Mr. Anonymous
-------------
------
All opinions on this site are those of the person making them. Freedom of speech is not restricted to just the few. It is available to all. Feel free to post.
- MiddleburyStayInformed
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
A Message From Mr. Anonymous
Oh My God!!!! Ed St. John did nothing but continually raise the Town side of the budget year over year every year he was there!!!! The only thing he did different than Tom is to be sure there was little or no criticism of his budgets at all, until his last few years. The funny thing is that the very people who were beating Ed in those last couple of years are now seen with Ed, as they pound away on the new administration. Hey, all Ed did was let the Region budget grow to what it is today, and when asked, said "there's nothing I can do about it, but I'll get a committe to study it". The bottom line, people, is that Public Works became a bloated operation equipment-wise under Ed, and really ended up doing little of the work all that expensive equipment was bought for. What makes it all worse is that the heavy equipment market has had the bottom drop out, and a lot of those machines McCormack wants to sell are going to get more at the scrapyard than the used machinery yards. And, the Region continued to grow almost uncontrollably. So, Ed did nothing for us in terms of prudent budgeting. He started this mess, and Tom is stuck with it
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Dear Middlebury Stay Informed Blog
I wanted to thank you for spreading the truth about Middlebury. You have a loyal following that is growing in size everyday. Showing people the lies in this town will get the true word out.
Thank you
Anonymous Middlebury Resident
yes but as long as Ed was buying everything for the fire dept (and public works) they supported him....through the 24 yrs. People voted him in !!!. Now you blame him. Year after year with "town meetings" where budgets were passed late at night and tax increases shoved down the people's throats.
I simply do not understand why Gormley is not getting support from Pat Deangelis, Keli Bollard, Campaign 2005, Elaine Strobel, or the Middlebury Republican Town Committee.
Tom was given a nearly impossible set of problems. Forget about blaming anybody for a moment, would you? You certainly cannot blame Mr. Gormley for those problems. But you ARE blaming him, aren't you? You're not helping him.
From my impartial view I can clearly see that there are forces at work that are interested in having Tom appear to be failing. These people could help! They could hand him a life preserver. But instead they are sitting on their hands and spreading lies and distortions.
Middlebury will suffer folks! Don't blame Tom Gormley. You know who deserves the blame. The blame goes to Doctor St. John (yes, I'm calling him doctor now, but not as a term of respect). He's a doctor of death to Middlebury. And his lap dogs (that's what they are) are expecting to get something out of St. John's return.
Here's what they should get. Shame. Embarassment. A big kick in the ass. Jail time.
Cut out this bullshit!!! Support Tom Gormley!!! What the hell has gotten into you people? How can you face yourselves with this behavior?
St. John walked away from the fire department. They did not walk away from him. He turned on the entire organization and tried his best to destroy it.
Lying about his Ph.D. and engineering degree, his sexual law suit, and his admission that he gave alcohol to minors are all of Ed's doing, and not the fire department's or anyone else's fault. Now the town is out almost a million dollars for a deal that no one seemed to know about but Ed.
And this guy thinks he can come back and run again? It will be a cold day in hell when this town ever elects this man, no matter how much Pat Deangelis tries to prop him up.
He fooled us once, but that won't happen again.
Take a piece of paper and write down the names of all the people who endorsed Tom Gormley last year and now are sitting on the sidelines because they are afraid of the "Doctor".
Those people are cowards. When the time comes - don't elect them for any position in town government. Vote them off! Get them fired.
The time to support Middlebury and Tom Gormley is now. Anybody who can't do it does not deserve a paid or volunteer position in Middlebury.
I now know what is meant by "A New View From The Hill".
This was the slogan used by Tom Gormley and Elaine Strobel with the overwhelming support of the Republican Town Committee.
Tom got into office and his view from the hill is very lonely. He's all by himself.
All those people who supported him, including turncoat Elaine, are now surrounding the hill and throwing rocks at him.
Isn't politics wonderful?
Deangelis started calling Tom Gormley a liar today without hedging it as satire.
I think this is libel and I'm hoping that Tom hires a lawyer and pulls asshole Deangelis into court.
From Wikipedia: libel
An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Because libel is a tort (a civil wrong), the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. Libel is a form of defamation , as is slander (an untruthful statement that is spoken, but not published in writing or broadcast through the media).
Wikipedia: The rest of the article on libel: Other defences
Defences to claims of defamation include:
. . .
Opinion is a defense recognized in nearly every jurisdiction. If the allegedly defamatory assertion is an expression of opinion rather than a statement of fact, defamation claims usually cannot be brought because opinions are inherently not falsifiable. However, some jurisdictions decline to recognize any legal distinction between fact and opinion. The United States Supreme Court, in particular, has ruled that the First Amendment does not require recognition of an opinion privilege.
Fair comment on a matter of public interest, statements made with an honest belief in their truth on a matter of public interest (official acts) are defenses to a defamation claim, even if such arguments are logically unsound; if a reasonable person could honestly entertain such an opinion, the statement is protected.
. . .
Public figure doctrine (absence of malice)
Special rules apply in the case of statements made in the press concerning public figures, which can be used as a defense. A series of court rulings led by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) established that for a public official (or other legitimate public figure) to win a libel case, the statement must have been published knowing it to be false or with reckless disregard to its truth, (also known as actual malice).[13]
Under United States law, libel generally requires five key elements. The plaintiff must prove that the information was published, the plaintiff was directly or indirectly identified, the remarks were defamatory towards the plaintiff's reputation, the published information is false, and that the defendant is at fault.
The Associated Press estimates that 95% of libel cases involving news stories do not arise from high-profile news stories, but "run of the mill" local stories like news coverage of local criminal investigations or trials, or business profiles.
I'm not saying your not right but don't be to quick to run to the courthouse. For all the slinging around of libel claims they are very difficult to prove, especially when the statement is of an opinion, such as "he's a liar." Furthermore, public officials have a very difficult task in proving defamation since our form of government values the ability of the populace to question its official's actions and contribute to the marketplace of opinions and ideas.
It's my belief that First Amendment rights also come with some degree of responsibilty. Some people obviously disagree with that. There is nothing wrong with pointing out waste, etc. in town government. However, basically putting highly distorted statements up on a website, at least in my mind, qualifies as being irresponsible to the point of abusing one's First Amendment rights. At least here all opinions are allowed, even if they differ from the views of the blog owner. That is the kind of discourse the founding fathers were trying to protect, not what comes out of "the Pit". Unfortunately, the owner of "the Pit" doesn't believe in dissent of his own views, whilst he bangs away at those who engage in some discourse, even if it is somewhat heated. Pat, Hancock, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the rest would be so ashamed of you. Talk about others being un-American? Take a look in the mirror, if you can stand the sight!!!
Nobody is asking America to change the freedom of speech laws. These work well in almost all situations. Mr. Deangelis makes me think of a little puny punk kid who hides behind a protective parent or sibling and taunts the other children. He knows they can't do anything - at least at the moment.
"I'm a disabled elderly man!"
"It's a felony to assault someone over 60"
Nyaah nyaah! Nyaah nyaah!
"You're a DUMBASS"
"You're a liar!"
"Liar liar, pants on fire!"
Those are on Mr. Deangelis's web site.
But Mr. Deangelis dare not walk out in the school yard alone. Couldn't then, can't now.
What a miserable existence he must have. Does his family read his internet diarrhea? Maybe at his eulogy we can make up some posters from his web site so everyone will know the contributions he's made to humanity.
Post a Comment