croton blog for croton-on-hudson new york

Open Forum for March 18, 2006

March 18, 2006

Crotonblog readers are invited to share their thoughts in this open forum. When posting comments in this open forum or any other post on Crotonblog, please abide by our terms of use.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that has.” — Margaret Mead

On March 21, 2006 10:34 PM, Just The Facts said: is reporting:

CROTON TRUSTEES 2 seats Charles Kane* (D) 975 Ann Galleli (D) 943 James Steinberg* (R) 718 Jose Gonzalez (R) 617

Are these final numbers????????

On March 18, 2006 6:57 PM, weewill said:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that has.” — Margaret Mead

She was indeed a wise woman. Unfortunately, it’s also true that a small group of suspicious, misinformed, or tunnel-vision partisans can change a village. We’ve seen this very small group of people repeat their unfounded rumors and innuendos aimed at damaging reputations and engaging in veiled character assassination with abandon.

The Crotonblog provides a clear forum for venting and expressing individual views. Everyone has the right to his or her opinion within the parameters of truth and responsibility. Jim Steinberg, rightfully responded to a blog comment that was questioning his integrity. This was similar to the kinds of nastiness to which I refer above and to which the former Mayor and I were subjected to while on the board. It’s up to each one of us to stop this cancer from spreading any further.

Enough is enough. It’s time to spend our time dealing with real issues facing the village. Whether we personally like or dislike a candidate has little to do with governing this vlllage. Their qualifications and experience and commitment are what matters.

I’ll be voting for the democrats, Ann Gallelli, Charlie Kane and Sam Watkins because I know their qualifications to be top notch. They have a long history and proven records of having the village interests first and foremost at all times.

Character attacks have no place in our village.

Georgianna Grant X Trustee

On March 18, 2006 4:50 PM, Reality Check said:

Time for another Reality Check.

I was fascinated by both the charge of a purloined soda pop and the response by Mr. Steinberg.

Lets start with the proposition that even if the allegation was true, which I doubt, a sitting trustee enjoying a can of soda at Village expense during a Village Board meeting offends me not in the least. Whether a “good” trustee or a “bad” trustee; one you support or one you oppose, we all have to agree that trustees get no money to speak of in return for their public service. Providing a cold drink during a Board meeting hardly seems out of line. Should we also charge trustees and Village staff for the coffee brewed in the office when the Board is in session? I don’t think so.

Now comes “onewhoknows” who repeats, embellishes and adopts as his own an already circulating rumor of surreptitious soda shenanigans. The claim is denied by Mr. Steinberg. All well and good.

But examination of what Mr. Steinberg actually said in his response tells you everything you need to know about the man, and demonstrates beyond dispute that he is unfit to sit on the Village Board.

Let me explain.

The righteously indignant Mr. Steinberg, in all his hypocritical splendor, rants that “It deeply disturbs me that individuals such as “onewhoknows” live in our community, teach and coach our children, worship with us on weekends, and are our neighbors. We as a community are better than this.” Well confidential to Mr. Steinberg: Where the hell was your outrage when Bob Elliott and Georgianna Grant were routinely accused of being on the take and selling out the Village? A false charge far more serious than sipping a free Dr. Pepper.

And it is not just anyone who regularly attacked our elected officials with such scurrilous venom, but none other than Maria Cudequest. And Ms. Cudequest is not merely a supporter of yours Mr. Steinberg, but someone you affirmatively chose to collaborate with to secure the Independence Party line in the caucus that never was!

Shame on you Mr. Steinberg! Shame!!

To lash out and be “disturbed” that a person such as “onewhoknows” even lives in the community, while embracing the likes of Ms. Cudequest, is sanctimonious beyond reprieve. Should everyone who disagrees with you move? I bet you, Ms. Cudequest and Mr. Schmidt would love that.

Personally, I am disturbed that a self confessed criminal vandal like Ms. Cudequest is not only living in our community but has such influence over our current elected majority - but she still has a right to live here.

To be so utterly two faced makes Mr. Steinberg, in my opinion, unfit to serve.

Now let us examine this entire episode from a somewhat different perspective. No one can dispute that candidate Steinberg’s image has been suffering lately. Many I have spoken with no longer view him in the same favorable light as they did before reading opposing opinions about him here on the blog. I myself have enjoyed the freedom of employing this open forum to make my views known without fear of vandalism by Ms. Cudequest.

But look what has happened. A writer who calls himself “onewhoknows” made a silly and minor accusation against Mr. Steinberg and by so doing, afforded Mr. Steinberg an opportunity to lash out at his critics. This has effectively insulated Mr. Steinberg from further criticism — just before the election.

Coincidence or set up? I don’t know; but I wonder. It sure smells a lot like Ms. Cudequest’s phony claims about negative flyers and missing campaign signs to me.

I for one will not be silenced. You may read another of my views of Mr. Steinberg’s own words in my post this date about the farmer’s market.

And that, my friends, is a Reality Check.


Recent Articles