Recently (I, dunno, about an hour ago) the Uncle blithely said: "Hey!I like name calling.I'm good at it. "
Ho ho, the Uncle is so funny.
Except to a certain family member, for whom the Uncle would do anything (and frequently has, may I point out), who pretty much took the Uncle to task for taking the Ralphlings latest attacks, particularly on Mindy and Iris, too lightly.
(Did any of you follow that last sentence?)
In any case, the Uncle now sees the light and, as an act of conrition has sent the following email to Sweet-As-Pie Swiller.
"Please feel free to use any and all materials on the Uncle's blog in any way you see fit, including fund raising for OCEAN or whatever you plan to call it next week.
Uncle Betty"
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Ralphling Overdrive
Wow, the Ralphlings are going into overdrive.
Neat.
You can practically see the steam coming out of their...ears.
The Ralphlings are screaming that Mindy and Iris are evil terrible people who have sold their souls to the devil and so you should vote for forming a village.
Who can argue with that?
And, it diverts attention from the lie that Bart Bloom and the other Ralphlings keep trying to sell us: claiming that a village will prevent annexation (it won't).
Hey, let's try an honest campaign and see if it sells.
How's:
Neat.
You can practically see the steam coming out of their...ears.
The Ralphlings are screaming that Mindy and Iris are evil terrible people who have sold their souls to the devil and so you should vote for forming a village.
Who can argue with that?
And, it diverts attention from the lie that Bart Bloom and the other Ralphlings keep trying to sell us: claiming that a village will prevent annexation (it won't).
Hey, let's try an honest campaign and see if it sells.
How's:
VOTE FOR A VILLAGE SO THAT RALPH CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO CONTROL
catchy huh?
As to the Ralphling's hyped up smear campaign -- I like what Swiller had to say (Yeah, I'm biased 'cause he's sweet as pie).--
Can the Ralphlings say the same?
Saturday, July 29, 2006
Ralphlings, A Field Guide
A handy dandy hint for identufying a posting from one of the Ralphlings: look for the unsigned accusation of "selling out" "being bought" "taking bribes."
Here's a patial list of the folks they've accused:
Mindy
Swiller
Sheila
Gerri
Mike A
Mike Q
Lorraine
If I've missed anyone, so sorry!
Here's a patial list of the folks they've accused:
Mindy
Swiller
Sheila
Gerri
Mike A
Mike Q
Lorraine
If I've missed anyone, so sorry!
Friday, July 28, 2006
Sweet As Pie
Photo News
To the editor:
One can only feel sympathy for John Baranowski, who, in a letter to the editor last week, appeared to be wracked by a paralyzing fear of the future. Let me reassure him that, as is the case with so many frightened people, his terror is created solely by his ignorance of the subject at hand and that by learning the facts he will be able to put his mind at ease.
For example, he believes that the five local laws recently re-enacted by the Woodbury Town Council “can be - and certainly will be - applied to every large vacant parcel of land.” Knowledge of those laws would show Mr. Baranowski that at most only nine other parcels of land could even be proposed to the Town Board for such development.
He goes to on speculate that the laws could be applied to the “thousands (of acres) of Arden House.” He is unaware that the codicil governing the bequest of Arden House would make this impossible.
He is fearful that the senior housing that will be created will be “high-cost, densely built (and) semi-attached,” and that there are “only weak provision for holding the developer’s feet to the fire to actually sell those units to senior citizens.”
In truth, the laws enable builders to erect housing for seniors at lower cost than would otherwise be possible. The density of the senior units will be four per acre - which is no change from the previous law - and there will no attached units at all. The provisions setting these units aside for seniors have been applied in many other localities with a history of holding up.
He believes that approximately one unit per acre (senior housing aside) constitutes “high density.” While this is a bizarre definition of high density, Mr. Baranowski’s confusion is understandable. Ralph Caruso has so often recited that phrase that many gullible people have been taken in.
I note that while he complains about the placement of the entrance to the senior housing section of the WP3 project, he fails to mention that his own home is just there. This omission leads me to suspect that “NIMBY” plays some role in Mr. Baranowski’s objections. That being the case, I would urge him to find the maturity to face his own selfishness, an emotion all humans experience. I would hope that the sooner that he comes to grips with his own humanity, the easier it will be for him to accept reality and conquer his fears.
Jonathan Swiller
Highland Mills
To the editor:
One can only feel sympathy for John Baranowski, who, in a letter to the editor last week, appeared to be wracked by a paralyzing fear of the future. Let me reassure him that, as is the case with so many frightened people, his terror is created solely by his ignorance of the subject at hand and that by learning the facts he will be able to put his mind at ease.
For example, he believes that the five local laws recently re-enacted by the Woodbury Town Council “can be - and certainly will be - applied to every large vacant parcel of land.” Knowledge of those laws would show Mr. Baranowski that at most only nine other parcels of land could even be proposed to the Town Board for such development.
He goes to on speculate that the laws could be applied to the “thousands (of acres) of Arden House.” He is unaware that the codicil governing the bequest of Arden House would make this impossible.
He is fearful that the senior housing that will be created will be “high-cost, densely built (and) semi-attached,” and that there are “only weak provision for holding the developer’s feet to the fire to actually sell those units to senior citizens.”
In truth, the laws enable builders to erect housing for seniors at lower cost than would otherwise be possible. The density of the senior units will be four per acre - which is no change from the previous law - and there will no attached units at all. The provisions setting these units aside for seniors have been applied in many other localities with a history of holding up.
He believes that approximately one unit per acre (senior housing aside) constitutes “high density.” While this is a bizarre definition of high density, Mr. Baranowski’s confusion is understandable. Ralph Caruso has so often recited that phrase that many gullible people have been taken in.
I note that while he complains about the placement of the entrance to the senior housing section of the WP3 project, he fails to mention that his own home is just there. This omission leads me to suspect that “NIMBY” plays some role in Mr. Baranowski’s objections. That being the case, I would urge him to find the maturity to face his own selfishness, an emotion all humans experience. I would hope that the sooner that he comes to grips with his own humanity, the easier it will be for him to accept reality and conquer his fears.
Jonathan Swiller
Highland Mills
The Rose Is Off The Bloom
Bart Bloom has told the people of Woodbury that they have to form a village.
He's told us that he's part of a committee to get us to do that.
He's told us -INCORRECTLY- that it will stop annexation.
What he hasn't told us is that while he is pushing us to permanently change our town HE'S GOT HIS OWN HOUSE ON THE MARKET!
Can anybody say CHUTZPAH!
How dare this guy tell us what's best for us but not mention that at the very same time he's packing to leave?
While he explains that to us, why doesn't he also tell us who the hell is on this secret committee of his?
Gee Bart, it seems that you really are in a position to talk about disinformation.
He's told us that he's part of a committee to get us to do that.
He's told us -INCORRECTLY- that it will stop annexation.
What he hasn't told us is that while he is pushing us to permanently change our town HE'S GOT HIS OWN HOUSE ON THE MARKET!
Can anybody say CHUTZPAH!
How dare this guy tell us what's best for us but not mention that at the very same time he's packing to leave?
While he explains that to us, why doesn't he also tell us who the hell is on this secret committee of his?
Gee Bart, it seems that you really are in a position to talk about disinformation.
A Blooming Idiot
Bart Bloom, the legal whiz who knew absolutely nothing about annexation when Caruso trotted him out to confuse people at the meetings at the Senior Center two years ago, is back.
Guess what?
He still doesn’t know anything!
He has sent out an email that tells us:
"The primary purpose for creating a village is to prevent or make it more difficult for an adjoining village to annex property in the Town and change the zoning."
Neat!
Totally wrong, yet neat.
Be confused, be very confused.
Forming a village does NOTHING to prevent annexation.
NOTHING
NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING!
Guess what?
He still doesn’t know anything!
He has sent out an email that tells us:
"The primary purpose for creating a village is to prevent or make it more difficult for an adjoining village to annex property in the Town and change the zoning."
Neat!
Totally wrong, yet neat.
Be confused, be very confused.
Forming a village does NOTHING to prevent annexation.
NOTHING
NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING!
FORMING A VILLAGE DOES NOT PREVENT ANNEXATION.
Are we clear on that?
You idiot!
As to making annexation more difficult - the general consensus among lots and lots of experts is that it either makes annexation easier or has no effect.
NO ONE SAYS IT MAKES ANNEXATION MORE DIFFICULT!
Well, no one but Bart Bloom, legal scholar extraordinaire and part time sock puppet.
What else has this fine legal mind got to say?
"A few of us have formed an organization called Citizens for the Preservation of Woodbury, the sole purpose of which is to pass the resolution in favor of creating the Village of Woodbury. "
Who, pray tell, are these "few of us?" Caruso? Donnelly? Baranowski? Reveille? Paris Hilton?
Whoever they are they are too modest to put their names in print.
There can’t be all that many of them, because Bloom is advertising for minions "to pass out literature next week explaining all the issues and responding to the disinformation being spread around town."
And what disinformation is being spread around town?
Bloom somehow forgets to mention any.
(Except of course for the stuff that he’s spreading himself.)
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Busy, Busy Beaver
Poor Supervisor Burke, what a workaholic. Two weeks ago meetings almost everyday with Bob Reveille and today, when he could be having a nice relaxing two hour lunch, instead he spends that time working away over at Ralph Caruso's house.
And never does he ask for any recognition for his diligence. In fact, if our phavorite phreelance photographer hadn't happened to snap this shot of the Burkemobile in Ralph's driveway, we would never have been able to give him the credit he deserves.
And never does he ask for any recognition for his diligence. In fact, if our phavorite phreelance photographer hadn't happened to snap this shot of the Burkemobile in Ralph's driveway, we would never have been able to give him the credit he deserves.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Carusoville
The Happiest Place On Earth
(by order of Village law 179.2)
(by order of Village law 179.2)
Wasting away in Ralphcarusoville
Searching for my lost town government
Some people claim Baranowski’s to blame
But I know, it’s my own damn fault
I look back in disgust
At my yes vote last August
With nothing to show but a higher tax bill
It’s a real thriller
A back breaking killer
By this time next year
I’ll be paying it still.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
YES or NOT AT THIS MOMENT
Maybe I should fix that transom. The Uncle just received an email from Sweet-As-Pie Swiller, all full of capital letters and bold print and like that there. So, here it is, for your consideration
Most discussions about the August 10th vote on forming a Village of Woodbury revolve around voting YES or voting NO. Those aren’t the real choices available.
The real choices are YES or NOT AT THIS MOMENT.
A yes vote will drastically, and most likely permanently, change our form of government and will raise our taxes. It could easily lead to drastic changes in our fire department, our police department and all other municipal services. It will have profound effects on the people who supply those services. The village will have the right to wipe the slate and bring in new workers under new contracts. IT WILL NOT PREVENT ANNEXATION.
A no vote does not prevent us from re-petitioning and creating a village at any time that we choose. There will be a one year period during which this EXACT SAME village can not be brought forward. But this proposed village was poorly drawn to begin with, incorporating parts of the state park. We could create a new petition, leaving out the parkland, and bring it to vote at any time that we wanted.
At tonight’s town board meeting it became clear that there are many unanswered questions on what forming a new village will mean. There are only three weeks until the vote.
This petition was on hold in the courts for years - that time might have been used to get answers to the public, it wasn’t. The village faded from our thoughts. Now it’s back and we have very little time to do much of anything.
To quote Don Siebold, Darlene Reveille, John Baranowski, John Burke, Bob Donnelly and all the others in Ralph Caruso’s group, when they were talking about the Brodsky project: "What’s the rush?"
If we vote yes we have made a final decision for good or ill.
If we vote no all that we are saying is NOT AT THIS MOMENT.
What it comes down to is this. You are being asked if you want to make a giant change in the way that you live. Your choices are either "yes" or "let me think about it."
Most discussions about the August 10th vote on forming a Village of Woodbury revolve around voting YES or voting NO. Those aren’t the real choices available.
The real choices are YES or NOT AT THIS MOMENT.
A yes vote will drastically, and most likely permanently, change our form of government and will raise our taxes. It could easily lead to drastic changes in our fire department, our police department and all other municipal services. It will have profound effects on the people who supply those services. The village will have the right to wipe the slate and bring in new workers under new contracts. IT WILL NOT PREVENT ANNEXATION.
A no vote does not prevent us from re-petitioning and creating a village at any time that we choose. There will be a one year period during which this EXACT SAME village can not be brought forward. But this proposed village was poorly drawn to begin with, incorporating parts of the state park. We could create a new petition, leaving out the parkland, and bring it to vote at any time that we wanted.
At tonight’s town board meeting it became clear that there are many unanswered questions on what forming a new village will mean. There are only three weeks until the vote.
This petition was on hold in the courts for years - that time might have been used to get answers to the public, it wasn’t. The village faded from our thoughts. Now it’s back and we have very little time to do much of anything.
To quote Don Siebold, Darlene Reveille, John Baranowski, John Burke, Bob Donnelly and all the others in Ralph Caruso’s group, when they were talking about the Brodsky project: "What’s the rush?"
If we vote yes we have made a final decision for good or ill.
If we vote no all that we are saying is NOT AT THIS MOMENT.
What it comes down to is this. You are being asked if you want to make a giant change in the way that you live. Your choices are either "yes" or "let me think about it."
Jonathan Swiller
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)