Quoted from Patches

You have the right to remain silent....if you can't afford a lawyer, you will have one appointed...

that's what will happen when they confiscate the notes......but if it's written on your hands or arms.....golleeee geeeeee....

License plate #'s taken in the parking lot?

So what if they are? Having people lined up AGAINST our Town puts our Town in a VERY dangerous predicament.... Our First Responders NEED to be armed with all the information they can obtain without a warrant..... At this stage the Nayboobs are only inches from crossing the line of criminality...  One wrong move and they may all find themselves in prison for a LONG, LONG time.

Quoted from Hamburg

So what if they are? Having people lined up AGAINST our Town puts our Town in a VERY dangerous predicament.... Our First Responders NEED to be armed with all the information they can obtain without a warrant..... At this stage the Nayboobs are only inches from crossing the line of criminality...  One wrong move and they may all find themselves in prison for a LONG, LONG time.

Now you speak like a communist!!!!!!!!


Our constitution gives citizens the right to speak against our government if they choose.    

We are free to compliment our government----AT ANY LEVEL--(federal, state, local) -- we have the ABSOLUTE RIGHT---GUARANTEED by the constitution--to speak in favor of AS WELL AS AGAINST issues that elected officials are discussing, voting on, etc.   It is 100% legal to have a situation exist where each and every individual in attendance at a "packed house" municipal meeting is against the position of the elected officials.  Actually, the elected officials are to respresent the residents and NOT their own personal feelings on an issue!!!!!!!!!!!

I DEFY you to cite the law---town, county, state, or federal, where it says that there is criminality in a group of citizens, in attendance at a government meeting, to be against the government on any one or all issues!!!!!!!!!!     And be sure to provide a  link to the law!!!!!!!!!


And furthermore, we have the freedom to speak on internet blogs like this and say virtually anything we wish, obviously as long as what is said isn't a statement that one is going to get a gun and shoot another poster.    We may not all agree, and the only thing that I prefer to see and will challenge people on is to provide proof to support what they write

By the way Hamburg aka DV, how come you haven't succeeded yet in getting Pat Z arrested on your complaint?????   Huh?????   It's been over a year now, hasn't it?

The English political theorists  Edmund Burke wrote often about representative democracy -- and even he believed that good representative government at times must make decisions that IN THE BEST INTERESTS of the governed but that which the governed may not necessarily agree with.

"...it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."

Some of the folks who post here -- particularly those that have become INFAMOUSLY known as "nayboobs" believe that the elected and appointed government officials must only listen and adhere to their (the "nayboobs's") opinions and positions on the issues.   The fact is that the elected and appointed officials must do what is in the best interests of ALL the governed,  must listen and weigh the opinions of ALL the governed, must study and consider all the FACTS involved in an issue and must also abide by local, state and federal laws and regulations when coming to decisions.  

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Some of the folks who post here -- particularly those that have become INFAMOUSLY known as "nayboobs" believe that the elected and appointed government officials must only listen and adhere to their (the "nayboobs's") opinions and positions on the issues.   The fact is that the elected and appointed officials must do what is in the best interests of ALL the governed,  must listen and weigh the opinions of ALL the governed, must study and consider all the FACTS involved in an issue and must also abide by local, state and federal laws and regulations when coming to decisions.  

I will differ with you on that and cite as proof.   In the town, personally I don't think it's as bad.     But what has happened is that the elected in the town are representing the big compananies who want to run roughshod over neighborhoods

But look at the city.  The mayor and council are elected to represent THE residents who LIVE in the city, and to make decisions in the best interest of the TAXPAYERS.   However, in the city it has been proven that the elected dems do NOT represent the residents.  

Answer this DV...in the city of Schenectady, tell us WHO the elected official are representing when downtown businessees are having financial problems and the city hikes taxes on the homeowners to bail out the for-profit businesses?  And the DEMS in the not only use taxpayers' money to bail these busineses out of financial problems, they make the taxpyaers pay the proeprty taxes of these businesses on top of that!!!!!!!!    Tell us what city DEM elected officials have rushed to the aid of financially strugging homeowners whose can't pay their property taxes?   Tell us DV, what homeowners in the city has the city voted to waive their tax bills because the homeonwer doesn't have the money?   Try answering that---and provide proof with homeowners names.

DV and all the aliases need to cited for threats and misinformation....anything that is written is probably coming from

a scripted document....other than the foul mouth and threats and accusations he states....also, he has a biased category

for many or all that post their opinions on this blog....this person (s) is out of control ....and needs anger management.

Many times his threats and alleging accusations are in a place that is not within reason....aggression is a main behavior

of this person....and no one can argue or come to a compromise with someone like this....

This person has posted many statements that are out of line....he has no compassion or sympathy that's why he

is so well appreciated with his cohorts......

wasting energy is not very productive with this person....and it shows in our Town government how it is affecting our community.

Out of touch with reality and priority of personal agendas....he has been trained well....good at trying to confuse the issue

when asked for the facts...skirting what is the truth...it will never change....only when this REGIME is out of the loop.

(yawn)  the same old nayboob distortions and unfounded allegations  ......    New Year  S.O.S. from them.

English Political Theorist....didn't we fight some sort of war becuase of the tyrannical and unjust British ways?  So we should now live unde the guidance of someone from that era who just happens to be British....?  How is that a form of political guidance that is applicable in a society that has dcades of change since his theory was written....OH YAH, I JUST GOT IT...BECUASE IT IS HOW YOU BELIEVE THINGS ARE TO BE...OOPS, MY BAD.  THOUGHT YOU WERE TO "REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF ROTTERDAM" NOT YOUR OWN THEORY OF WHAT THE TOWN PEOPLE "SHOULD" BELIEVE!

Quoted from joebxr

English Political Theorist....didn't we fight some sort of war becuase of the tyrannical and unjust British ways?  So we should now live unde the guidance of someone from that era who just happens to be British....?  How is that a form of political guidance that is applicable in a society that has dcades of change since his theory was written....OH YAH, I JUST GOT IT...BECUASE IT IS HOW YOU BELIEVE THINGS ARE TO BE...OOPS, MY BAD.  THOUGHT YOU WERE TO "REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF ROTTERDAM" NOT YOUR OWN THEORY OF WHAT THE TOWN PEOPLE "SHOULD" BELIEVE!

Apparently, you either don't understand the point Edmund Burke was making --- Burke's writings on what representative democracy mean are as meaningful today as they were over 200 years ago.   Following his theory, representative democracy is a far cry from tyrannical ... rather it says that ultimately the elected representative must stand before his constituency at election and there is a balance between "representing the peoples will"  (following the desires of the majority) and "representing what is best for ALL".   It recognizes that there will be times that the representative will have to vote AGAINST the will of the majority and vote FOR what is best for ALL -- and that is where the representative's use of good judgement comes to play.

Secondly, members of boards and commissions are also bound to act within the legal parameters established --- and just because a majority ... or often just a very loud minority want to sway a decision solely based on their OPINION of what should or should not be done  -- the law requires the board or commission member to make decisions based on FACTS and within the standards established by law.

Burke was Irish.

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

Burke was Irish.

orange or green.....DVOR would want the distinction

Burke was Irish .. but moved to England and was involved in BRITISH politics --- he is considered a British or English Political Philosopher the same way that   Joseph Conrad (who was born Józef Teodor Konrad Korzeniowski ) was born in Poland moved to England and is considered a British or English writer.

As for whether, Burke was orange or green -- although his father may have been Catholic , he was baptized, raised and throughout life worshiped as an Anglican -- thus Burke was ORANGE.  Whether a person is Catholic or Protestant, it is of little difference to me -- since it doesn't change the value and/or validity of the person's position on an issue.  

For the record, some of my Scottish/British ancestors were faithful Catholics and others were faithful Anglicans --  I proudly wear BOTH orange and green --- along with the red, white and blue of the British and the American flag.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Burke was Irish .. but moved to England and was involved in BRITISH politics --- he is considered a British or English Political Philosopher the same way that   Joseph Conrad (who was born Józef Teodor Konrad Korzeniowski ) was born in Poland moved to England and is considered a British or English writer.

As for whether, Burke was orange or green -- although his father may have been Catholic , he was baptized, raised and throughout life worshiped as an Anglican -- thus Burke was ORANGE.  Whether a person is Catholic or Protestant, it is of little difference to me -- since it doesn't change the value and/or validity of the person's position on an issue.  

For the record, some of my Scottish/British ancestors were faithful Catholics and others were faithful Anglicans --  I proudly wear BOTH orange and green --- along with the red, white and blue of the British and the American flag.

not according to your previous posts....

Quoted from senders

not according to your previous posts....

There is NOTHING in that post that is not consistent with previous posts that were made by me.