Mike Harkavey and his gang are apparently supporting newly minted Democrat and soon to be former Republican David Sager over Democrat Seth Goldman for NYS Senate. WTF? Is this not the same committee that launched a jihad (and rightfully so) over Vincent Bradley for running as a non Dem, when we had a great qualified Democrat running??? Be consistent Mike! Mike Harkevey should get off that high horse of his and out of the Democratic party.
12 comments:
Jeremy, I can only guess that the difference now (from the Sennett/Bradley debacle) is that the Saugerties committee is supporting someone whom they feel is qualified. Bradley was neither a Dem nor qualified. Furthermore, Bradley didn't win the convention; thus he shouldn't have gotten a Wilson-Pakula to run in a primary.
Bradley not qualified to be the U.C. DA? Give me a break, I can understand if you don't like him but he had the knowledge to do the job. Andrew Cuomo felt he was qualified that's why he made him an Assistant Attorney General!
Does this mean that everyone who wanted a Wilson Pakula for Bradley and is now against offering one are hypocrites and should leave the party. I think not.
Your were one of Jon Sennett's biggest supporters.Rightfully so. Did you favor a waiver for Bradley?
The key is that the Democrat should be qualified to run for the office through his or her experience.
This guy is still Republican and because he just switched very recently he will not a Dem until after election day and as a result will need a Wilson Pakula. It is obvious Harkavey and the rest of the Saugerties Committee have good dem. values when it suits their interests, but not when it doesn't. How do you spell hypocrit....H-A-R-K-A-V-E-Y. Isn't Harkavey also the guy pushing for the new bylaws to make sure that people on the dem committee do not support Republicans...Someone should tell him that this guy is still a Republican until election day...he is breaking his own ethics law. He really is unbeleivable.
Bradley did (and still does) specialize in white-collar crime. That is a very important area - I am not at all denigrating his specialty and expertise. However, Bradley never prosecuted a violent felony, and that is critical to being a DA at the county level. Bradley has no experience with serology reports, DNA, etc. As far as Harkavy being a hypocrite, as the first commenter stated, if the non-Dem doesn't get the endorsement at the convention, then Harkavy had better not advocate for a Wilson-Pakula. Bradley wasn't a Dem AND didn't win at the convention. If he had won, then Sennett would've primaried him. If a Dem wins at the convention, you don't give a Wilson-Pakula to the "loser" (I'm not trying to demean Bradley) to primary a Dem who has the endorsement of the committee.
First, Vince Bradley was qualified to be District Attorney..there I said it. He however was not more qualifed than Jonathan Sennett nor was Holly Carnright for that matter. Jonathan will be DA Jan 1, 2012 and that is for a seperate discussion.
My point is very simple, 1039 said it best it is hypocrtical of Harkavey to support Sager when you have a qualifed Democrat running for the office.
What are the crazies in the Dem party going to do when Vince supports Jon in 2011? What people don't realize is Bradley does not hate Jon Sennett he ran and lost along with Jon, they killed each other. Jonathan was wrong for not allowing a primary and Vincent was wrong for staying in the race.
However, the FRINGE of the party used the race to attack Parete using both Sennett and Bradley as pawns to further their own agenda.
It really is disgraceful that there are people that just don't want unity. Could care less about Sennett and more about their own agenda. Mike Harkavey, Terry Rosenblum, Sue Zimet, Julian Schreibman and their gang are a bunch of fucking assholes.
4:49 - I have to honestly say, after reading your post, that if Bradley supported Jonathan Sennett, that actually might achieve unity. But, you should refrain from calling names such as you did. It's not exactly conducive to healthy debate (even though you're right).
These people trying to make a distinction between Harkavey's two clearly opposing positions are out of their minds. He and his committee are now the laughing stock of the county and that is saying a lot. You cannot one year tell someone "Hey you have not been a democrat long enough to get all the rights of the other dems. who were here longer than you" and then two years later tell a recently enrolled former Republican that you can be our candidate when there is a perfectly qualified and willing democratic candidate. That is HYPOCRISEY. And to 10:14, who runs for office should not be dictated by who is "most qualified". In this country you can run for anything you want to. It is the voters who determine who gets nominations and who wins, not some poorly attended committee. And BTW most people I talked, to are fully in favor of giving the guy the Wilson Pakula. Let him run. If the dem can't beat him in a primary, he can't win in the general. It is Harkavey talking out of both sides of his mouth that they are complaining about. He wants to blame everyone else for the discord in the party, when it is obvious he and the rest of the nut jobs from Saugerties are a large cause of it.
10:14 - of course who runs for office is not dictated by who is most qualified, but it should be. Anyone can run, and the committees (at every level - town, county, state, national) are charged with vetting candidates and choosing the one who can win. Hopefully, they'll choose the most qualified; sadly, as you can plainly see in many of our elected officials, that doesn't happen very often.
I thought Harkavey was dead? Or was that Bob Aiello? I can't remember and who cares about what goes on in Sawgerdties anyway?
King Stoner
16 towns voted and supported David Sager, not only Saugerties. This is called democracy.
Folks still don't get it. There is no hypocrisy in supporting Sager. If Bradley had won the vote in the committee he should have gotten the waiver to enter the primary. The issue is not whether a person is a Democrat or not. The issue is who won the committee's nomination.
Post a Comment