Maybe I should start hanging around to see what goes on in these candidate nights, rather than just leafleting and running.
Cambridge Day reports a bunch of non incumbents talked about replacing the Cambridge city manager at the August 31 forum. They report two incumbents praising the city manager.
The strongest quoted comment was from Minka vonBeuzekom, “I feel there’s been a violation of that public trust.”
The trouble is that nobody, including vonB seemed to be interested in implementing the decision of the Superior Court judge and jury and the Appeals Court panel. The report includes nobody calling to fire him for malfeasance in office documented by appellate decision.
I will consider hanging around in the future, but with the strongest comment being vonB’s, I am not at all certain it is worth my time. Great words, typical Cambridge implementation. Too much more of the same.
Please see the full report at: http://www.cambridgeday.com/2011/09/01/city-manager-is-key-issue-in-council-candidates-forum/.
Sunday, September 04, 2011
Planned Coverage of the Cambridge, MA, USA Election
My environmental concerns on the Charles and in the area very clearly are rooted in the rotten situation in Cambridge.
It is beginning to look like the Cambridge Pols are going to treat the Appeals Court / Superior Court orders in Monteiro as they treat pretty much everything else which accurately and negatively describes the situation in Cambridge: ignore it and continue to run around calling themselves saints.
I will follow the Cambridge Chronicle series on ending the reign of the Cambridge City Manager because the Chronicle is doing something positive, and might actually achieve something.
I started looking around campaign related sites to see if I could find reports more directly meaningful on real environmental issues.
One site has been publishing positions by candidates for years now.
It was interesting to note that only one candidate, so far, has answered the questions this year.
That candidate both impresses me and scares me.
Thinking the situation over, while I will comment on the Cambridge Chronicle series, I will likely avoid specific candidates and evaluating organizations unless there is reason to cover them.
This is based on the analysis of this candidate, who is not an incumbent but looks like a very major candidate.
The candidate has meaningful campaign experience managing campaigns. He also claims to have environmental experience.
His connection to Cambridge City Councilor Davis stands out too strongly.
Davis has looked like the most environmentally destructive member of the Cambridge City Council while loudly, and very much non stop, calling herself a saint on environmental issues.
The pitch is she is saving the world and how dare you object to her destroying Cambridge. This is the standard pitch. It is very destructive and distressingly effective at least in part because it is backed by the pretty much non stop propaganda of the massive Cambridge Pol organization.
I will try to elaborate on the environmental destructiveness of the City of Cambridge and its various related organizations in future reports.
Please just be advised that, during the election season, I only specifically intend to follow the issue of the Cambridge City Manager’s tenure in light of the opinion of jury, Superior Court judge and Appeals Court panel.
I have better things to do than try to evaluate degrees of destructiveness of too many people who are simply too destructive, whether from indifference, stupidity or from inherent rottenness. I would be very pleased to be proven wrong.
It is beginning to look like the Cambridge Pols are going to treat the Appeals Court / Superior Court orders in Monteiro as they treat pretty much everything else which accurately and negatively describes the situation in Cambridge: ignore it and continue to run around calling themselves saints.
I will follow the Cambridge Chronicle series on ending the reign of the Cambridge City Manager because the Chronicle is doing something positive, and might actually achieve something.
I started looking around campaign related sites to see if I could find reports more directly meaningful on real environmental issues.
One site has been publishing positions by candidates for years now.
It was interesting to note that only one candidate, so far, has answered the questions this year.
That candidate both impresses me and scares me.
Thinking the situation over, while I will comment on the Cambridge Chronicle series, I will likely avoid specific candidates and evaluating organizations unless there is reason to cover them.
This is based on the analysis of this candidate, who is not an incumbent but looks like a very major candidate.
The candidate has meaningful campaign experience managing campaigns. He also claims to have environmental experience.
His connection to Cambridge City Councilor Davis stands out too strongly.
Davis has looked like the most environmentally destructive member of the Cambridge City Council while loudly, and very much non stop, calling herself a saint on environmental issues.
The pitch is she is saving the world and how dare you object to her destroying Cambridge. This is the standard pitch. It is very destructive and distressingly effective at least in part because it is backed by the pretty much non stop propaganda of the massive Cambridge Pol organization.
I will try to elaborate on the environmental destructiveness of the City of Cambridge and its various related organizations in future reports.
Please just be advised that, during the election season, I only specifically intend to follow the issue of the Cambridge City Manager’s tenure in light of the opinion of jury, Superior Court judge and Appeals Court panel.
I have better things to do than try to evaluate degrees of destructiveness of too many people who are simply too destructive, whether from indifference, stupidity or from inherent rottenness. I would be very pleased to be proven wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)