First let me congratulate Len Bernardo and James Quigley on the endorsement of the Conservative party. The endorsement is good for about two thousand votes in a general election and normally that would be a nice boost to their respective campaigns. However, this year the endorsement is tainted to say the least.
Every year the Conservative party has an open caucus, where all members of the Conservative party in Ulster County are invited to come and vote for their candidate to represent them for different offices in November. This year for some reason that did not happen, the Conservative party's Executive committee made the decision to back Bernardo and Quigley without the input or knowledge of rank and file members of their party. They also failed to invite and meet with all candidates running for office.
While the Conservative party did not do anything wrong from a legal standpoint, what was done was unethical and it just does not look good for their party or their endorsed candidates. When you are running to be the Executive of the County or the watch dog over the county's money, everything should be on the up and the perception of back room deals looks bad!
With that being said, I want to publicly ask that under the circumstances that Mr. Bernardo and Mr. Quigley reject the endorsements of the County Conservative party, or ask that Ms. Hewitt allow any other candidate wanting the line to be granted a full primary, so that all members of the Conservative party have a say, not just a few people in closed room.
PLEASE leave these people alone. They are a group of people, who for the most part are anti-govt and I guess they have their reasons.
ReplyDeleteRemember last year? They voted and voted and voted until it came out the way Hewitt wanted it to? They might as well appoint candidates.The Conservatives must like it that way, they keep reappointing Hewittt.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who takes that endorsement should consider the means by which they received it. The Independence party at least puts up a front and acts like they are giving everyone a faur shake even though they are not.
Quigley Buys Endorsement! When will this headline appear in the Freeman. We all know what is going on here. Quigley can spend all the money he wants, he still won't get elected.
ReplyDeleteGive it up. They won fair and square. Crying about won't help.
ReplyDeleteMr. Blaber, if your last paragraph was ment as humor, well done! However, if you were serious when you wrote that suggestion, you have a lot to learn about politics & politicians and mostly, it shows your age.
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost,a county-wide Democratic candidate DOES NOT need the Conservative Party nomination to win. This has been proven in past elections as well as into the future. How can you state the Conservative Party endorsements are shady when only the Republican candidates sought their cross-endorsements? Remember MIke Hein WAS NOT seeking the Conservative endorsement.Have more faith in the ability of Hein and Auerbach to win in November without cross endorsements.
ReplyDeleteMr. Hein stated to you, Jeremy he did not seek the line. Sounds like he is badly hurt by the lack of opportunity to obtain the endorsement.
ReplyDeleteCome on now, Hein cannot have it both ways. I was for it before I was against it!
It is somewhat disturbing that the Freeman indicated that Hein went for the Conservative line. He openly indicated that he was not seeking the Conservative line.
ReplyDeleteIt would be helpful to get the real scoop on this. We need straight talk in a candidate.
PS: I support Hein strongly.
You are the biggest hypocrit. No one running for these offices is a conservative. The conservative party or any other party has the right to endorse their candidates in whatever manner they see fit. You spent the last two days telling us how Hein did not seek the endorsement..how can it be unethical if only one of two candidates running seeks the endorsement adn the party endorses that candidate? And Since when did the rank and file democrats have any say on who their candidates would be. And Working Families Party and Indpependence Party both do the same thing the Conservatives did should those endorsements go back. Wake up.
ReplyDeletestop being so biased,, it was a fair & square endorsement
ReplyDeleteThe Chair of the Conservative Party has a "very close relative" who WORKS IN HEIN'S OFFICE !!!!
So she had ample reason to endorse Mike Hein,, except the Consrvatives truly believe Len Bernardo is the better Candidate.
Stop whining & crying & deal with,, by the way,,, GORE LOST TOO !!! HA !
Its nice to see that you are interested in other parties outside of your own. It shows that you are becoming more open. But dont worry Blaber, your candidates are far from Conservative.
ReplyDeleteBonnie Hewitt is a very fair woman. She is crystal clear to candidates that if you take the Working Families endorsement, that the Conservative Party will not endorse you. You can't have it both ways. She does NOT like it when people take her line, just to get another line on the ballot. She is a very wise woman and she knows when people are trying to play her to just to get votes.
ReplyDeleteBlaber, first you say "so what, Bernardo got a line that Hein didn't even seek". Now you want Bernardo to give that line up?
What about Lew Kirschner bragging to everyone that he had the Conservative line "locked up" and buying dinners for all of the people on the Conservative Executive Committee. Is that OK?
Everyone had the opportunity to interview with the Conservative Party. The interviews were last Tuesday night.
Bonnie Hewitt's brother-in-law is Michael Hein's treasurer. How could it be POSSIBLE that he didn't know about the interviews, or wasn't given a chance to interview.
10:16 Hewitt's relative in Hein's office is a lifelong Democrat. Hein did not seek the conservative nomination and was never interviewed by Hewitt as the Freeman falsely reported.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear to me that Hein does not need the Conservative Party Endorsement the way Ken Post, Mike
ReplyDeleteLaPaglia, or Lew Kirshner needed
the line way back in the 1970' s or
1980's. In my view Hein was smart to stay away from that line.
The days of the Democrats 'have to have' Row D is long gone.
Just ask Mike LaPaglia
Jermey
ReplyDeleteAs a person who was at the
meeting you spoke about I can tell you that Mike Hein had the same chance as the other candadates
He was told that if he took The Working Families Party line he would not get the endorsment. He took in anyway what did you expect
The executive did give Mr Hein an interview.And anyway was it not you
that said he didn't need the conservative endorsement to get elected we'll see won't we.
And as far as Bonnie Hewitt is
concerned she does a great job
I don't know anyone who would take the cheep shots you and your cronies throw at her and not respond back. Jermey Get over it.
Actually, I am certain that Mike Hein knew full well that if he took the Conservative endorsement he could not have the Working Families Party endorsement- period. That's because the political impulses for Conservatives and WFP are mutually exclusive. (How many progressive-reactionaries do you know? Think "jumbo-shrimp" or "military-intelligence" - you get the point!)
ReplyDeleteYou cant get endorsed by WFP and then accept a Conservative endorsement. This is something WFP makes clear to the candidates at the they interview. NOTE: WFP endorsements tere announced prior to the Democratic convention.
Jeremy, the cartoon here - Shelly Silver with Republicans Bruno and Pataki - is a poor illustration for this story. A more apt illustration would have been a couple dogs of the same breed quietly playing cards together in complete agreement. The basic issues for the Hewitt conservatives are 1) anti-abortion and 2) anti-tax and 3) anti-civil rights.
This is the year that the Conservatives are shown to be the non entity that they are. It has always bothered me that both major parties give these narrow minded,self serving, regressive, 17th century thinking knuckleheads the time of day, let alone kiss their ass as both do.
ReplyDeleteIf neither of the majors ask them for support, Bonnie and her band of brownshirts go away.
The fact of the matter is that Hein did interview with the Conservative Party. Instead of taking the loss like a man, we now have this "wag the dog" mentality of claiming that he was wronged by not being allowed to interview. That sounds a lot better than Bernardo beat Hein. Or that the party didn't check with enough people before endorsing the "other guys". It's a great diversionary tactic though. But what most people can't understand then, is why the whining about wanting Quigley and Bernardo to give up the endorsement if the Democrats don't want it anyways? Answer: Real Democrats don't want the conservative endorsement - it's not in line with their "progressive agenda"; Hein wanted the endorsement for the votes and to claim a victory over his opponent. Keep posting stories so you push this one off the first pages of posts. It's an embarassment to you. You are the one who said "who cares" to begin with.
ReplyDeleteHein did not, and I don't care. I just find it strange that there was no caucus. The opportunity was taken away from anyone wanting the line. The exec board just went behind closed doors and cut a DEAL with Bernardo and Quigley..too bad it was a losing one.
ReplyDelete11:17, I like the way you think. If you ignore them, or better yet let them come up with their own candidates, they become ineffective.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting reading about the unfairness of one particular party versus another. I had an interesting experience with the individual committees of the political party I am a member of after I contacted each Chairperson concerning practical consideration for a being a candidate. 16 out of 20 ignored me. Several of these made Public endorsements.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of the labels or parties - it's the taxpayer's who get cheated with entrenched bloated government.
Let's give some business people a chance - Bernardo & Quigley!
What is the real story. We have you saying that Hein did not interview and then we have someone saying they were at an interview with Mike Hein. Did he or did he not interview for this line? I for one would like to know as it will certainly affect my thoughts about him. Berardi has a point. The way this Dem Committee behaved is somewhat disconcerting...why the endorsements so far in front of the convetion...they are encouraging people to announce they are running a year in advance. Only career politicians would have any interest in doing that. Leaves a very bad taste in my mouth and obviously in Berardi's too. Might be time to give someone outside of government a chance and see how they do.
ReplyDeleteIn the words of my generation" RIGH ON 11:17,and UP YOURS Bernardo/ Quigley".
ReplyDeleteBored in the Burbs
3:35, Berardi is a nice enough guy but entered the race too late to be taken seriously, and was unqualified for County Exec. The biggest problem was that Berardi expressed no meaningful reationale for his candidacy. He seemed to be saying that he was a "real Democrat", not a johnny-come-lately conservative like Mike Hein nor crazy and self-indulgent like Susan Zimet... and so what? His exerience in his family business was not adequate preparation for the job, and his experience in legislative positions (county leg, town board) was inadequate preparation for executive responsibility in government. I never understood why he was running in the first place. Within two weeks, I gather he didnt understand why he entered the race either.
ReplyDeleteVoters will have trouble relating to a candidate who can't assert a straightforward rationale for their candidacy. Just having a big enough ego to enter a race is not enough.
It seems to me that some Americans have an impression that government is best led by "citizen legislators" (Mr. Simth-goes-to-Washington farmers, merchants, regular folk) like we were back in colonial times. This is usually a populist impulse for Democrats - and a business impulse for Republicans.
Your confusing your Berardi's. Bill is a self-employed CPA, Michael was the elected official.
ReplyDeleteTo the person who is too immature to write something in a civil manor. ( Knuckleheads, brownshirts and 17th century thinking) It truly is typical for someone who won't say thier name to HIDE behind the ANONYMOUS title in this blog. As a Conservative, I rejoice in your baseless, namecalling comments becaues it shows your true "Caveman Mentallity". Please have some pride in yourself by listing your name. By the way, becaues of people like you, we will never go away. I can personally inform you on our true stand on major issues since you are obviously lacking on knowledge about our party.
ReplyDelete