What a loser! Katie
--- On Tue, 6/21/11, Sid Dinerstein
From: Sid Dinerstein
Subject: Re: FW: Palm Beach County GOP News Wire, June 16, 2011
To: "kkss21"
Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2011, 5:57 PM
Kathleen:
The Robocalls i did for Rene were paid for personally, and I never mentioned my position as Republican Party Chairman. There were no Democrats in the race. HUH? But Rene WAS a Democrat. I am proud that I helped to elect a moderate Dem as opposed to one that might have moved the city in the wrong direction. You confuse me, Sid.
But I'm still missing your point.
Are you suggesting that political parties not participate in non partisan elections?
Or is it only the Republican Party that should be excluded?
Sid
Please answer the question Katie...calling people names is sophomoric and doesn't amount to a hill of beans without having some earnest DISCOURSE...
ReplyDeleteWe would all like to hear you continue your stand against the Republican party with intelligence and serious points to be made.
Sid, we are moving this city in the right direction. What ever do you mean that we aren't? Have you been listening to Scott Maxwell? Don't believe a word he says. Sid, do you really get taken in by fellow Republicans to this degree? Some have gone to jail. You shouldn't be a leader of your party. Step down and do us all a favor. Maybe you're a Democrat in disguise? maybe you don't know what they heck you are other than playing games and listening to Scott Maxwell and his tall tales of anarchists. It's really pathetic that anyone in your position could be so stupid, Sid.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that the term "anarchist" or "anarchist alliance" doesn’t seem to resonate with some who read this blog? Here’s the factual history beginning in 2005: backed by card jennings, anna beth carson and the rest of the folks from that group, marc drautz is elected mayor...in 2006, seeing a campaigning strategy that worked well, cara jennings uses the same tactics to get herself elected as she proudly proclaims that she is in fact an "anarchist"...now she, the admitted “anarchist”, is now, as they say, “two for two” and on to 2007; cara and the rest of her group tap another of their own to run for the commission and poof! jo anne golden gets elected, now they are “ three for three” but still not done yet because they don’t hold the commission majority, so what does cara and company do, why well of course, they find another candidate that they can control and its grand slam time, in 2008, suzanne mulvehill ascends to a commission seat and yes folks, that’s right, its “four for four” and the “anarchist” is clearly driving the agenda now because she created the majority...now let’s fast forward to 2010, cara Jennings decides not to run for re-election, so what does she do, why of course, she hand picks her replacement, chris mcvoy…so, now we are “five for five” …but wait, there’s more…in 2011, the very three people that cara Jennings placed into office, are the very three who are endorsing Rachel waterman for mayor in the special election, yet some people wish to continue to deny the cara Jennings connection? In the end, as long as the current commission majority continues to find themselves beholding to the very proud, very matter of fact “anarchist”, the term “anarchist alliance” is an accurate and appropriate term because frankly, as illustrated within this blog over and over again, the inference is that you "show me your friends and I’ll show you who you are!" Thank you for considering this post.
ReplyDeleteWe need to get a few things straight here.
ReplyDelete1. Cara jennings is a self-proclaimed "anarchist." I have always challenged her romantic idea of herself because
if she was REALLY one, she would not have been a government oficial. The two are opposite extremes AND ARE RIDICULOUS to contemplate.
2. It was not Cara Jennings that got anyone elcted. It was the PEOPLE. Not one little person has all that power or all that influence but the Republican Party does.
3. Cara Jennings and associates are not part of the wealthy class nor do they have left-over resources to waste. If they have money, they put it towards environmental issues, causes for which they relaly believe. Normally it is in small increments, unlike a Ramiccio that got clever donations from Wayne Akers Ford and from the Unions that are sucking the City dry.
4. Those edorsing Waterman are people who see her skills and know of them first-hand.
5. This election is not about "show me your friends" but rather choosing the best candidate. There are people endorsing Waterman that are not friends but believe that she is the only choice.
6. Some of us have seen Ramiccio and Maxwell in action and want a new face.
Scroll down to Lynns earlier article about the GOP and you can read my e-mails to the local republican club. I an a Republican . I have NO PROBLEM with INDIVIDUALS helping whomever they want to be elected.My point is- The Republican AND Democratic clubs should not be influencing non partisan races. This is a very scary trend.Wanting to be a public servant should not have to depend on your membership in the Democratic or Republican club.You should not have to be a member of a union,or the Chamber of Commerce. These races are NONPARTISAN for a very important reason.And if the heads of the major political parties in this country are so blinded by the need for POWER at all costs, then we are ALL in trouble. Katie Mcgiveron
ReplyDeleteSid's been listening to Commissioner Scott Maxwell way too long. His brain has become fuzzy with fluff. The City is going in the right direction. We got rid of Clemens, Vespo, Lowe, Burns, McKinnon.
ReplyDelete