTP/Randy Kolb/Bill Sherman machine making. The Independence and Conservative parties will all become utterly irrelevant as well. There will be now a O'Connell machine in the county. Face up to it and accept it now and enjoy it.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
It is curious that so many of you have besmirched someone's motives simply because they disagree with you and belong to the party of Reagan, and want to stay there. I don't see why so many of you are that filled with hate towards the Republican party that you want to destroy it, and maybe I just see it differently because it is not about "me" it is about something bigger.
I don't understand how a party person like yourself, that claims it's not about "you" but something bigger, belongs to the Rotterdam Republican Party that un-endorsed a sitting Republican, and then didn't show any leadership to even contact a long time registered Republican, primary winner Mike O'Connor on how they could help his effort to win. Incumbent Joe Suhrada stepped down from a position at the County level to run for Republican incumbent Mertz's Town Seat. Joe S is pretty savvy, I'm sure he knows the advantage incumbents have in elections.
This current Republican Party is no bigger than its executive board. More pointedly, Parisi and Buchannan.
What happened in the 23rd district in NY should be an indication that Republicans are not happy with the party that they belong to. People want a real choice but as it stands right now both parties are the same, both tax and spend. IMO taxpayers want their elected officials to do what's best for them not what's best for the party bosses. Backing the REMS tax district was not a good move as the taxpayers are at the end of their rope with paying more taxes. I have no hate for the Republican party, I've been a registered Repub for 50 years but right now the party doesn't reflect the values that I have and don't compare the present Republican party to the party of Regan because this current party has lost all the values that made that party great.
Bravo Shadow-I could not agree more. Especially here with John Denny on a REP ticket-lol-
They lost everything, made complete idiots of themselves, wasted resources on the clerk's "race" and no one has the basic decency to resign in disgrace?
Who is going to run it and take the reins? You don't get rid of a party without a viable one to take its place, correct? You want to eliminate the party, or you want to eliminate the leadership. Now all you have done is make the dem party the ONLY party in the county with no launching pad for the rep party to recover, just because your one hero (a patronage worker who never had a private sector job) was your ultra conservative white knight and had to be stood up for. Will the people who ran the NNTP take over the party? That would be highly hypocritical considering the comments they make about the Republican party being no good. The best thing about the whole sweep is that it will once again give you a chance to see the contrast in governing styles between even the so-called "moderate" Republican administration and the democrat/socialists. I don't believe that Del Gallo is anything like a democrat but I also don't think he understand any of the philosophy of any of it either. He doesn't know what a liberal is but he isn't one. What he will be is powerless against the party that used him to get hold of the town hall.
And that party is monolithic, tolerates no dissent, allows no discussion, allows no openess, and maintains a solid unity even when driving the county off a cliff. They are able to pour 100 union workers and patronage people into each district on election day, raise unlimited funds, block any attempts to even have an election, resort to any unfair tactic and then make it look (with the help of a complicit Gazette) that it is the opposition who are the rats and bad guys each and every time. They have the public TV, the nonprofits, the unions, and the so-called arbiters of fairness such as LWV to render the GOP as the most treacherous and vile haters in the eyes of a less and less educated public. So if you think that with the score 20-1 in the bottom of the ninth with two batters out that you have a shot of doing any rebuilding, think again. We are the way of Albany. the taxpayers thank you NNTP/Randy Kolb/Bill Sherman/John Mertz. You all know it in your hearts.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
All we want is for the Republican party to go back to the values that they were founded on and if they keep backing RINO liberals the party will never come back to the strength it once was. If it's the leadership that's pushing for the Rep party to keep nominating RINO'S then the leadership has to be changed in order to get back to the conservative values the party was founded on. When you have a sweep like what happened to the Republicans in Rotterdam the blame has to squarely fall on the leadership of the party for being out of touch with it's base.
Out of one side of your mouth you say the Democrat Party is "monolithic, tolerates no dissent, allows no discussion, allows no openess, and maintains a solid unity". While the fact that the Republican Party kicked out one their own that held elected office, because he wasn't willing to go along to get along is acceptable. The reasoning I've been hearing was that he was "difficult" to work with. He wasn't walking lockstep with the leaders. So to me, it seems to be the same. I can't recall in recent history, the local Democrats unendorsed a sitting representative unless their were legal or ethical issues with that person. In this case, the legal and ethical issues may lie with those that unendorsed him.
Why is it ok for the Republican Party to crush dissent, but not the Democrat Party?
Out of one side of your mouth you say the Democrat Party is "monolithic, tolerates no dissent, allows no discussion, allows no openess, and maintains a solid unity". While the fact that the Republican Party kicked out one their own that held elected office, because he wasn't willing to go along to get along is acceptable. The reasoning I've been hearing was that he was "difficult" to work with. He wasn't walking lockstep with the leaders. So to me, it seems to be the same. I can't recall in recent history, the local Democrats unendorsed a sitting representative unless their were legal or ethical issues with that person. In this case, the legal and ethical issues may lie with those that unendorsed him.
Why is it ok for the Republican Party to crush dissent, but not the Democrat Party?
Trust me HIM is/was unethical. Evidently the Inspector General's Office wanted HIM on tape offering to reappoint the previous Assessor if he (the previous assessor) wouldn't sign the reval assessment roll. Tedisco's staff didn't have the balls to push through legislation to roll it back so this was HIS last grasp at not paying his fair share in taxes. The damn wire failed.....so I hear. HeHeHeHe
Him stinks and the REPS knew it. Parisi and Buchanan were in on it.
Even Steele recognizes the impact a 'conservative' 3rd party has made. It appears that he is at least trying to take strides to rebuild the republican party and bring it back to it's original ideology. These 3rd party candidates are real conservatives who don't 'hate' the republican party....they are just picking up where the party left off. Let's see if the local republican party will follow suit.
Quoted Text
Originally published 05:45 a.m., November 24, 2009, updated 03:43 p.m., November 24, 2009 Conservatives seek test for RNC funds
Eager to ensure that "tea partiers" don't undermine GOP candidates, conservative members of the Republican National Committee are pursuing the creation of a rule that would bar the Republican Party from funding candidates who fail a conservative litmus test.
The group is circulating a petition among committee members that would enshrine former President Ronald Reagan's proposition that his 80 percent friend was not his 20 percent enemy. The rule would require Republican candidates to share at least 80 percent of the party's main tenets to be eligible for party aid.
The resolution, if adopted, would withhold party money from the candidates and from the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee - the two party affiliates charged with electing Republicans to Congress.
"This is an '80-percent unity for conservative principles' resolution, and if some consider this is a litmus test, so be it, because as a party we must stand by our basic principles in defense of our freedom," said Oregon RNC member Solomon Yue.
The resolution "imposes standards for candidate financial support, which includes both the $5,000 in cash contributions to the candidate and the $42,100 in coordinated expenditures [in primary and general elections]," said Jim Bopp Jr., a constitutional lawyer who is chairman of the National Republican Conservative Caucus and an RNC member from Indiana.
Members of the conservative group within the RNC tell The Washington Times that, besides aiming to make the GOP more consistently and reliably conservative by promoting lower taxes, keeping spending levels in check and focusing on national security, they want to head off an already emerging third party inspired by the anti-spending tea-party movement.
The third-party movement picked up steam during the recent special congressional election in upstate New York.
In that election, the RNC and the NRCC contributed large sums to liberal Republican Dee Dee Scozzafava's campaign, despite the presence of Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. Mrs. Scozzafava in the end bowed out and endorsed the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens, who eventually won the race.
RNC Chairman Michael S. Steele said afterward that he made no attempt to persuade Mrs. Scozzafava to stay neutral or endorse the Conservative Party candidate.
Neither the NRCC nor NRSC would comment about the resolution. The RNC may spend up to $84,200 in coordinated expenditures for a House race, and the maximum is $2,284,900 for a Senate campaign, if the state party assigns its coordinated expenditure limit to the RNC.
The resolution could pose problems for candidates such as Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who's facing a stiff primary challenge from former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio in the race to replace outgoing Sen. Mel Martinez, a Republican. Mr. Rubio is favored by the conservative wing of the party, which has been frustrated by Mr. Crists embrace of President Obamas stimulus package and his support for energy policy based on fears of climate change.
The NRCC has reached out to conservatives in recent weeks to make sure their leaders can support the committee's top-tier challengers in next year's elections.
One party strategist, speaking on the condition of anonymity to freely discuss the touchy intraparty issues involved, urged the RNC members to be careful.
The strategist said a litmus test would send the wrong message to independents whom the party is looking to attract, and said primaries are the best tests of who represents Republicans in each state or district.
"We already have screen tests in place, and they are called Republican voters. If a candidate doesn't support the principles of the party, Republican voters aren't going to choose them as a candidate, which renders the whole coordinated-funds issue completely moot," the strategist said. "Respectfully, some of these committee members need to take a step back and realize this is unnecessarily harmful."
The RNC conservatives' move could put pressure on Mr. Steele.
His allies on the RNC have privately argued against the 80 percent rule, which sponsors want to have debated and put to a vote at the January meeting of the RNC in Honolulu.
The last time a resolution to bar funding to Republican candidates was attempted was in 1991, when social conservative Tim Lambert, an RNC member from Texas, narrowly lost a floor vote on his proposal not to help pro-choice Republican candidates.
Some of the party's most prominent figures, including former Chairman Haley Barbour, now Mississippi governor, were flown into the meeting to speak against the Lambert resolution, arguing that it was a litmus test and thus did not comport with the GOP's "big tent" philosophy.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
They decided to lose everything. They decided to target Eunice-lol-Then blame the NNTP for your stupidity? Of course Michael should have won. Alot harder when you're purposely left off "team" pieces"? As PDQ stated there is no I in team. Wait to you hear who these stunads want to run for Supervisor. 
