Quoted Text

There is no doubt that Cooke will be a far more skillful and FAIR negotiator of the police contract, for which there is no choice - it must be done. Tommasone will not even discuss it with them.

WRONG!
It is the cops that won't negotiate with Tommasone!

Quoted from 77

The minds of GENUINE conservatives has not changed, only the leadership of the Conservative Party. Bill Cooke should have been endorsed by the Conservtaive Party last time. There is no doubt that Cooke will be a far more skillful and FAIR negotiator of the police contract, for which there is no choice - it must be done. Tommasone will not even discuss it with them. And anyone who has taken the time to get to know Bill Cooke would soon discover that he is in fact a conservative who has nothing in common with his party.
It should also be noted that the Tommasone administration has been on a hiring wave with the "Independence" Party (which is anything but independent) - he now has the Independence endorsement he couldn't secure in the last Supervisor election. Tommasone bought that line with the hiring of their party members, while Cooke has promised the police nothing-or anyone else for that matter.
And let's not forget that not only did the REPUBLICANS endorsed a DEMOCRAT in the Town Board race, they staged a failed primary for Denny to KEEP the Krat line!

First you are correct about the genuine conservative's minds not changing. There are some REAL conservatives out there. But they  had better take back their Rotterdam party and pretty quick. It is clearly out of touch with their grass roots idiology.

Second, Bill Cooke is hardly the right man for the job! REALLY! And you mention that Mr.Cooke will be a far more skillful and fair negotiator for the upcoming negotiations for the RPD. Are you implying that Mr.Tommasone is NOT skillful and would not be a fair negotiator? And if that is what you are implying....how did you come to that conclusion? Perhaps from the cops themselves?

Bill Cooke is void of any vision to lead this town. He clearly didn't in the last election either. He is truly a dem that has just become a puppet for the conservs...or should we say the RPD? It doesn't take a rocket scientist here to figure that one out!  And I would have been disappointed and disillusioned if the conserves endorsed him in the last election, just like I and many many others are in this one.

And as far as Tommasone on a hiring wave for people from the Independence party.....like who? Is this just perception? Or perhaps this is the same thing he did for the conservs with Joey Guidarelli in the last election. Perhaps?

Quoted from PoliticalIncorrect

WRONG!
It is the cops that won't negotiate with Tommasone!

I thought it was the battle between the "Hatfields(Tommasones) and McCoys(Hamilton)????????

What was Bill Cooke doing for most of his service with the post office? Could he have been a business agent for the union? Who would Bill Cooke side with in a contract negotiation with the police UNION? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck what is it?

Quoted Text

Quoted from Gadfly:

The minds of GENUINE conservatives has not changed, only the leadership of the Conservative Party. Bill Cooke should have been endorsed by the Conservtaive Party last time.

Gadfly,

I agree with you that the rank and file of the Conservative party (of which I am one) doesn't agree with the party leadership regarding some of the endorsements that were made this year and in the past.  As an example, the party endorsement of Jasenski/Godlewski over Lazzari/Santabarbara doesn't appear to most of us to be based on political ideology.

You and I have discussed the party endorsement for Rotterdam Town Supervisor and as you know, I support Tommasone. (we'll just have to agree to disagree).  Although not a Rotterdam resident, I believe that Steve's accomplishments (at least the recent ones) will benefit the town.  Unfortunately, I have not heard of a platform of issues from Mr. Cooke, only venomous attacks against his opponent.  I believe that you need to better inform the public of Cooke's positions on the issues if you are to secure votes in his favor.  I would be particularly interested in
his position re: Kosiur's Laws re: sex offender residency.

It would be very helpful if those of us in the Conservative party could obtain information pertaining to the questions that are asked by the party leadership of the candidates and the candidate's responses.  Those questions should presumably be about those issues upon which the Conservative party bases it's platform.  Though some of these may not be pertinent at the county/town level, it would be nice to learn who are the candidates with traditional conservative principles/values.

• size of government
  
• government spending
  
• taxes
  
• entitlement programs
  
• law enforcement/public safety
  
• gun ownership
  
• immigration
  
• abortion
  
• trade
  

Perhaps, in the future, the endorsement interviews can be recorded and made available to party members.

I believe that there is room for diversity of opinion in the party.  However, the "litmus test" on the issues should be the only basis upon which endorsements are awarded.

Quoted from Brad Littlefield

Gadfly,

I agree with you that the rank and file of the Conservative party (of which I am one) doesn't agree with the party leadership regarding some of the endorsements that were made this year and in the past.  As an example, the party endorsement of Jasenski/Godlewski over Lazzari/Santabarbara doesn't appear to most of us to be based on political ideology.

You and I have discussed the party endorsement for Rotterdam Town Supervisor and as you know, I support Tommasone. (we'll just have to agree to disagree).  Although not a Rotterdam resident, I believe that Steve's accomplishments (at least the recent ones) will benefit the town.  Unfortunately, I have not heard of a platform of issues from Mr. Cooke, only venomous attacks against his opponent.  I believe that you need to better inform the public of Cooke's positions on the issues if you are to secure votes in his favor.  I would be particularly interested in
his position re: Kosiur's Laws re: sex offender residency.

It would be very helpful if those of us in the Conservative party could obtain information pertaining to the questions that are asked by the party leadership of the candidates and the candidate's responses.  Those questions should presumably be about those issues upon which the Conservative party bases it's platform.  Though some of these may not be pertinent at the county/town level, it would be nice to learn who are the candidates with traditional conservative principles/values.

• size of government
  
• government spending
  
• taxes
  
• entitlement programs
  
• law enforcement/public safety
  
• gun ownership
  
• immigration
  
• abortion
  
• trade
  

Perhaps, in the future, the endorsement interviews can be recorded and made available to party members.

I believe that there is room for diversity of opinion in the party.  However, the "litmus test" on the issues should be the only basis upon which endorsements are awarded.

Brad -
I did record the endorsement interviews for all candidates running in Legislative Districts 3 & 4 - which included all candidates running in the towns therein. You are welcome to review them anytime. There were no interviews for the City of Schenectady, or its legislative districts. And in compiling the questions for candidates, I insisted on adding the very simple following question: What do you feel you have in common with conservatives? Some of the answers would leave you baffled (especially those offered by your Town Justice candidate, Camille Siano-Enders).
With regard to Bill Cooke in particular, he is absolutely against big government and the overly generous entitlements doled out in this county. He does not believe in abortion, and is a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment.
And unlike Tony Jasenski, Bill is fully aware of the criminals descending upon Rotterdam from every direction. Based on Jasenski's latest deceptive mailer, it is apparent that he is unaware of the drug dealers operating in plain view in the Rotterdam Square Mall, the knife-wielding delinquents intimidating kids in the local parks, the criminal jungle that is Hannaford Plaza, etc. According to Tony, he is going to PREVENT such activity from creeping into Rotterdam, Princetown and Duanesburg. He is apparenetly clueless about the fact that what he claims he will "prevent" is already well in progress, and has never mentioned a word about it until now - and again, he hasn't a clue. He thinks they're just beginning to move up Crane Street and Broadway! Hello Tony! Take another look through the WHOLE TOWN!
As for Kosier's pandering sex-offender law, Cooke considers it just as dangerous and thoughtless as we do.
And you're right about some of these applications locally - they just aren't LOCAL issues. But they sure say a lot about a candidate's character and values.
By the way, what exactly has Steve Tommasone accomplished? I know he suddenly has a lot of PROPOSALS that only now is he "advertising" through the recently published town "newsletter" - which amounts to nothing more than a publicly funded campaign brochure. Steve's "proposals" with regard to the Hamburg Streeet corridor, the Curry Road Shopping Plaza, flooding problems in Masullo Estates, etc. are issues that existed long before Steve was elected and he has NEVER addressed them until this election year. Under Steve, they will never progress beyond "proposals". He has spent a fortune on one "study" after another instead of just telling the Masullo residents the truth:there is nothing he can do to stop water that always seeks its level. Worst of all, when Steve attempts to discuss these issues, NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL HE'S TALKING ABOUT! I would defy anyone to translate the endless mumbling chatter he delivers to the public in our town meetings.

First let me correct you on one issue. That is Masullo estates. Mr.Tommasone has been addressing this issue from the inception of his elected position as supervisor. Have you attended the tireless town meetings for the last 4 years that have addressed this issue? Just ask Mike O'Conner and he I'm sure he will confirm. Mr. O'Conner, who resides in Masullo Estates, has admitted that this administration  has actually done more than any others. He also commends Mr. Mertz on this issue. As far as a resolve to the water issue at Masullo....you are possibly correct....there isn't one. Not one that wouldn't cost the taxpayers a huge chunk of change. That development was built on wet lands and shouldn't have been approved to begin with. So are we now to fault the present administration for the past wrong doings? Mr. Tommasone was handed a town that is a mess. Just attend the town meetings and it is a flood of residents who have issue after issue. And why is this happening with this administration? Because for the first time, they have a town board that will listen. All of these issues, and there are many, will clearly take more than 4 years to resolve.

Second, as far as Mr.Jasenski, that endorsement was a joke. He or Godlewski, 'the do nothing boys', will be just that! As far as the increased crime...take it up with the PBA, police chief and the cops....in ALL towns! That is their job. They are paid a decent wage with extrodinary benefits to do the job!

As far as Mr. Cooke...IT IS STILL CLEARLY A NO VOTE!! His campaign is empty and void of the specifics.

Quoted Text

eg:With regard to Bill Cooke in particular, he is absolutely against big government and the overly generous entitlements doled out in this county. He does not believe in abortion, and is a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment.

As for Kosier's pandering sex-offender law, Cooke considers it just as dangerous and thoughtless as we do.

This is no big revelation. He is being endorsed for the RPD ONLY!! How can he 'absolutely' be against big government when he not only is a dem but a UNION LEADER! Sorry, can't have it both ways and it won't sell to the people.

Gadfly, I have to disagree with you about the Masullo Estates water problem all it will take is enough money to correct the problems created by the past administrations of Rotterdam. In the past Rotterdam has allowed builders to do as they wish as far as housing developments are concerned and the builders were never held responsible for the problems which occurred as a result of their mistakes. Builders were allowed to bring in 5' of fill in order to keep a house above the water table with no thought of what would happen to the existing homes about the blocked drainage ditch. The result was that the water table became even higher than it was b4 the house was built. The storm water sewer system which drains the Netherlands Village was never constructed properly and now drains somewhere into Masullo Estates and the stilling pond constructed to hold the storm water fro Netherlands remains dry as a bone. All the storm water systems were approved by past administrations of the town and they don't work as engineered and the residents have had to live with these mistakes for years. Money will correct the problem but the town doesn't have it so the problems with drainage continues.

You are correct shadow...and if Mr. Cooke/dems/conservs, think this present administration isn't doing all they could....what EXACTLY would Mr. Cooke  PROMISE to do to resolve this on going water issue in Masullo Estates.

I fear that all will promise to fix the problem until they educate themselves with the cost and complexity of the problem and then the back peddling starts.

I think that the conservative party would have endorsed Steve Tommasone again. And I also think that the party didn't because of the law enforcement involvement in that party. I think that Steve Tommasone will be re elected anyways.

Quoted from 77

The reval was voted upon in the first half of 2005 (somewhere between May and July?). That record will show that Republican Holly Vellano cast the deciding vote to go ahead with the reval. It should also be noted that Tony Jasenski also favored the reval but didn't have the cahunas to cast what he believed at the time would be the deciding vote - so he quit at the last town meeting before the next agenda for the next meeting-knowing the reval would be on that agenda. Then, as now, Jasenski will not take a position on ANYTHING. He will only jump on what he determines to be politically popular. Some things never change...

Thank you and I will do my best to look into this soon, although I think there won't be enough time before election day.

Quoted from CICERO

That is further proof that the current Rotterdam conservative party is a quid pro quo party.  The conservative party doesn't endorse a candidate unless they are going to recieve something in return.  Whether it's an appointment on the town board(Guidarelli), or somebody to negotiate a favorable police contract.(Finacially favorable for the police of course, not the taxpayer)

I can't be exactly sure, but let me tell you this.  There are a few people who reside in this county who are true conservatives, and I think that starting in the very near future, you will start to see the Conservative Party swing back to not being politically motivated (as far as getting something in return), but instead, looking at each possible candidate by the merits of what they stand for and would bring to the local arm of the party, whether it be on a town or county basis.