Now that Labor Day has come and gone, the political races are heating up here in
The staff at Ulster Politics has heard that word on the street in
Although not official from the Board of Elections, insiders say that Allan Wikman's petitions were challenged, and will not hold up. Will Maksuta of New Paltz had initially indicated interest in the race, but did not file any petitions.
On the Comptroller side, there were no other challengers which will leave Elliott Auerbach (D-WF) and James Quigley (R-I-C) as the only two candidates.
For the 101 Assembly, Robin Yess (R-I-C) faces off against Kevin Cahill (D-WF?). There is a write in election for the Working Families line, which Cahill was endorsed for, on Tuesday, September 9.
Senator Bill Larkin will face challenger Larry Delarose.
Assemblyman Tom Kirwin will face a challenger to be determined at next week’s primary election on
Whomever you support, Ulster Politics is here for discussion, particularly when there are OTHER blogs out there that routinely REFUSE to post certain comments. Here at Ulster Politics, we still believe in us reporting, and you deciding.... that's why we and some of our loyal readers think that we are the most fair and balanced blog around.
Posts
76 comments:
Whomever you support. Whoever is the nominative case. Whomever is the direct object, not the subject. The direct object is in the accusative case and is spelled "Whomever". As in "to whom it may concern".
WHO cares!
The taxpayers do. We foot the bill for education and we expect our residents to be literate. Republican pig-english is a kick in the teeth to the people getting gouged for school taxes.
Enough already... it's fixed
"Let's be clear, we are not electing Prom Kings here. These men will have to perform real jobs. Let's base our vote on their qualifications."
We should all be basing our decision for Comptroller and Executive on who is the most qualified to do the job.
In both cases it is Jim Quigley and Len Bernardo.
The nonsense about Jim Quigley not being from around here is just that, nonsense. Even if he had moved here in 2000 (as Len Bernardo did), SO WHAT.
We can't give people jobs just because they are "from around here". That would be unwise.
I have also heard people want to vote for Auerbach because he is "so nice". Yes, Elliott is nice, but he is not a CPA. He is not trained in auditing. He has a degree in economics. I have taken both economics classes and accounting classes in college, and they are NOT the same thing.
Mike Hein has the same inferior experience to Len Beranrdo that Auerbach has to Quigley.
Let's be clear, we are not electing Prom Kings here. These men will have to perform real jobs. Let's base our vote on their qualifications.
Both sets of candidates from both parties have to sell themselves to the electorate. This is a horse race now until November.
Len Bernardo has already, in his short business career here, displayed poor judgement. He took advantage of public help to start up his business. A business that has not yet fulfilled the promised number of jobs. He then proceeded to use his business to promote a discriminatory religious group and was reprimanded by the state. These actions raise questions about his ethics and the validity of his qualifications. Qualifications don't equal performance and while these individuals might have different degrees on paper, their job performances have little to do with them. Auerbach is working hard to campaign while Quigley gets caught sleeping. Bush has an MBA from Harvard! Did that qualification bring us the management his degree promised? Imre claims to have advanced degrees but he apparently never learned anything about hypocrisy. I'm sure Krulick knows his language, but where's Kryolux now? All I see is an empty factory for sale. Candidates in my opinion should be judged on how hard they will work and who they will represent. Bernardo's bad ethics make me support Hein. Quigley's bad work ethic makes me support Auerbach. (And I would never support Auerbach otherwise.) Diplomas on the wall don't get anything done. We need pro-active people in these jobs, not slackers.
9:02 - Why don't you call Skate Time and speak to the manager who works for Bernardo, who also has full health insurance benefits paid by Bernardo, if he feels that Bernardo didn't create the jobs he promised.
Maybe you should also ask the Party Manger if she's happy.
Why don't you ask the kids and adults that work behind the snack bar, in the the skate room, who are Party Heros and Runners, the floor guards, the security guards, and the maintenance people if they think that Bernardo didn't fulfill his promise.
NEWS FLASH: The New York State Comptroller is NOT A CPA. He comes from local government just like Auerbach. If the position required the applicant to be a CPA, IT WOULD BE IN THE CHARTER. It is not. I have read it. Have you? The next comptroller needs to have a mix of PUBLIC and private sector experience, charisma, leadership, and drive. Elliott has a proven track record for all of the above.
AUERBACH FOR COMPTROLLER
I have worked for Len Bernardo for the last 3, going on 4 years now. I helped build Skate Time and I currently oversee the day to day. If it had not been for Len, I'd still be grinding it out in NYC, which by the way, I hated. I consider myself blessed to be able to live in the community I grew up in, the community I love. So 9:02, if you have any questions that require LEGITIMATE answers, I'd be more than happy to accommodate you. Look up Skate Time's number and give me a call. And by the way, if Len were this crazy-christian-monster everyone makes him out to be, I'm positive my lack of faith would have kept me in the city...I work hard, and THAT'S what matters.
-Mat
Quigley has a bad work ethic?? That is the funnies thing I have ever heard. You tell me why someone who has a bad work ethic has been with his company for 20 years. You tell me why he is one of the parternes of his company. You tell me why he had to go to NYC for a job. Try commuting 2 and a half hours each way 5 days a week for 17 years. If that shows anything, it shows he is dedicated to his job. Hope to here back from you!!
Geez, 9:02, do you even bother to do a MINIMUM of research before making absurd comments?
First, *I* am not a candidate for ANYTHING, so why is MY name being taken in vain in the context of candidate qualifications?
Then: "I'm sure Krulick knows his language, but where's Kryolux now? All I see is an empty factory for sale."
Are you insane? WHAT empty factory? Kryolux Inc is a privately-held corporation I created in 1984 to consolidate my various consulting, media, marketing, and research services. Kryolux never had a "factory" and never needed one! I work with clients around the country (and a few beyond), since all I need is a small office, some PCs, fax machines, phones, etc.
So just trying to slam ME with some irrelevant and ad hominem slur, particularly one as off-base as your nonsense claim, shows just how valuable anonymous claims from anonymous clowns are.
Clearly, YOU don't know ME from a hole in the wall, but only THINK you do, which is why not being accountable for your ignorance is more proof of the shortcomings of anonymous posting.
---
10:33,
Lou S., is that finally YOU?!!!! Wow, even the WORDS are the same! "charisma, leadership, and drive."
"Elliott has a proven track record for all of the above."
Uh, no. EA only has a proven track record of pompously CLAIMING all the above, but curiously neither he nor his flacks can nor do SUPPORT these claims with any relevant and substantial EXAMPLES!
Locals down here would only laugh convulsively if anyone suggested to them that EA had these qualities!
And someone said that Auerbach was "nice"? That is the LAST adjective locals in the know would use for that bullying, vindictive, self-serving opportunist.
In fact, this was probably ANOTHER Auerbach anonymous post; notice you NEVER see Auerbach posting to ANY blog or forum under his own name, where HE has to be responsible for his statements!
So, if you are NOT EA, why not proudly announce WHO you are and WHY YOUR blatant assertions should be taken seriously? I bet that if we could SEE who you were, it would be as funny (or sobering) as when, in "Singing in the Rain," the curtain goes up to reveal that Lina Lamont's voice was really that of Kathy Seldon!
Nothing like an indebted employee's endorsement to convince me to support Bernardo. LOL!
Steve you ran an unsuccessful campaign for legislator. Now you're dishonest. I still have the sign to prove it. What was it called then? Bioenergy something? It still failed. If you think all posts are from EA then so be it. Desperate claims of people hiding behind anonymous make you a total fool. Len Bernardo failed to keep his promise to the taxpayers and no amount of support from his employees constitutes a relevant rebuttal. Further, he may not be a christian zealot but he was all for bilking those who were. Is that any more ethical? No. So pick your poison and mull it over, it's checkmate. Auerbach may be as bad as I think he is, but Bernardo and Quigley are worse. Quigley paid a blogger last year to insult people and run local businesses into the ground. This year at least his paid hacks (Imre and Steve likely) aren't targeting the bread and butter of the local business community.
Bernardo has filled his obligations to the IDA. If you are a regular reader of Hugh Reynolds and had followed "Tourism Book Gate" you would know that Bernardo was put into the program for Tourism, not for job creation.
Two ways to get it
1) create jobs
2) tourism
Bernardo was put in for tourism - NOT job creation
It doesn't take a PhD to figure out how many jobs it takes to operate a roller rink.
All this talk about Bernardo not creating the jobs he said he would is just rhetoric.
3:38 is correct. I was on the Board of the IDA when Bernardo came through. He was required to get a tourism study done.
He applied at the same time that the Bowling Lane in Ellenville did. They wanted to get in under tourism as well. The bowling alley was unable to meet the standard, but Bernardo did.
We do as for job information, but that was not why we approved Bernardo. We were all aware as 3:38 pointed how, how many jobs a roller rink was going to create.
Bernardo was put through because of the tourism potential that his business had.
Well there you go! Since when is a skating rink even close to being a tourist attraction? Are you people nuts? And you wonder why the county struggles for tourism? My recollection from news reporting was that fifty jobs was the goal. Convincing people that a skating rink was a draw to tourists takes quite a conman. That just lowers Bernardo's standing.
Quigley wins, he looks nerdier. I want my Accountant looking very nerdy.
I am still waiting to hear how Quigley has a bad work ethic.
Wow, 3:10, I can find NOTHING on this thread that refers to my running for anything! So how could I be dishonest about it?
(Are you confusing it with an answer on another thread? Well, THAT person who brought it up -- maybe you? -- never specified WHAT office I lost a bid on, so how was I dishonest about THAT? I simply assumed that the LAST office I ran for, which I won twice, but chose NOT to run again for, was the one in question; a previous anonymous whiner -- maybe you? -- claimed I was "kicked off the town board" so THAT was what I was thinking was the charge.)
I guess you couldn't deal with what I DID say, and what I DID refute, so you have to go off on a tangent!
But since YOU bring it up, let me mention that Auerbach ran for legislator in the same district, AS a better-known former mayor, and did WORSE than I did! HE didn't even bother to make a serious effort to campaign, where I personally went to NEARLY EVERY HOUSE in the Town of Wawarsing, and some beyond. (BTW, it's a known fact that Jews rarely did very well in District 1, which still has an unfortunate number of persons who likely keep hooded sheets in their closets.)
As for me, running in a district that hadn't elected a non-republican in about 25 years, I did pretty well for a relative unknown in his first political race, and a GREEN no less, against well-known incumbents. And with my help, which he will freely confirm, helped elect Rich Parete, as the FIRST non-Republican to get elected in the district in a quarter-century, and opened up the district to where, in my next run, where I ALMOST won a seat, helped elect MORE non-Republicans, and helped send troglodyte Ed Jennings to defeat by keeping HIS votes down.
So, success is relative; I noticed that I beat ALL Republican candidates in total votes within Ellenville itself, so I parlayed my second legislature run into a village run a few months later and won handily. So, ultimately, WHAT IS YOUR BLEEPING POINT?
But what does even THAT have to do with anything? I'M not running! Can't you guys focus?
You're still fishing and WRONG. Kryolux was NEVER called anything else. Bio-Energy Systems Inc was totally different; after I co-founded it in 1976 it soon went on to become Besicorp, a multi-million dollar public company, employing over 100 persons in the Ellenville area, and with dozens of distributors and dealers worldwide.
The company STILL exists, but it moved to Kingston, but this was after *I* left the company in 1981 over disagreement with my former partner, Mike Zinn, over HIS unethical practices and self-serving actions. And there are dozens of persons who can confirm HIS personality and nature, too, so please don't claim that it's just "me" being paranoid or "bitter."
But, again, that has nothing to with Kryolux; Besicorp is still making lots of money in Kingston, so IT didn't fail, and there's no Kryolux factory. So you are an ignoramus with no pot left to piss in.
Now, even EA knows more about Bio-Energy and Kryolux than this silly claim states, so THIS anonymous crank is likely not EA; even EA, crafty as he is, wouldn't purposely diminish his own credibility by posting something so blatantly silly just to throw everyone off the scent. No, THESE posts were more likely by someone like BLABER posting anonymously, who probably misinterpreted or confused something EA TOLD HIM when EA told him to ban my posts and treat me like a diseased wombat. THAT makes more sense here! Just guessing, but, hey, when nearly EVERYONE else IS anonymous, it's hard to pin down a target.
Still, YOU, or the other anonymous YOU, haven't addressed my comments, but keep side-stepping with attacks on ME, when *I* am not the issue, or the candidate!
Calling me a "total fool" doesn't make me one! Particularly as YOU ARE an anonymous and erroneous whiner, who IS hiding behind that anonymity to refuse to face the one you are accusing! IF we could SEE you, and your mask were gone, I'm sure we'd all have a good laugh, and a knowing smile that what you say is biased and motivated by YOUR self-interest.
I see you use the word "HACK" to describe me, much as an anonymous clown did earlier; it was "disgruntled mediocre hack" then, I believe. So YOU are probably the same person who said THAT then. I'm guessing Blaber, coached by Auerbach, but as you are ultimately unknown, that's just an educated guess.
Now, to accuse ME of being a PAID hack for Quigley is completely false, and is slander, and if you were KNOWN to me, could subject you to getting slapped with a lawsuit, were I to waste any effort on a pissant like YOU, but it is another reason why anonymity is such a cowardly and despicable way to avoid taking responsibility for such scurrilous lies.
I have not received, nor expect to receive, nor even discussed receiving, a single penny from Quigley or anyone else this election season! I've made no arrangements with any campaign, am in nobody's debt, and haven't endorsed anyone.
YOU are just a slanderer without the balls to identify yourself. Shame on you! I would want you to say this charge TO MY FACE like a man, and face the consequences, but you clearly are NOT mensch enough to do such a thing, or even take responsibility for merely doing it online. Pathetic.
All this because you can't address what I ACTUALLY said! NO wonder you won't stand up and identify yourself, coward!
Can anyone list any policy initiatives to discuss? Does any candidate have a platform or at least an issue?
Concerning the IDA, there you have it Brittany. Being a columnist, I figured you to be a practitioner of due diligence, not an author of fiction. Maybe it's time to stray from the bar-scene.
Steve's heading for the psych ward now. Only a loser would rant on about his silly rivalry with Auerbach! Hey how's that circulation going? Do you sling insults at your readers there too? You're pathetic Krulick and your desperate swinging at shadows makes you the coward here. I'm glad you've admitted that you had a short political run and that you've had plenty of short lived business dealings as well. You know that statue in your little village with the boy and the boot with the hole surely depicts the method you employ. Shooting yourself in the foot. With you on his payroll Quigley needs no enemies.
Well said Steve K!! Who is this coward?
Sorry Brittany, you got it wrong. By the way, when did you join the IDA board?
A roller rink is not like a manufacturing business. If a manufacturing business is really, really successful, they may need an extra 100 or 200 employees.
The number of employees required to operate a roller rink pretty much only goes up by 5 to 10 employees depending on the season. Think about it. How many people does a roller rink need in a Skate Room? How about the snack bar? How many floor guards and security?
Seriously Brittany, the IDA is not that stupid to let someone tell them or set unreasonable goals.
You are just trying to make Bernardo look bad and really the only thing that you are doing is showing your youth and inexperience.
How many businesses have you owned?
Oh... none? That's what I thought.
By the way your newspaper column sucks.
"Who, who" said the lonely owl.
Brittany.... what's your deal... in the morning you say
Bernardo took from the taxpayers and is smirking all the way to the bank.
In the evening you say... (obviously being sarcastic)
I'm glad you brought up the tourism issue, though. It's been increasingly difficult to even drive down 209 due to the throngs of people converging on Skate Time.
So which is it? Skate Time is busy or not?
Have you ever been there?
They do get a lot of tourists in the summer from the camps that are all over in southern Ulster.
if you know so much about the IDA Brittany and you had a problem with Bernardo's project, maybe you should have spoke up when they had the public hearing FOUR YEARS ago
Skatetime is always looking empty. Do their customers skate to get there? I think it's a front for money laundering. How many other businesses give full health benefits?
Again, when you can't address issues, sling vile names! Practice psychiatry online without a license! Try to discredit the messenger! (A long-time Auerbach tactic, but applied by most losers who can't face an honest debate.)
As Gandhi said, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
But, again, the issue ISN'T ME, so why this side-stepping distraction from anonymous YOU?
There is no "rivalry" between me and Auerbach. Actually, I try to think as little about him as possible, and have as little to do with him as possible (I love when I take trips out of the area, so I can experience a world where Auerbach has never been heard of!). I'm just trying to let those in the county who are unfamiliar with the guy, except for HIS own pompous self-promotion and that of suck-ups like Blaber, find out what most persons in the know down here have realized for years.
We're STILL waiting for Auerbach or his few ardent supporters (and not those forced to smile and say nice things as part of supporting the whole party ticket) to present SOME actual relevant examples of his "successes" in the public or private sector, how his limited training and experience qualify him to oversee and audit a $300 million budget and hundreds of employees, or how the questions of his own ethical standards can be ignored as someone seeking to be the ethical watchdog of the county.
FOCUS! Auerbach is the person in question! Not ME!
And you're STILL an anonymous coward who has given US no reason to take anything YOU say seriously.
I have NO responsibility for the Ellenville Journal and its decisions or policies. I just write a column every other week (go to http://journal.kryolux.us for the whole of them so far, where you can draw your own conclusions, or see several at my new blog, http://2020ulster.blogspot.com), and contribute to the online forum, all at no charge. I actually disagree with many of their decisions and policies, and say so publicly all the time.
Their circulation is actually less than the Ellenville News was, which *I* published back in the 80s for a bit. It's only a fraction of the circulation of Wawarsing.Net, which I edited for the Ellenville-Wawarsing Chamber of Commerce for several years, to great public approval. But then, none of THAT is what's relevant here, is it, Sparky?
Why would I sling insults at my dear readers? Go to the columns and see for yourself. Here, I only call a spade a spade, and anonymous cowards ARE anonymous cowards.
Callling ME pathetic, absent any logic or examples or exposition, doesn't make it so. Calling ME desperate (hey, I have nothing to lose, so I am hardly "desperate"!) doesn't make it so.
I HAVE to swing at SHADOWS because THAT is all you cowards come forward AS! Talk about chutzpah! (The prime example being someone who kills both his parents and pleads for the court's mercy on grounds he's an orphan!) How many times have I seen Auerbach project the very sins he's committed on those who have called him on it?!!!
*I* am the one with MY name and integrity on the line, not nameless ciphers like YOU. HOW does this make ME a coward? HOW does it make YOU NOT ONE? Come forward and IDENTIFY yourself, and then we'll see who has the guts to face the public!
What is YOUR obsessive interest in ME anyway? Why is it SO important to attack ME and pick on every irrelevant strawman you can dig up? Did I forget to tip you? Did I question one of your ideas in public? Did I cut you off at a street intersection? This unhealthy fetish needs to be dealt with, lest it ruin your already pathetic life!
You clearly have no understanding about the Boy with the Boot statue's history and what it means. You clearly have no idea the extent of my business dealings. You obviously have no way of knowing whether I have FUTURE plans for public office (beyond the PUBLIC SERVICE I continue to be engaged in, including serving on a committee appointed by the Village Board to look into possible dissolution or restructuring); my current PERSONAL DECISION to VOLUNTARILY step down FOR NOW after two terms (hey, like Washington!) should be EMULATED and applauded, don't ya think?
You have already been called out for making up lies about me being on Quigley's payroll. Why don't you provide some PROOF for your outrageous and desperate claim? *I* can't prove a negative, other than to swear it isn't true, but the burden is on YOU, and, had you not been an anonymous coward, I could have hauled you into court to MAKE YOU prove your claims or suffer the penalty for lying.
You're scum, plain and simple. Just the kind of person that Elliott would have supporting him this way, if not EA himself, who is more than capable of this kind of behavior, AS I HAVE SEEN IT myself, and so have many others!
I'd ignore YOU and not respond IF I could only be sure YOU were ONE crank and not several, but absent a unique identity, that's not possible. But that's the method cowardly bullies and bitter jealous ethical midgets (no disrespect to short persons) employ.
8:36.. what are you a moron. It's mostly KIDS that skate there... They don't DRIVE yet. and yes, a lot of them use their skateboards and bicycles to get there. Some take UCAT and a lot of them get dropped off.
To 10:33 AM
The current New York State comptroller is a former NYS Assembly member and was named to the position as the result of a "POLITICAL DEAL". He was not on the list of qualified people put forth by the search committee.
5:18 at your service: not only the ONLY pure i ndependent candidate for UlsterUSA County Executive, but THE ONLY candidate with a 19-specific, metrics-up front point platform. For example, I PROMISE to cut county property taxes ten percent. I'll VETO any/all new/increased taxes. I'll CUT the county budget 10 percent by scientifically-boosting worker productivity, of which I'm an EXPERT. I have testimonial letters up the kazoo from NYC-based CEOs, powner-managers, managing partners of professional firms.
Mr. K: glad you like my "definition" of chutzpah. You might like same for "maven": a SELF-PROCLAIMED expert like some of the spout-offs in this column.
Allan Wikman
845 + 802-0403
www.campaignwindow.com/allanwikman/
I think Krumlick needs to go on the Yankee Jim watchlist. The frothing is getting thick. His obsession with his imaginary adversary is a serious warning sign.
That caricature of Bernardo looks way too slim! Is that his wife?
9:55-Thank you for establishing that their clientele are not tourists. The initiative of the county to help this business was clearly not tourism. The story told by the Bernardo's was that Mrs. Bernardo dreamed of having a skating rink and this was a midlife crisis realized. Are the taxpayers supposed to fulfill wishes of aging boomers?
9:55-Aptly implies that it would take a moron to think that tourism was the reason the IDA approved Skatetime. Is the IDA staffed with morons? Maybe. Or maybe someone was disingenuous in their representation of this proposed business. Either way, it looks bad.
Now that you've sworn Krumdick, that you're not on Quigley's payroll, I'm assured of that fact that your personal vendetta against Auerbach is truly driven by your petty rivalry. Your slimy character and weak justification are noted. I wouldn't worry about your reputation, it's pretty much gone. You could sue this blog if you were so desperate for attention, but no judge would take your claims seriously and you'd probably face recrimination for it. No reasonable person would question someone's assumption, absent your denial, that you were working for Auerbach's opponent. Since you are a pollster, perhaps you should poll the locals to see just how many see your writing as the "most talked about" aspect of the paper.
Skatetime 209 is a "state of the art" Skate Park & Roller Rink. It is a toursim related recreational facility. Many groups visiting Hudson Valley Resort, Nevele, Honors Haven, Pinegrove, and Rondout Resort include visits to Skatetime 209.
Bernardo, like many of our new neighbors, moved from NYC after 9/11 and made UC his home. However, he & his wife went a step further by investing in a business as well as a home. I just wish all our new neighbors were like the Bernardos, Ulster County would be flourishing. They are good neighbors.
Steve shorten the speech no one is listening
10:29, you are correct, but you also forgot all the campgrounds that go there. Right next door to Skate Time is the Rondout Valley Resort Campground. Jellystone on 52 sends a ton of people there, as does the Ukrainian camp.
The International Riding Academy in Ellenville send their girls there once a week, all summer long.
The Jewish Camps from Sullivan and Ulster Counties PACK that place all summer long by the busloads, 300 and 400 at a time. That is money from the city and other counties that flow right here into Ulster County. If that's not tourism dollars, then what is?
Someone else posted this elsewhere. I felt it definitely needed to be moved to the top
Anonymous said...
The problem Len has is that hge is an independent getting bashed fromm the Democratic and Republican Oligarchs. There is no difference between the two respective Boss Hoggs, Spada & Kirschner, just like Auerbach and Hein are noting more than political oppotunists 1st Hein is a repub. then a dem. Next nobody can support Bernardo without getting the blessing of either Spada or Kirschner, lest they fear losing their State, Local or County jobs. As for the parties Catalano in inept and should resigne, its exactly as Spada wants it and the Dems are in a constant state of infighting which has left them as the party with the larget amount of registered voters but the smallest list of accomplishments, except to call for the impeachment of Bush.
Too bad, for this County to move ahead we need to sweep out 4 decades of good old boy politics.
September 7, 2008 9:56 AM
10:44,
My posts are just as long as they need to be to present my case. I feel like Mozart, when asked by Joseph II to remove the "too many notes." Just WHICH words would you have me cut?
AS for "no one" listening... how would YOU know? Such absolutism only reduces YOUR credibility, as YOU can't speak for EVERYONE. Indeed, I'm rather sure that those who rail against me most are reading EVERY word, looking for some scrap of trivia to use to attack me with!
-----
Wikman,
That definition of chutzpah is NOT yours so I did not get it from YOU! It goes back at least a century, and was widely made known by "The Joys of Yiddish."
And, if you want to be taken seriously as a candidate for County Exec, you may want to get some more control over your SPELLING and GRAMMAR.
-----
Ah, what can I say to the gentle soul who has now resorted to calling me "Krumdick"? By my mother's rules, and those of most newsgroups, such petty name-calling is an admission he has lost the argument and has nothing else left to fight with.
There IS NO "personal vendetta" and no "petty rivalry" vis-a-vis Auerbach, as I've already explained! I'm not running for anything, and there's nothing Auerbach has that I want or envy. This is simply my concern about an issue that can affect the whole county, and my attempts to get people to THINK and realize there's more beyond the self-promotion and spin that Auerbach and his few supporters hope to bamboozle the ill-informed with.
It's no more personal than when I warn the community about the negative consequences of Wal-Mart or a a casino coming to town.
Oh, and just calling YOUR OPINION "fact" doesn't make it so, particularly as I've already pointed out the error or disingenuousness of most of the "facts" YOU (or some other anonymous YOU who might as well be YOU!) have already posted in a vain attempt to smear me.
Now, as part of the entertainment value I hope to provide for others, and for my own amusement (as Auda abu Tayi, the Tony Quinn character in "Lawrence of Arabia" said, "I do so because it is my pleasure."), I will play out the reel a bit to let our bilious friend think he has caught ME, before pulling him back in to sink the hook in even deeper.
Just "noting" that my "justification" is "weak" and that my "character" is "slimy" doesn't make any of that true either. Simply more of YOUR blatant assertions absent substantiation.
Just whistling in the dark about my reputation being gone doesn't make it gone! YOU are hardly in a position to know that, nor to frame it as such, as much as you'd like to.
I never said I'd sue this blog or had any intent to! Clearly your reading skills are weak. I said that HAD YOU BEEN IDENTIFIABLE, I'd have been ABLE to sue YOU for slander, but, as you are anonymous, that was simply not possible. It's that simple, and YOU missed it.
Not everyone is motivated by money or "vendettas" or the mean-spiritedness YOU seem to display here. But when a pickpocket sees a holy man, all he sees are the pockets; it seems YOUR vision is no higher than the petty thoughts YOU seem to harbor and dwell in. Sad.
Kooluck sees himself as Mozart. No he's not a self-absorbed lunatic. I'm sure he's a legend in his own mind. He somehow thinks he can render the opinions of others to be not true by declaration. Wow, what a fruitcake. This nut almost got into the county legislature. He yelled twenty times in his first post on this thread alone. I'm sure he would have brought some real drama into county politics.
Everyone is identifiable Koonchuck.
Isn't Krulick the guy that walks around Ellenville with the toy car?
I just went to Walmart today to further their conspiracy to destroy Krooklik.
When I look at a holy man all I see is a pickpocket.
What does Brittany do for a living? Probably works as an organizer or something for some non profit.
Come on Brittany, invest some of your own money in job creation. How many people have you hired with your own money and ideas.
All talk, no action. Next thing you know you'll be buying nearly foreclosed housing and taking section 8 vouchers from the County - oh, never mind, we already have public minded people who do that.
It seems our anonymous gnat friend (gee, since HE won't identify himself, why not GIVE him a name? Chuckles is as good as any other, eh?) can't keep from obsessively picking the scab on his bile duct and letting his spleen vent against me!
Doesn't he realize that if HE stopped posting his silly blather, *I* wouldn't be responding to it? See, I go by the "Carville War Room" rule; though I have little use for Carville or the Clintons, I believe they were spot on when they said, when you're attacked, particularly with malicious and erroneous claims, you must respond within 24 hours... firmly, effectively, and overwhelmingly, or else you will seem weak, and some may believe the claims. John Kerry, for one, found out what ignoring that rule meant!
So, since I try to post as an educational tool, let's look at the poor soul's recent post as an object lesson in how NOT to post, if one wants to be effective and be taken seriously:
1) "Nobody home."
It now should go without saying that anonymous posting is not high on the ladder of effectiveness, since if a person isn't courageous enough to stand behind what he says, why should anyone take it or him seriously? It has all the power of a form letter, compared to a personal phone call or meeting.
2) "Online mind-reading"
It's amazing how many posters presume to know what others are actually THINKING! How do they do that? A crystal ball? Psychic powers? Omniscient divinity?
Well, Chuckles, I doubt "Kooluck" (whoever the hell he is; did you really expect that was ever going to be funny or effective?) thinks HE is Mozart; I know *I* sure don't!
(Amazing how supposed adults either CAN'T read, or else choose to play stooooopid. This may also be a badly-played strawman.)
No, Chuckles, *I* don't think I'm Mozart. I merely employed a moderately-familiar cultural reference, the movie "Amodeus," to post an ANALOGY, suggesting how criticism of the length of my posts was LIKE the similar criticism of the length of Mozart's opera by the Emperor (See, I don't believe YOU are Emperor Joseph II, either, as the "logic" of your claim would imply!). IT was to get a little smile, and show just how philistine such charges COULD be.
3) "Time to up the meds"
Questioning the poster's mental state is sooooo old and lame online. But it's sooooo much easier than DEALING WITH the issues at hand, or the LOGICAL arguments, or the FACTS that are relevant. Call someone crazy and, hey presto, you don't have to take their WORDS seriously!
Alas, it doesn't REFUTE them. (This is often the last-ditch ploy of the hopelessly defeated.)
4) "Ironic projection"
Amazing how often critics are guilty of what they project on others: "He somehow thinks he can render the opinions of others to be not true by declaration."
Well, besides MORE online mind reading (Chuckles has NO WAY of knowing WHAT *I* think!), this is a precise description of what HE has been routinely doing! He makes blatant assertions of opinion but he CALLS them "facts," so we are supposed to let them trump the evidence of our own eyes!
I don't DENY that the opinions of others ARE their opinions, and they are more than welcome to them, and to express them... I just question whether simply calling them FACTS makes them so, or simply blatantly asserting them makes them true!
Opine all you want; believe them to be true all you want. But when you expect OTHERS to accept them as being more than personal opinion, you either have to SUPPORT them with FACTS, LOGIC, authoritative substantiation, or, at the least, one's OWN credibility as a witness of integrity and veracity. See, *I* stand BEHIND my statements, whereas anonymous cowards hit and run.
5) "Blatant assertions & Strawmen & Ad hominems, oh my!"
"Wow, what a fruitcake. This nut..."
Well, first we further have the mere blatant assertion of mental deficiency, as before, based, illogically, on the previous strawman that claims to KNOW what *I* think! Since the premise is invalid, so is the conclusion. QED.
And, as this personal attack has NOTHING to do with refuting the arguments by logic or evidence, it is merely the typical ad hominem attack against the character of the PERSON rather than the actual words OF the person. It refutes nothing and scores no debate points.
6) "Exaggeration and Mischaracterization"
"He yelled twenty times in his first post on this thread alone."
Uh, no. First, I can only assume by "yelling" Chuckles means ANY use of UPPER CASE letters. Does he not understand the conventional online term "yelling" (actually, the term is "shouting") does NOT refer to the isolated use of capitalization for a word here or there (which is only the minor inflection emphasis that would be obvious if I were talking to you over the phone; most newsgroups and forums don't allow for easy italic or boldface as here, so the only way to provide idiomatic inflection on certain words is to upper case them, and that is what I'm used to) but only to the use of upper case in full sentences, paragraphs, or whole posts. Besides making it harder to read, THAT is what is meant by "yelling" (shouting)!
So, as I said, I have not been "yelling" at all. The closest thing to "yelling" here is Chuckles's shrill and obsessive personal attacks.
7) "Side-stepping"
As the old lawyer rule goes, "If you can't argue the facts, argue the law. If you can't argue the law, bang the table." When unable to deal with the issues at hand, or the questions asked, or the challenges raised, do as Chuckles does... AVOID THEM ALL and go off on irrelevant tangents. Attack the messenger, nitpick trivia, make outrageous claims, throw smoke grenades... ANYTHING but sticking to the original matter!
Notice how in EACH post Chuckles avoids MY ACTUAL words, or MY points, as if I never brought them up, but tries to move the goal posts or the whole field BACK to his territory, which is just ATTACK KRULICK, and do nothing else.
By obsessively making ME the issue, he hopes to avoid the attention being back on AUERBACH where it belongs! (EA has mastered this technique, so Chuckles has learned well from the master!)
-----
4:34,
So, please help in identifying Chuckles for us, won't you?!!
If YOU be he, that would be a snap! Just tell us WHO YOU ARE. Otherwise, pray tell us, how do we do that easily? Look up the poster's IP address on the server? Wouldn't we have to subpoena blogger.com for that?
Your comment is like Steve Wright's: "Every place is within 'walking distance'... if you have the time." Sure, everyone COULD be identified, with the time, money, and a bunch of guys with guns to enforce it. But I was referring to the REAL world, where Chuckles is NOT identifiable to us in any easy and practical way.
-----
No, 5:33, Krulick is NOT the guy walking around Ellenville with a toy truck. That would be WAYNE, and he has some real physical and developmental problems, and thanks for your lack of sensitivity and compassion for a person less fortunate than most. You're a real mensch and humanitarian, you are! For that alone I would invite you to take a perambulation to the nether regions and go osculate a G. gallus domesticus ovum.
Sheesh!
Once again Kumchuk shows that his opinions aren't worth squat.
My Goodness! The nastiness here has reached a new level. Of course, that always happens when people lack the ability to make logical, rational arguments in support of their position or candidate. Many of these remarks seem to closely resemble temper tantrums being thrown by toddlers.
I may disagree with Mr. Krulick and Ms. Turner on many issues, but I have a great deal of respect for both of them for using their real names and for refusing to descend into the muck and filth into which this debate has degenerated.
OK, let's address a few issues with regard to Skate Time 209.
It has been established conclusively on this thread that Skate Time 209 applied for - and was granted - an IDA grant based on its tourism potential. While claims are being made as to what was promised by the proprietors pertaining to new employment, the fact is, the grant was NOT for job creation, it was for tourism. Information in employment may have been interesting to the IDA Board, but it was not relevant to the grant process.
My family has been involved in the hospitality and tourism industry in this area for over three decades. One thing I can tell you for certain is that nobody comes to Ulster County just to visit a single attraction. Every visitor is looking for a package of various establishments to entertain their families.
Let's face it. We do not have a single, killer tourism destination in our County (such as Walt Disney World, for instance). People who come to - for instance - a dude ranch want to ride their horses and swim in the pool but also want to take a hike in the mountains, pick berries at a local farm, visit a museum, look at art galleries in Woodstock or New Paltz and - yes - take their kids skating.
When making a decision about where they wish to go, families look at everything the area has to offer. The more we can give them as a County, the more likely they will choose one of our resorts over someplace in, say, the Poconos.
In short, no tourism destination in Ulster County stands alone. Our tourism industry operates on the principle of synergy, of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.
In fact, on any given night during the summer, you can see the parking lot of Skate Time jammed with busses from many different resorts. Obviously, they are happy to have a safe, clean, fun establishment to which they can take their guests' kids. Just as obviously, Skate Time 209 is making such resorts more attractive to potential guests, bringing more people to the area, helping stimulate our economy.
Now, as to the job aspect. Not only was it made clear to the IDA that there are only a certain number of jobs which would be created by Skate Time 209 (which is really not even relevant with a tourism grant), but there is an additional commercial space in the building which - until very recently - had been rented out and was creating jobs for quite a while. It is my understanding that a NEW business will soon be making its home there, again creating jobs.
Moreover, by contributing to growth within the tourism industry, Skate Time 209 is helping job creation throughout the County. Even a single additional job in each of a couple of dozen businesses due to the existence of Skate Time adds up. In many businesses, the job stimulation effect of a successful establishment such as Skate Time 209 goes beyond the addition of just one job.
The most important point, however, is that the proprietors of Skate Time 209 TRIED and succeeded in creating employment on some level. How many jobs were created by the people on this forum who have criticized the Bernardos? For that matter, how many jobs has Len Bernardo's opponent for the position of County Executive created? Let's be honest, any County jobs which were recently created (I don't know of any at all, but let's give County Government the benefit of the doubt) were put in place by the Legislature, not the Administrator's Office.
So, all this criticism of Len Bernardo is that he has created jobs, just not enough of them. At the same time, the people criticizing Mr. Bernardo are supporting a man who has done nothing on the same front.
Hmmmmm. Doesn't seem very consistent to me.
Whether you are talking about experience, talent, knowledge or - yes - job creation, Len Bernardo's record far outpaces that of his opponent.
All the smoke and mirrors in the world cannot conceal that one, simple fact.
A thoughtful and genuine analysis of the Skate Time IDA deal is available for any and all who are interested. You can FOIL for the original application which does include the estimate of new job creation. In addition, you can then FOIL for the annual report where the actual jobs created are disclosed. A project is in fact approved based upon assertions made in the application - in this case job creation and a "destination tourism component."
This project is retail and ineligible for IDA support. It was approved on a destination tourism exception. There is a very long consultant's report included in the file. Tourism defined by the proposal is very specifically defined as guests from outside the Hudson Valley region. The Ellenville bowling ally was not receiving a significant percentage of guests from outside our region as Skate Time claimed.
Get the facts on file and decide for yourself if this project truly represents a healthy approach to economic development assistance.
Thank you Jen for setting the record straight. There has been much denial here that job creation had something to do with this. I would hope that the IDA would enact prohibitions to stem this type of abuse by politically motivated prospective recipients. This business was used as a platform for politcal purposes. It was an abuse of the taxpayer's money to do so. This discussion would never have materialized if the business owners had not sought to divide the community they serve. It's truly a shame that programs meant to benefit the county's residents are turned into a tool for the political gain of a few unethical citizens.
Mr. Krulik, you have displayed a very disturbing obsession with medication. If you are being denied coverage for your medication, I suggest you contact the Healthcare Bureau of the Attorney General's Office in Albany. They can be very helpful in resolving these matters.
The only thing that is being used for political purposes is the IDA against the Bernardos.
The Bernardos were never politically active in this area until last year.
They started that project in 2004, and not that IDA is being used against them.
That is just wrong.
It is a fine establishement.
When you seek and receive public assistance for a business, you should be above partisan politics. It's simply not ethical to use your gain to achieve political power at the expense of the taxpayer.
Once again, Chuckles, or an anonymous clone clown that might as well be him or Auerbach, has proven my point about "ironic projection" and hypocrisy:
By posting this:
"Once again Kumchuk shows that his opinions aren't worth squat."
Chuckles has directly hoist himself on his own petard, as he has previously said OF ME:
"He somehow thinks he can render the opinions of others to be not true by declaration."
Your honor, I rest my case!
Notice that Chuckles AVOIDED, as usual, all the rest of my skewering of his pathetic shortcomings in posting methodology, but feels he can simply DISMISS all that with a mere blatant assertion handwave! Never mind pointing out WHY his mere opinion is valid, or WHY my opinions or LOGICAL refutations are invalid. WE are all just supposed to AGREE with his unsubstantiated opinion because he merely says so!
No debate points there, Chuckles!
And isn't it telling that Chuckles can't bring himself to mention MY name! He has to use silly and/or demeaning variations, that don't even come close (can anyone explain why someone might think this is funny or effective? Is it simply to treat me derisively and snarkily?), but even when spelling my name, can't bring himself to spelling it right (e.g. "Krulik" instead of Krulick) even when it's right there for him copy!
Perhaps this is the online equivalent of being unable to look someone straight in the eye, eh? After all, *I* HAVE an identity here, and stand behind it; Chuckles has been branded an anonymous coward and REMAINS one, so is perhaps experiencing identity problems and is perhaps unconsciously revealing his sense of inferiority. But then, unlike Chuckles, *I* don't pretend to have a license in online psychoanalysis and online mind-reading, so that's only a guess.
Further on, Chuckles does some more side-stepping, bringing up the old "meds" distraction, just as I noted. No, Chuckles, I have no obsession with "meds." I merely used, a couple of times, the classic line seen on nearly every newsgroup that comes up when someone, like you, has no other argument, so goes after the supposed mental problems of the opponent, and that classic line ("Time to up your meds") suggests that the opponent needs to increase (or sometimes decrease) the "meds" he MUST be on, seeing as how that suggests all that he's been posting is the result of an improper dosage, and NOT to be taken seriously as an actual ARGUMENT that needs REFUTING through logical means.
Of course, it's not a proper response, and just a diversion, and that, again, is All Chuckles has been able to muster.
Finally, WHERE IS AUERBACH in all this? If *I* were a candidate, and someone were posting nasty and outrageous personal attacks against someone, as Chuckles is doing, simply because someone like ME is challenging that candidacy, *I* would have gone online and asked the nasty anonymous poster to cease, as it is NOT doing his campaign any good, and only brings into question whether such anonymous postings ARE coming from the candidate himself, or in misguided support of him, yet is only hurting the candidate and campaign by association.
A mensch would come online and reject and censure (that's CENSURE, not CENSOR!) such postings, and distance himself from them; Auerbach has been MIA in all this, which makes one wonder. I'm reasonably certain Auerbach reads these blogs, or at least knows about them; remaining "above the fray" ceases to be an option when this level of slime is being perpetrated, ostensibly on his behalf.
(I know, I know... Chuckles SAYS he's not supporting Auerbach, but why should we believe a word he says? The fact is, *I* have publicly come forward to challenge EA's run, and Chuckles has made it his obsession to attack ME, and there seems no other reason to attack ME EXCEPT for challenging EA, at least no other rationale Chuckles has expressed that makes any sense.)
I again urge the blogmaster to seriously consider simply not posting these personal attacks on me that have no purpose in furthering the goals of this blog.
6:23 Hugh Reynolds has made a career out of writing fiction.
Krylok you're a clown. Give it up. By your mama's rules you conceded in your very first post. You're simply fighting a losing battle to salvage some respect. If anyone gave your rants creedence before, they sure don't now. Why don't you use you skills as a pollster to find out? Comrade Imre gave you his vote. I vote no.
Sigh. Even more blatant assertions from Chuckles, the anonymous coward clown clone.
Where's the PROOF for your claims, Chuckles? Where's the refutation of MY actual words, which you never seem able to deal with, particularly as I've repeatedly deflated your every fallacious tactic? For, though I can't unmask your identity, I've EXPOSED your every rhetorical gambit -- the blatant assertions, the strawmen, the ad hominems, the outright lies and errors, the side-stepping, the mischaracterizations.
Just WHERE in my "first post" (don't leave out the context in which IT was written, now!) did I concede or violate anything? You can't just blatantly assert it and call that PROOF; why not POINT IT OUT and then PROVE that the evidence you show supports your claim?
Bet you don't do it, as you haven't done it the LAST many times I've challenged you to!
And yet you still claim to speak for everyone else! What chutzpah!
Keep whistling in the dark past the graveyard to salvage any shred of credibility YOU may think you once had; only a legend in his own mind would keep believing that any intelligent person reading this blog hasn't written him off already as a buzzing gnat of no value to this discussion, and keep up this treadmill of empty name-calling and bile.
I have already explained why *I* have posted here, but YOU haven't explained, with anything that makes sense, why YOU, if you are NOT EA, and not supporting EA, have maintained such passionate and obsessive efforts to do NOTHING ELSE but attack me with, it would seem, no other purpose than to discredit me and my comments, not through logic or relevant response, but simply through attempted character assassination.
Now, why would any sane and disinterested person get so worked up over ME that he would go to this level of biliousness? WHAT is your reason, and why do you seem to be so ANGRY and frothing over me?
----
I have to ask the blogmaster why he still lets these 100% personal attacks continue against someone who is NOT in public office, is NOT running for office, and has no recourse to deal with this attacker face to face -- or even be able to know who the accuser is -- other than by having to constantly waste time countering lies and errors to defend my good name.
Yes, I'm perfectly capable of keeping this up for as long as the anonymous crank spews his slime, and each post only allows me to confirm how low this anonymous coward is willing to sink, but wouldn't you be doing us all a favor by turning off his ad hominem spigot and letting this thread go back to its original purpose?
It has to be Elliott Auerbach. There is no one out there more vindictive than him.
There could be no one else so bored and interested in you Steve.
Where the is smoke there is fire.
You criticize Elliott and Elliott doesn't like it. He thinks he is a big shot in Ellenville.
You are driving him nuts.
Give it up Elliott. Quigley is far more qualified.
The strongest argument that it's NOT Elliott in EVERY instance is the posting time of two of the posts this afternoon between 5 and 6 o'clock. At that time, he was on a neighborhood walk on my street, with the mayor and other village officials, and I was there with them.
Unless he was calling these in by cellphone, it seems unlikely he was responsible for them. Elliott may be capable of many things, but physical bi-location isn't one of them!
Now, there may be MORE THAN ONE anonymous person involved in this, like an unorganized tag team, but EA may have exhausted his wad here soon after the "Lou S." flap and a few anonymous posts in that series.
Besides, as I've noted, some of the erroneous comments made about my past would not have likely come from EA, even if he were trying to cover his tracks, as they only reduced the poster's credibility to be proven wrong and proven lying over and over.
Though Auerbach has the most REASON to do this, it's not in his interest to tie up so much of his time this way. It's possible a small few of all the posts attacking me were by him (the times allow for it), but not all of them could have been.
It's like crop circles; sure, SOME of them were by those two guys in Britain who admitted to faking some of them, but THEY couldn't have physically done ALL of them.
Likewise, EA couldn't be responsible for ALL of the posts, and may even be guilty of NONE of them. Such is the problem with total anonymity.
I'm sorry EA hasn't come online AS HIMSELF even once to clarify this, or to denounce any personal attacks not related to the candidates or the issues.
The question thus remains: what kind of person who ISN'T EA would be so bilious and so obsessed about ME that he will go on and on with name-calling, lies, errors, blatant assertions and just a near-endless stream of vitriol with no purpose in sight other than to TRY to make me look bad? Does that seem like the actions of a sane and dispassionate person?
Hey, I can keep this up forever, and HAVE TO when MY NAME is having mud thrown at it, but what makes an anonymous cipher persist? Must be one hell of a bug up his ass to motivate one so!
Anyone here have any clues as to whom it may be? Other than EA, that is? Some have suggested Blaber, but it seems like someone who has spewed this against me at the Ellenville Journal forum, which I believe was before Blaber likely knew who I was.
Well, the person clearly has all the traits of a schoolyard bully, except willingness to confront his target mano-a-mano. Such bullies only take on those they know they can beat up; if the target is too strong, they hide behind walls or hooded sheets, or make anonymous calls in the dark of night, or, as here, lob their verbal grenades under cover of mystery.
I'm just the mirror. You don't like your reflection. Your incessant spewing of vitriol is the only offense here. If someone was as nasty as you, vomiting hate upon Quigley, I'd still be here to reflect it back on them. You're just stupid enough to do it at the expense of your honor. What honor?
Coming soon to blog near you! The the exciting downward spiral of a local loudmouth loon! It's the Krulock Show, featuring the rants and raves of a man whose honor, integrity, and credibility are worthless to him and are being diminished by the day by the loss of control over his own ego!
Hmmm, I sent this in last night, but I don't see it, so I'm resending it:
The strongest argument that it's NOT Elliott in EVERY instance is the posting time of two of the posts this afternoon between 5 and 6 o'clock. At that time, he was on a neighborhood walk on my street, with the mayor and other village officials, and I was there with them.
Unless he was calling these in by cellphone, it seems unlikely he was responsible for them. Elliott may be capable of many things, but physical bi-location isn't one of them!
Now, there may be MORE THAN ONE anonymous person involved in this, like an unorganized tag team, but EA may have exhausted his wad here soon after the "Lou S." flap and a few anonymous posts in that series.
Besides, as I've noted, some of the erroneous comments made about my past would not have likely come from EA, even if he were trying to cover his tracks, as they only reduced the poster's credibility to be proven wrong and proven lying over and over.
Though Auerbach has the most REASON to do this, it's not in his interest to tie up so much of his time this way. It's possible a small few of all the posts attacking me were by him (the times allow for it), but not all of them could have been.
It's like crop circles; sure, SOME of them were by those two guys in Britain who admitted to faking some of them, but THEY couldn't have physically done ALL of them.
Likewise, EA couldn't be responsible for ALL of the posts, and may even be guilty of NONE of them. Such is the problem with total anonymity.
I'm sorry EA hasn't come online AS HIMSELF even once to clarify this, or to denounce any personal attacks not related to the candidates or the issues.
The question thus remains: what kind of person who ISN'T EA would be so bilious and so obsessed about ME that he will go on and on with name-calling, lies, errors, blatant assertions and just a near-endless stream of vitriol with no purpose in sight other than to TRY to make me look bad? Does that seem like the actions of a sane and dispassionate person?
Hey, I can keep this up forever, and HAVE TO when MY NAME is having mud thrown at it, but what makes an anonymous cipher persist? Must be one hell of a bug up his ass to motivate one so!
Anyone here have any clues as to whom it may be? Other than EA, that is? Some have suggested Blaber, but it seems like someone who has spewed this against me at the Ellenville Journal forum, which I believe was before Blaber likely knew who I was.
Well, the person clearly has all the traits of a schoolyard bully, except willingness to confront his target mano-a-mano. Such bullies only take on those they know they can beat up; if the target is too strong, they hide behind walls or hooded sheets, or make anonymous calls in the dark of night, or, as here, lob their verbal grenades under cover of mystery.
Well, it seems that by my having exposed every gambit that Chuckles has employed to avoid dealing with MY actual comments themselves in merely trying to discredit me, he has devolved to nothing more than a flaccid, sputtering sack of bile. That's all that's left and it seems to have become a mere Mad-libs exercise for him:
"(_______ silly variation of Krulick's name) is just a (___________ generic slur). His (___________ exaggerated actions not supported by evidence) prove that he is (__________ attack on Krulick's mental stability). He no longer has any (__________ some positive attribute) and nobody (____________ blatant assertion that claims to speak for everyone) anymore. And yet (__________ blatant assertion of a whistling-in-the-dark-past-the-graveyard hope that by merely wishing something silly were true, it is made true)."
AS this is all he seems to have done in the last few posts, having exhausted all the lies and erroneous nonsense about my life and history that I've disproved, I will likely choose to ignore such posts in the future, as I feel that responding will probably not be needed, as I believe he has exhausted any credibility he might have had in the beginning, before his lies and errors were demonstrated, and so they, and he, can be safely ignored, as impotent and DOA.
Hence, unless he begins specific attacks again, with specific lies or errors about me, I will likely let him sputter on like this, until he collapses in a spent heap of bile and vomit, and rots in the gutter he belongs in.
Ta ta.
Steve you're not "disproving" anything, rather, you're proving my points with every desperate rant. You're still a local loudmouth who garners no respect. People are only nice to your face.
Not that Steve Krulick needs defending, but doesn't it seem a bit odd (I'm trying to avoid the word "hypocritical" for fear of being told that I am "ranting") that Mr. Krulick is being attacked for responding to his attackers?
Mr. Krulick's remarks are far less negative and anger-filled than those which are being lobbed against him. Again, I am quite certain that he and I would agree on very little, but his arguments for his positions - some of with which I agree, some I do not - are logical and well-thought out.
A logical, rational person who disagrees with Mr. Krulick should be able to refute his statements, as a good debater can effectively argue both sides of any issue. Debating well does not mean that you are right but angry vitriol is a sure sign that the one speaking (or, in this case, writing) hasn't the slightest understanding of the topic at hand.
The fact that Mr. Krulick has been as restrained as he has after the vile comments being spewed at him is, I must say, a sign that he recognizes the utter lack of intelligence of his attackers and, as a gentleman, refuses to stoop to their septic levels.
Imre- Krulick is the attacker here and whilst I may find your claim that the use of the fillibuster is undemocratic only when used by Democrats to be hypocritical, I've never found your comments to be rants. Mr. Krulick reacted to a post's opinion regarding the Republican candidates by insulting all posters that avail themselves of the anonymous feature and making outrageous assertions about their political affiliations. He deserves the descriptions he's received as he has in Ellenville for many years. His anger and frustration are evidence of this. Hardly vile are these observations. They are simply a product of his crude manner. By his own statements, his mother would not approve of him. No matter how long or how hard he protests, he cannot control the perceptions he has create for himself among the public. You need to learn as well that attacking someone's opinion only serves to strengthen that opinion and spread it further. Especially when the opinion comes from an anonymous source. Steve is exceptionally talented at insulting those who agree with his issues the most.
Nope.
Steve Walmart called and they want their check back. Your task of creating phony opposition failed.
"Gasp."
Flop. Flop. Fl...
7:01 -
While I have targeted the Democrats for their use of the filibuster, I never claimed that when the Republicans use it, it is ethically acceptable.
In fact, I believe it to be wrong no matter who uses it. The essence of Democracy is voting and any procedural measure which prevents votes from coming to the floor is - in my opinion - wrong.
As to the rest of your comment, I stand by my earlier words. I find Voltaire's famous quote, "I may disagree with what you say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it," to be the essence of the principle of Free Speech.
Like him or dislike him, agree with him or disagree with him, Steve Krulick says what he believes and backs it up with reasons for it. He also has the guts to attach his name to his posts. Until he was viciously attacked some time ago, he did not resort to anger in his responses (at least on the blogs I read). He has a right to defend himself.
Anonymity is a sign of fear or a lack of self-confidence. While some say the story is just that, we know that John Hancock did, in fact, sign his name to the Declaration of Indepence in large letters. The story is that he declared that he did so in order for the King's Men to be able to read it and find him.
True or not, that story demonstrates what we should all understand: that an opinion which one cannot claim as one's own, for which one lacks the courage to own publicly, is essentially worthless.
Thank you, Imre (I'm still trying to figure out how to pronounce your names; could you post a phonetic rendition of them?), for your reasoned support.
I don't expect it to do much good or to have any impact on our still ranting friend. (As of now, seeing how bootless and toothless his last posts have become, the dying gasps of a landed fish, I have little or no reason to respond TO HIM anymore, though I MAY continue to write ABOUT him, as here, in a tangential manner.)
Though we haven't met, and, as you say, we likely disagree on many policies, and even some fundamental philosophical points, I think we probably would agree on some META-points that undergird HOW individuals in a society DEAL with differences, and that an obligation to justice, fairness, truth, tolerance, respect, and reason is far more important and necessary to getting along than which side you cut your egg on!
I recall how there have been recorded friendships among erstwhile political opponents (Jack Kennedy and Barry Goldwater come to mind, though they both had a sense of privilege and entitlement that likely bonded them more than their politics), and I would rather deal with a REASONABLE person who has opposing views but can be REASONED with, than someone who agrees with my position TODAY, but is so closed-minded and dogmatic about it that, should circumstances change and positions need adjusting, won't budge an inch, and will consider YOU more of the enemy for disagreeing SLIGHTLY, than the person who isn't even close. (This is what often happens when parties splinter, a common enough event among various socialist factions, best parodied in Monty Python's Life of Brian with the Judean People's Front versus the People's Front of Judea!)
I'm just sitting back and observing the last throes of Chuckles's death rattle. He kinda got briefer and briefer (funny how he criticizes my lengthy posts, yet when I become super-succinct, he criticizes their brevity!), then unleashes a longer post to nobody in particular making all kinds of repeated blatant assertions.
I love this line, on a parallel thread, which, though aimed at me, and though he doesn't point to ONE example that would make it TRUE of me, precisely describes what HE has done:
"He made outrageous assertions and refused to take responsibility for his mistakes like you."
Well, as noted, I don't believe I've made any mistakes, HE hasn't pointed out ANY, or proven that there even WERE any by me, yet *I* have pointed out mistake after proven mistake by HIM, and HE hasn't apologized for any of THEM; AND as his entire posts are anonymous, whereas all of mine are identified as mine, the whole notion of taking responsibility for them at all, coming from HIM, is risible to the max.
Now he denies that HE initiated the attacks, when the Aug 7 posts clearly seem to show the progression of events, STARTING with his name-calling and outrageous blatant assertions.
Well, not that I REALLY care who he is or what his motives are, as he's pretty much used up his entertainment value, but it might help explain what drives someone like this to such a paroxysm of obsessive and persistent manic attacks, and how such future attacks could be countered.
Anyway, we should talk about the possibility of me coming on your radio show sometime to see just how much agreement and disagreement can be held without leading to fisticuffs! Having read some of your bio material you posted I'm already impressed with your credentials; surprising that such an intelligent and learned person holds such bizarre views! ;) But then, you might think likewise of me! It might be fun to sort some of that out.
Ciao.
Post a Comment