Comical Council says one thing - does another ...
I can't stand hypocrites.
People that say one thing and do another.
When you interpret something one way in March and the same thing completely opposite in October, I call you a hypocrite.
The Lockport Common Council's stance on the proposal to house juvenile sex offenders at Wyndham Lawn is hypocritical in my opinion.
Wednesday evening, David Warsocki, president of the Tollgate Hill Citizens Association, showed up at City Hall with a petition of 700 names opposing the installation of juvenile sex offender at the Wyndham Lawn campus.
Suddenly, Alderman David Blackley drew up a late resolution opposing the plan – not that the city council has any say-so over Wyndham Lawn (which sits at the corner of Lake Avenue and Old Niagara Road – in the TOWN of Lockport) – and his five colleagues on the Common Council unanimously supported the resolution.
Now, some of you may see this as representational government at its best: The people asked, the council responded.
But I have a problem with it ... not because I think that Warsocki is over-reacting, over-reaching, and generally nervous-without-a-cause (although I do) ... but because back in March, I asked the Common Council to show their opposition to another cause which the effectually had no control over ... and I was told, “we don't do that.”
On March 4, I wrote “Voice of a Million Tongues” and asked the Common Council and the County Legislature to show their opposition to the War on Iraq.
I even drafted a resolution for each body to adopt, taking into account their required legelese.
And the next day, March 5, Pat Schrader, president of the Common Council appeared on my talk show, Dialog. I asked him what he thought of my proposal. I assumed that him being a good Democrat, he would have seen the War on Iraq for what it was – an attempt by W to get even with the evil Saddam for making his daddy look stupid.
I was wrong. My friend Pat told me, “We don't do that.”
Don't do what, Pat?
Apparently, the Common Council doesn't take up positions that are outside the guise of their direct control.
Hmm, I thought for sure I had recalled them taking sides on issues that didn't “directly affect” them before, but maybe I was wrong.
Okay, Pat. Thanks anyway.
But then, seven months later, on Oct. 1, the Council adopts this Warsocki resolution opposing Wyndham Lawn. Unanimously, I might add.
What does all this mean?
It means that our friends on the Lockport Common Council change their minds with the political winds. I'm sure that had I had a petition of 700 people back in March opposing the war, they would have been more than happy to support my resolution.
It means that they have no convictions and no leadership.
You could say that voting with the public is what they're supposed to do. I say that's hogwash.
The majority of the public in this country supported the War on Iraq because they were brainwashed by our president to believe that if we bombed Iraq, it would halt terrorism.
The majority of the country NOW knows that just wasn't the case.
We elect these people to make decisions and have opinions. If we wanted to make the decisions ourselves on a one-by-one – as-needed basis, we wouldn't need them.
Come to think of it, we don't.
But back to Wyndham.
True there are 700 signatures on that petition, stating their opposition to the plan. But do you really think those 700 people ALL know exactly what is and isn't going to happen at Wyndham?
I got an email from an anonymous writer stating that someone named “Donna” had misled her into signing the petition. And had she known then what she knows now, it would have been 699 signatures. How many others were misled?
This is why we pay people to represent our best interests ... because we don't all have the time to sift through every little detail.
Worth noting: The Common Council doesn't have time to sift through every little detail either.
Joe Gallagher, communication director for Wyndham, told me no one from the city has asked for an official account of what it is Wyndham wants to do.
People that say one thing and do another.
When you interpret something one way in March and the same thing completely opposite in October, I call you a hypocrite.
The Lockport Common Council's stance on the proposal to house juvenile sex offenders at Wyndham Lawn is hypocritical in my opinion.
Wednesday evening, David Warsocki, president of the Tollgate Hill Citizens Association, showed up at City Hall with a petition of 700 names opposing the installation of juvenile sex offender at the Wyndham Lawn campus.
Suddenly, Alderman David Blackley drew up a late resolution opposing the plan – not that the city council has any say-so over Wyndham Lawn (which sits at the corner of Lake Avenue and Old Niagara Road – in the TOWN of Lockport) – and his five colleagues on the Common Council unanimously supported the resolution.
Now, some of you may see this as representational government at its best: The people asked, the council responded.
But I have a problem with it ... not because I think that Warsocki is over-reacting, over-reaching, and generally nervous-without-a-cause (although I do) ... but because back in March, I asked the Common Council to show their opposition to another cause which the effectually had no control over ... and I was told, “we don't do that.”
On March 4, I wrote “Voice of a Million Tongues” and asked the Common Council and the County Legislature to show their opposition to the War on Iraq.
I even drafted a resolution for each body to adopt, taking into account their required legelese.
And the next day, March 5, Pat Schrader, president of the Common Council appeared on my talk show, Dialog. I asked him what he thought of my proposal. I assumed that him being a good Democrat, he would have seen the War on Iraq for what it was – an attempt by W to get even with the evil Saddam for making his daddy look stupid.
I was wrong. My friend Pat told me, “We don't do that.”
Don't do what, Pat?
Apparently, the Common Council doesn't take up positions that are outside the guise of their direct control.
Hmm, I thought for sure I had recalled them taking sides on issues that didn't “directly affect” them before, but maybe I was wrong.
Okay, Pat. Thanks anyway.
But then, seven months later, on Oct. 1, the Council adopts this Warsocki resolution opposing Wyndham Lawn. Unanimously, I might add.
What does all this mean?
It means that our friends on the Lockport Common Council change their minds with the political winds. I'm sure that had I had a petition of 700 people back in March opposing the war, they would have been more than happy to support my resolution.
It means that they have no convictions and no leadership.
You could say that voting with the public is what they're supposed to do. I say that's hogwash.
The majority of the public in this country supported the War on Iraq because they were brainwashed by our president to believe that if we bombed Iraq, it would halt terrorism.
The majority of the country NOW knows that just wasn't the case.
We elect these people to make decisions and have opinions. If we wanted to make the decisions ourselves on a one-by-one – as-needed basis, we wouldn't need them.
Come to think of it, we don't.
But back to Wyndham.
True there are 700 signatures on that petition, stating their opposition to the plan. But do you really think those 700 people ALL know exactly what is and isn't going to happen at Wyndham?
I got an email from an anonymous writer stating that someone named “Donna” had misled her into signing the petition. And had she known then what she knows now, it would have been 699 signatures. How many others were misled?
This is why we pay people to represent our best interests ... because we don't all have the time to sift through every little detail.
Worth noting: The Common Council doesn't have time to sift through every little detail either.
Joe Gallagher, communication director for Wyndham, told me no one from the city has asked for an official account of what it is Wyndham wants to do.