Rudy Rebuts Charges Of Hiding "Booty Call" Expenses

Rudy Giuliani spent much of today dismissing claims that he hid the cost of police protection related to trips he took to visit with Judith Nathan while he was still married to Donna Hanover.

Giuliani called the story a "debate day dirty trick" in this interview with Katie Couric of CBS. He stated that all of the expenses were proper and the effort to bring them up five years after the fact amounted to a "political hit job".

The accounting for the expenses may well have been totally legitimate, but unfortunately for Rudy, it isn't how the money was paid, it was the circumstances under which the expenses were incurred that is most objectionable. If it becomes clear that the money for police protection was spent for trips with no purpose other than to pursue an affair with Nathan, Rudy will have a problem.

And, if so, he will deserve his fate.

More F.A.I.R. Journalism

I wonder if Democrat & Chronicle reporter Jill Terreri gets a stipend from the Monroe County School Boards Association.

I commented on her report in Sunday's Democrat on the effects of F.A.I.R. on school districts. As I noted, her "news story" was basically a rehash of the school districts' position papers on the topic. There was nothing new or newsworthy in the story.

Today, Ms. Terreri managed to go herself one better. She reported that neither Maggie Brooks nor any administration representative attended a "non-partisan" forum on the issue in Brighton. Surprisingly, the representatives of the Brighton School District are against the plan and taxpayers expressed concerns that school taxes might increase as a result. Thank goodness for this report. How would we have ever guessed what happened at the forum without the D&C?

Seriously, I can't believe these two stories were considered news. At best, they are repetitions of old news and information on this issue. At worst, they amount to pro-school district, anti-Brooks propaganda. Worse, this report wasn't even the first report on the issue. The RochesterTurning Blog had the story first (referring to a WXXI report). So it wasn't even fresh propaganda.

To use an old line: calling the D&C a fish wrapper is being unfair to fish wrappers.

D&C Goes Metro .... Again

My son and I look at the newspaper together most mornings. He thinks the funniest section is the comics. I, on the other hand, get most of my amusement from the editorial page.

This morning the D&C had its 7th or 8th or umpteenth (I've lost count) piece on government consolidation/metro government. Today they used their editorial entitled "No more one-shots" as their vehicle for promoting their number one agenda item. Ostensibly, this editorial was calling on the Brooks administration to be careful about selling off County resources to get one-time cash infusions to close the remaining budget gap this year.

But, of course, the D&C editorialists could not pass up the opportunity to throw in a metro pitch. The editorial goes on to propose that the County government needs to look for savings through "major government consolidations". Specifically mentioned were "public safety services" and "fire districts", which, by the way, in the opinion of the D&C, "are too numerous" in Monroe County.

So lets see, Monroe County will save money through "major" consolidation of public safety services and fire districts. I really wish the editorial had gone on to explain how that would work. To the best of my knowledge, the County does not provide fire fighting services directly. So how could consolidation (elimination?) of fire districts help the County reduce its budget?

What about public safety services? Well, we have a Sheriff's road patrol, the RPD, and six towns have their own police. If all public safety services are consolidated into a larger Sheriff's department, the County would have to spend more money. Of course, as an alternative, there could be a new "government" entity (the Rochester Regional Metro Police District?). Presumably, all county residents would pay for that service, but, I guess the County budget would be reduced since there would no longer be a Sheriff's road patrol. I have serious doubts as to whether the cost per taxpayer would go down; I am certain police service in Gates (and in the other towns with local police) would be dramatically reduced.

The D&C can't bring itself to tell the truth. Their real concerns about County budget issues; the F.A.I.R. plan; local government consolidation; "smart growth" vs. "urban sprawl"; and on and on, and on, are really all about one thing; to wit: saving the City of Rochester from the utter failure of all of its operations over the past 30+ years. Metro government is the only way
the City of Rochester can afford to continue. Metro government's purpose is to suck up suburban resources and reallocate them to the City.

It would be a fair issue for a debate. Too bad the D&C is afraid to debate that issue honestly.

What Passes For Journalism

The Democrat and Chronicle ran a story today headlined "Suburbs left with school deficits" (Here's a link to the online version).

From that headline, you'd probably think the D&C story was going to provide some objective evidence refuting County Executive Brooks' claim that increases in state aid to school districts would offset losses in Sales Tax revenue under the medicaid intercept plan. You'd be wrong!

The story starts with a brief account about the experience of the Schumachers and their worry that the Brooks plan may threaten music programs in the Penfield School District. Mrs. Schumacher is credited with this insight: "It's robbing Peter to pay Paul". The story goes on to quote several school officials who offer various self-serving criticisms of the plan. To show that the story has "balance", the report also contains a quote from the County Attorney in support of the plan (although its not clear why a County Budget official was not sought out for an explanation of the plan's effects).

The most amazing thing about the story to my mind was the inclusion of a chart labelled "F.A.I.R. Impact", outlining the "potential tax increases" needed by each district to cover the sales tax shortfall. As you would expect, the chart was prepared by an independent entity like the Center for Governmental Research .... er, ah, no, ... actually, it was supplied by the Monroe County School Boards Association (the group coordinating the lawsuit against the County).

No mention was made in the story of the views of independent or objective reviewers of the plan, like the Rochester Business Alliance, whose President called the Brooks plan "reasonable" or the afore-mentioned CGR which pronounced the plan "responsible".

What was the purpose of the story? Surely it was not to provide the public with information it could use to weigh the relative merits of the plan and its critic's views. I would call it a propaganda piece, but that would give the reporter credit. I think the reporter actually thought her story was a "real" news article. She was wrong.

Where were the editors? What's become of journalism?

Is the Crisis the Story or is the Story the Crisis?

TV, newspspers and the internet are full of stories about the impending financial crisis. The stories questioned whether or not consumers and markets will surrender to their fears about high gasoline prices, the falling dollar and the sub-prime mortgage crack-up.

As I watched the reports, I could not help but wonder how much of the anxiety consumers may have been feeling was caused by the media roiling the waters. One story on NBC had the correspondent at the Woodbury Outlets in Central Square, NY. The pictures showed parking lots full to bursting and shoppers lined up, even pressed up against the doors of the various stores, waiting for the 4,5, or 6 o'clock openings. A shot of the toll booths on the NY Thruway at the Woodbury exit showed a lineup of cars that gave the appearance of refugees fleeing from an advancing army. When the doors opened, the customers stampeded through to get at their bargains, in the manner of groupies at a rock concert.

Later in the NBC report one "expert" discussed his concerns about the possibility that a drop in consumer spending could lead to recession. He actually said that "some consumers are choosing between filling their gas tank, paying their mortgage or buying Christmas presents". Frankly, if anyone in that situation decides to buy presents, he or she should be hospitalized. Seriously though, is that what passes for expert analysis?

Later, on Kudlow & Co., somewhat more credible analysts were asked their views. None of them gave rosy forecasts, however, they made a number of points about why we should not quite yet take the pipe. One analyst pointed out that because of changes in incomes and the uses of oil in the US economy, gasoline prices would have to approach $6.00/gallon to have similar recessionary effects as occurred in the 1970's. Others gave similar notes tempering fears of the effects of the weakness of the dollar and the mortgage banking industry.

As I noted, they were not suggesting that there were no problems, but they pointed out that there were still many strengths in the US economy that should not be underestimated. They also worried that bad news itself could lead to bad results. This is something I learned in economics class. If people believe something is going to happen in the economy, their actions tend to cause it to happen.

As such, I wish the mainstream media would stop reporting the economy like the National Inquirer reports the "news". We may find that if the media keeps predicting the worst, we may get it.

All's F.A.I.R. In Love, War and School Taxes

Here's an example of school propaganda on the Brooks Sales Tax front.

Note the money quote:

"The County justified their 50% cut in education's portion of sales tax dollars by highlighting new state aid to education. But, this year's state aid was provided with the expectation that the new money would be targeted in specific ways to improve academic results and schools are being held accountable by the state for how this money is used".

Most districts are claiming that the plan will hurt them this year, but many districts, like Gates-Chili set aside money ($1.7 million in Gates' case) on the chance that the County might go this route. Were they going to give it back if the intercept didn't happen?

Moreover, I have learned that if a taxpayer contacts the County budget office, he/she will get an analysis (with actual dollar amounts) showing the "impact" of the Brooks plan on the School District the taxpayer lives in. Contact Bill Carpenter at the County Office Building.

I have really grown tired of people talking about how "open" the School budget process is and how its the only government budget the people get to vote on. Everyone knows that those votes are almost meaningless given the power of school boards to impose an "austerity budget" (there's an oxymoron for you). Further, if the schools wanted a vote that truly reflected taxpayer's views, they'd have the budget vote on election day when there is real turnout. They won't do it because they'd never pass a budget again. They much prefer their special vote when they can motivate support among families with kids in school.

By the way, schools aren't the only government that has public voting on its budget. Fire districts also have budget votes. Those votes are held in December and even fewer people (around 200-300) vote in them. Interestingly enough, these districts which have so-called "voter input" in their budgets have had spending increases far above the inflation rate and far above the rate of spending increases in Town budgets.

The fact is that the schools have been spending money without much restraint. The Comptroller's recent report exposes that fact. The Brooks plan was the right move for the County, the City of Rochester, and town governments. The "burden" shifted to the school districts is one that they should bear, namely proposing reasonable budget plans with spending rates that can be justified to taxpayers in their districts

Repoman's Turkey Tips

Okay, I'm really reaching for a post here, but I wanted all of you loyal readers to know that I am a many-faceted "renaissance man".

Nothing can mess up Thanksgiving like an un-thawed turkey. I can attest to many T-Day mornings soaking a frozen bird in cold water to try and speed up the process. I have mis-judged the amount of defrosting time so often that my wife doesn't even let me give my opinion anymore. Today's Democrat & Chronicle had an article in the "Living" section that may be of some use (as opposed to its news and opinion reporting). Among other things, the story includes the "Butterball Turkey Talk Line" number (800-288-2372 or http://www.butterball.com/). The turkey hot line saved us a couple of times.

For those of you with the responsibility of carving the bird, America Online has a video describing the proper technique. My father always carved; I've struggled the last few years trying not to hack the turkey to pieces. This video may help.

You will have to talk to Paula about the cranberry sauce. She has her own recipe and I don't know if she'll share it.

Have Ego, Will Travel

New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, in apparently unimpressed with the candidates running for President, according to this report in the New York Daily News.

Bloomberg, in New Orleans for a municipal government conference, criticised all of the candidates as being "incapable of leadership". When asked if he had any particular candidate in mind, he indicated that he was dissatisfied with all of them.

Well, I guess he's satisfied and impressed with himself. Bloomberg is rumored to be considering an independent run for President. He seems to have all the necessary tools: a huge ego and an even bigger bankroll.

His recent public pronouncements seem to be laying the groundwork for jumping in.

Now For Something Completely Different

Just for fun, take a look at this video (courtesy of Dave DiCaro by way of Jib Jab).

The title is "Night of the Living Democrats". It stars Laura Bush and Joe DiCaro as the good guys and a number of evil zombie Democrats as .... themselves! The best part is the cameo by none other than "the Gipper", who, as always, sends the Dems packing.

Its great fun!

"Steamroller" Gets Rolled

The blogosphere is filled with reaction to Elliot Spitzer's about-face on driver licenses for illegal aliens. NRO had two that I found particularly interesting.

The first is by Mark Krikorian and is entitled "an offer he couldn't refuse". Kerkorian wonders if Hillary Clinton had anything to do with the Governor's retreat. After all, it was her four-way flip-flop on the Spitzer plan that precipitated her recent debate fiasco. She could not have relished the idea of defending Spitzer's plan during the presidential campaign.

The second article is by John Derbyshire. His piece is about what he characterizes as the Great Elite Back-Down Issue. His view is that immigration has been the biggest issue separating the elites from the rest of us. The reaction of us "average Joe's" has surprised "clueless" members of the elites and has forced them to back away from their position on the subject.

There are many more columns and editorials about Spitzer's debacle. Maybe next time, he'll try a little harder to get a read on what the people want before he takes the plunge.

UPDATE: On the lighter side, here's the Scrappleface entry on the topic.

Election Over, D&C Returns To #1 Agenda Item

Namely, local government consolidation.

Yesterday's Op-Ed piece on the "courageous" effort in the Village of Holley to consider the abolition of its police force contained another dig at Gates residents, who were previously admonished by D&C editorialists for wanting to have both our own police force and lower government expenditures. This time the paper effectively denigrated the Gates Police as being of little use beyond unlocking cars in the Wal-Mart parking lot.

I have it on good authority that the Chief of Police and many of his officers are none too pleased. I expect that we will soon see a rebuttal (if the paper will print it). The D&C did not print an LTE from the president of the Gates Keystone Club critical of last year's anti-Gates PD editorial.

The D&C just doesn't like dissenting voices, particularly on the government consolidation issue. Jim Lawrence and Tom Tobin are determined to push this point as far as possible.

This is their signature agenda item, as I have previously noted. Expect more of the same. Lots more.

D&C's Editorial Is Only "FAIR"

Actually, that gives them a lot of credit. In fact, the editorial opinions of the D&C are usually pretty poor. The editorial criticising the Brooks intercept plan was typical.

As is so often the case, I found it difficult to understand the D&C's position on the FAIR plan as stated in the editorial.

First, the primary criticism of the plan seemed to be that it is too pessimistic with regard to the growth of the area economy. That's funny, I would have thought that being conservative on economic assumptions was a good idea for government. Pie-in-the-Sky (or Ferries-on-the-Lake) has not worked out that well for us.

Next, I found amusing that the D&C called for further belt-tightening by the County government. What should be cut; please D&C tell us, since the D&C editorialists usually complain whenever any County program is threatened with cuts. Meanwhile, they included one brief sentence on school spending; this despite last week's Roch. Business Journal report showing that 47 of the 50 highest paid public officials in Monroe County are school officials, and the Comptroller's report showing school taxes rising twice as fast as inflation.

Finally, I was amazed at the facile way in which the editorial board dispensed with the support of the plan by Sandra Parker of the Roch. Business Alliance and the Center for Governmental Research. The D&C generally treats the RBA and CGR as the Oracle at Delphi on governmental matters. But on this point, they don't know what they're talking about?

I don't get it.

Actually, I do. Parker and the CGR didn't get the memo; the D&C doesn't want to support Ms. Brooks or anything she does that will really cut the county deficit. They know that the only real answer is consolidation of local government. Nothing else is acceptable.

The Edmund Fitzgerald

I've been a Gordon Lightfoot fan since my college days at SUNY-Albany. Emily Wright turned me on to Gordon.

He has had a number of hits over the years, but he may be best known for his 1976 ballad "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald". Today is the 32nd anniversary of the loss of the ship. I came across this video tribute to the lost ship and crew on Fark.com. The video has some actual footage and has Lightfoot's song as accompaniment.

The Fitzgerald was launched in 1958 and was the biggest ore freighter on the Great Lakes until the early 1970's. The boat was built by Northwestern Mutual Insurance Co. of Wisconsin and named after the company's chairman, whose father had been a Great Lakes ship captain.

Some people believe that the Fitzgerald was a jinxed boat and bad luck dogged it from the beginning. When Mrs. Fitzgerald went to christen the boat by breaking a champagne bottle over the bow, it took her three swings to break the bottle. Upon launching the vessel in the water, the boat was slightly damaged as it hit the dock, and finally, at the ceremony one of the onlookers suffered a heart attack. The boat suffered an unusual number of minor wrecks and mishaps during its 17 years of service.

Apparently, controversy still remains about the actual cause of the wreck. There is no question, however, that Lightfoot's hit song has made the Edmund Fitzgerald the most well-known Great Lakes' shipwreck.

The People Have Spoken

Well, the votes are in.

The lowest voter turnout since 1964 contributed to Gates having some of its closest races in recent memory. The Gates GOP maintained control of the Town Board, while Democrat Mark McIntee also held his seat. As such, Supervisor Esposito will continue to preside over a Town Board with a 4-1 Republican majority.

Long time councilman Greg Hart finished third in the balloting for the Board, thus losing his seat. He has given long and honorable service to the citizens of Gates and was a worthy heir to his father, former Supervisor Jack Hart. Greg has been a friend and a colleague for a long time and I'll miss him as a Board member. I'm sure, though, that he will remain very active in Gates politics.

Judge John Pisaturo won his 7th term on the bench. I'm particularly pleased about his re-election, since his opponent used his censure over charging excessive speeding fines as a means to unfairly attack his judicial qualifications. Town voters, fortunately, did not buy into it.

The new face on the Town Board belongs to Chris DiPonzio. Chris led the balloting for the Board and brings both youth and business experience to Town government. He also has a fine political pedigree; his mom, Betty DiPonzio, was a long time Board member, and was one of the most popular elected officials in Gates. I'm looking forward to working with Chris (who is also a good friend and former golf partner).

That brings me to Supervisor Ralph Esposito. As I have previously written, I know no finer public official than Ralph. His political and governmental skills are simply unmatched by anyone I have ever dealt with in the public arena. His experience, competence, and accomplishments make him the best possible choice to run the Town of Gates. His steady hand has brought us through fiscal challenges and given Gates residents a quality of life which is second to none. I am honored to serve with him.

Going forward, it will be interesting to watch both political and governmental developments in Gates. For example, we will learn if Councilman McIntee is going to revert to the cooperative bipartisan spirit that he evidenced in the early part of his first year in office, or if he will continue to be the posturing partisan that he became as the election neared. The GOP majority treated him with respect during the past year; he lost some of that respect due to recent actions that seemed to be political antics. Frankly, he should expect little leeway from us if he continues to try to score partisan points rather than to govern cooperatively.

From a purely partisan view, elections have become more difficult for the GOP in Gates, due to ever declining Republican voter enrollment. The Gates GOP needs to come up with a plan to deal with that problem, as well as the problem of low voter turn-out. We have to accelerate efforts to register new GOP voters and get those we do have to actively participate in the party.

Clearly, the days of easy wins for the GOP are long gone.

Rudy Closing In?

Those of you who are regular readers (those 3 or 4 of you), know I'm a fan of Rudy Giuliani. I continue to think he remains the GOP's best hope for holding the White House in 2008.

Apparently, I am not alone in my thinking. Rich Lowry, writing in the National Review Online suggests that Rudy has had staying power despite predictions to the contrary. His article opens on that note:

"Rudy Giuliani’s downfall in the Republican primary fight has been much predicted, but little in evidence. He just got the endorsement of the Christian conservative leader Pat Robertson and has stubbornly stayed atop national polls all year long".

Lowry says that Rudy has shown himself to be a proper heir to Ronald Reagan, calling him "an urban cowboy". Lowry also notes that Rudy has another attribute that I think may be the most important of all; he's likeable, and, as my wife likes to point out, Americans vote for the candidate they'd most like to have a beer with. Lowry said: "At this basic level, Giuliani tugs on Republican heartstrings. There is no substitute in politics for being liked, and Republicans simply like Rudy".

Lowry concluded with this observation:

"Giuliani’s best selling point in the primaries is that — whatever his media coverage says — he’s not something new under the sun. He’s an archetype that Republican voters know and love — the gun-slinging sheriff, just with a different ZIP code".

Meanwhile, Robert Tracinski, of TIADaily.com, writing in RealClearPolitics, pointed to Giuliani's appeal to the religious right and the possible effect he could have on their influence in the GOP:

"I have argued that Giuliani's candidacy is a test of the priorities of the right. And there you have the priority list: Islamic terrorism first, small government second, judges third.
And if this is how Pat Robertson looks at the election, how many other religious voters will do the same?
That's why this endorsement is so significant: it is a precise and thorough validation of the premise behind Giuliani's candidacy.
The potential implications reach far beyond Giuliani's presidential prospects. Up to now, most Republican politicians have based their campaigns on an opposition premise: that to win the support of the Republican "base," it is necessary to conform to the agenda of the religious right. Call it the Mitt Romney Theory. But if Giuliani wins the nomination, and then goes on to win the general election, how many Republican politicians will feel emboldened to adopt Giuliani's position?
What we may be witnessing is a significant political retreat by the religious right".

Finally, I have noted many attacks on Rudy from both right and left. As I have previously noted, critics only criticize candidates that they are worried about. I think they better keep worrying.

Lieberman's Lament

This one's for you Rubes.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) Conn., was very critical of the Democratic party regarding its approach to national security issues, in a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, as reported by the New York Sun.

Lieberman accused his Democratic colleagues of abandoning the principles of FDR, Truman, and JFK, regarding national security. He called them out on the concept that they view George Bush as the greatest threat to American security:

"Since retaking Congress in November 2006, the top foreign policy priority of the Democratic Party has not been to expand the size of our military for the war on terror or to strengthen our democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East or to prevail in Afghanistan. It has been to pull our troops out of Iraq, to abandon the democratically elected government there, and to hand a defeat to President Bush."

Lieberman is now virtually an outcast from the mainstream of the Democratic party, which has shifted quite far to the left since he was Al Gore's running mate in 2000. He was particularly critical of his 22 Democratic Senate colleagues who voted against his resolution naming Iran's revolutionary guards and Quds force, terrorist organizations. Lieberman also railed against liberal web commentators who he claimed pushed a theory that his resolution would give the President a "back door" OK for war against Iran:

"There is something profoundly wrong-something that should trouble all of us — when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran's murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops." He added, "There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base — even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime."

Sen. Lieberman is a voice in the wilderness of the Democratic party on this topic. I think great past Democratic leaders, who were strong on defense, like Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Scoop Jackson, and Sam Nunn, would hardly recognize today's Democratic party. One of these days, some Democrat is going to have to deal with a military crisis. How will they handle it?

I'm Not Sure Walsh Is A Republican, But He's Not A Conservative

So say Tom Cook and Jim Quinn, Conservative Party Chairmen of Monroe and Wayne Counties, respectively, as quoted by the Syracuse Post-Standard.

Cook only recently learned that Congressman Walsh was actually a RINO:

"I was shocked when I began analyzing his record," said Cook, the Monroe County chair for 28 years. "It's only when he did the anti-war thing that I began looking into it."

If Tom had read this blog he would have learned the facts on Walsh much sooner.

Cook was quite vehement, however, in his denunciation of Walsh, saying:

"This guy writes me a letter and says he's not a conservative," Cook said Wednesday. "Never in my 28 years as chair has anybody ever written me a letter to ask for an endorsement and say he's not a conservative. He's pro-life, which is nice, but we're not the Right-to-Life Party."

Mr. Quinn also expressed his dismay at Walsh's faulty conservative credentials:

"We've always had a cool relationship with him regarding his voting record," Quinn said. "The flip-flop on the war in Iraq was the straw that broke the camel's back."

It is not completely clear whether or not the loss of support of Cook and Quinn will assure Walsh gets no Conservative Party endorsement. There are 10 Counties in Walsh's district. The State Conservative Chairman, Michael Long, has yet to weigh in and the Onondaga County Chair, Austin Olmstead offered a note of possible support.

The issue is critical for Walsh who narrowly won re-election in 2006. His margin of victory was less than the approximately 7,200 votes he got on the Conservative line. As I pointed out in July, its quite clear that Walsh doesn't understand who his supporters really are.

Good News Is No News?

That is the sub-title of a Times of London article about the very real success that's been occurring in Iraq since General Petraeus took over and changed our military strategy.

The article points out how little of this "good news" makes it through the "conventional wisdom" of the press who have been convinced that Iraq is a hopelessly lost cause. The Times also points out that many Democrats in Congress and running for President have invested a lot into the Iraq "quagmire narrative".

There may be problems for Democrats in 2008 if Iraq does turn around and the Democrats look like the party that wrote off the military too soon. Americans hate to lose; that could cost defeatist Democrats at the polls.

UPDATE - 11/8: Here are the links to the New York Times and Washington Post articles I cited in the comments section. For some reason, the links did not work on the comments page.

Hillary Debate Update: "Meanies" Ganged Up On Her

Hillary responded to what her campaign called "piling on" with this ad.
(Video via Real Clear Politics)

Maybe Hill's not as tough as I thought. Or maybe, as PowerLine claims, she knows that Democrat girls will stick by her. They discuss how Hillary may be able to play the "feminist" card in the primary season, but that the general election may be different.

You can review their analysis here and here.

Edwards Ad Mocks Hillary Debating Herself

John Edwards took a shot at Hillary Clinton in this campaign ad.

Hillary did have a hard time dealing with some of the more controversial questions. And, I'd say that Tim Russert won't be getting tickets to the inaugural ball if she wins the White House.

(Video via Real Clear Politics)

Desperate Gates Dems Launch 11th Hour Attack

Politics in Gates reached a new low yesterday as the Gates Democrats' mailer hit homes across the town.

Half of the mailer was a hit piece aimed at Town Justice John Pisaturo. This is the second such attack on him focusing on the fact that he was censured for giving overly large fines to speeders.
The piece says that "Judge Pisaturo broke the law" by handing out those large fines. This is becoming a typical tactic; implying that a crime was committed when the issue is compliance with an administrative or regulatory aspect of a statute. Further, why do the Democrats think hammering speeders is such a bad thing? Maybe drivers would slow down in Gates if they knew they were going to get the biggest fines possible.

The other half of the mailer was more of the same old "chicken little" criticism. The Democrat mailer used out-of-context "facts" along with quotes from editorials from 15-16 months ago in an effort to distort Ralph Esposito's record and lead people to unjustified conclusions. This has gone on for five years now. Ms. Swanton and the Democrats have been criticising Mr. Esposito and the GOP, but during all of that time, they have never offered a concrete, positive proposal for changes in Gates' government. Ms. Swanton focused on Ralph's car; Mr. McIntee on some secretarial salaries. Five years and the best they can do is "save" the Town a few thousand dollars?

A quick look at the latest mailer leads to an inescapable conclusion; the Democrats know they are losing this year so they will say anything in a last ditch effort to salvage their campaign. Most residents of Gates are reaching the conclusion, as the D&C and G-C Post did, that all Swanton and her gang can do is criticise the current administration; they have no positive plan or real ideas for running the town.

Further, their brand of politics is disgraceful. This is not like the pointed, rather witty ads they ran two years ago. Those ads went to the edge but usually didn't cross it. This year's campaign has gone far beyond the pale. I believe the Republican campaign has been positive and fair. We have campaigned solely on what we have done over the past few years and made virtually no references to our opponents.

Too bad the Democrats chose the dark side. I say shame on them.