Author: Gatemouth

http://www.cafepress.com/bluegreenred.71542210

I'll bet it's a limited edition of five (which is probably five more votes than those attained by the person who will eventually get the job).  

Back on April 29th, I made some observations concerning how the NYS budget process actually works, which seemed so ludicrous and absurd that some people thought I was making the whole thing up. As one can now see, this story in today’s (12/3/06) New York Times pretty much confirms the process I’d outlined.

Before the release of the motion picture bearing his name, the character “Borat”, portrayed by British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, was most famous for a sequence on Cohen’s TV series, "Da Ali G Show", where, at an amateur night in a Country and Western bar, he performs a song where he advocates "Throw[ing] the Jew Down the Well’’ to an appreciative audience of rednecks.

In an interview in “Rolling Stone”, Cohen, a Sabbath-observing Jew, admitted that the audience may not have been anti-Semitic, but merely humored the character to be polite. He nonetheless pointed out that such polite indifference and conformity to anti-Semitism led to the Holocaust.

Submitted for your consideration, dueling headlines:

“Court Dismisses Suit Against Plan for Pier Parks” – Brooklyn Heights Press (11/30/06)

“Park backers lose waterfront lawsuit” – Brooklyn Papers (12/2/06)

So who’s right? Did those who want the park win, or those who want to stop it?

As I’ve documented, it’s been quite clear for well over a decade that the only way a Park was ever going to be built on the Brooklyn Heights Waterfront was if it were self supporting. The lawsuit mentioned in the headlines sought to block the use of the revenue sources (including apartment buildings) proposed in the plan to create “Brooklyn Bridge Park”. Those behind the lawsuit, brought by the Orwellingly named “Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund”, include the Willowtown Association, which has opposed any park on the Brooklyn Bridge Waterfront, long before housing became part of the plan, because it would lead to people from outside the neighborhood walking past their homes (residents of Joralemon Street actually hung up signs saying "Don't Tread On Me"). Also in the opposition is Roy Sloane of the Cobble Hill Association, who has stated quite clearly that he opposes the building of any park except on his terms, which are fiscally insupportable. Thus, those who supported the lawsuit, including publisher Ed Weintrob of the Brooklyn Paper (a resident of Willowtown), can only be termed park opponents, since they oppose the only plan which has any hope of bringing a park to fruition.

“Some bloggers just rattle…the anonymity of the computer gives them free reign to incessently idle about with their conspiracy theories and salacious gossip. GM didn't do that; he backed up the reasons for his statements (which is more than we can say for many bloggers). You may not have agreed with what he said … but the mere fact that we came back and engaged him – and ourselves – is a testament to the power of his words, and the popularity and importance of the political blogger."-Black Pride (5/23/06)

“The Hippocratic Oath begins with the injunction “First do no harm”. It is not a high standard to meet, but it is one at which the WFP has utterly failed. It is time to put the patient out of its misery and pull the plug on the WFP. Vote for Spitzer for Governor on the Democratic line”- Gatemouth (10/28/06)

Any month in which Chris Owens gets to issue a mission statement for a new political movement, or Charles Barron is given the opportunity to sound off about an unarmed black man hit by 50 bullets on the night before his wedding (while the shock of the underlying incident stuns Gatemouth into a failure to respond to his ill-chosen words), is bound to produce its share of unique rhetoric. Add to that the fact that most of November is devoted to post-election recrimination and spin, and the opportunities to pick low hanging fruit off the vine increase exponentially.

This is by no means a selection of the most ludicrous quotes in a month where the cup hath runneth over; it’s just a sampling of a few favorites, with some notes:

Let’s be clear from the start; this is not another piece making fun of Chris Owens; he just happened to start the discussion. Last week Owens, the self-proclaimed (and surely consensual) leader of Brooklynites who call themselves “progressive” stated that those who share his vision support “public policies that promote and establish equitable social [and] economic…outcomes for all Americans, including quality public education, affordable and accessible health care, and quality and affordable housing.” Although, for my own reasons, I don’t call myself a progressive, these goals are just fine with me; however, in seeking to implement those goals, Owens proposed, among other things, support for efforts to “maximize voter registration and voter turnout….regardless of an individual voter's profile”, to which I replied:

After running fourth in a field of four in a race for Congress with only 19% of the vote (despite having the support of, and same last name as, an incumbent Congressman with nearly a quarter century of service), Chris Owens decided to snatch dignity from the jaws of defeat by claiming credit (with some credibility) for the defeat of white candidate David Yassky. Having been handed a bunch of lemons, Owens decided to claim he was manufacturing lemonade, and it’s hard to disagree that this was better than squeezing sour grapes, even if it's still a matter of empty calories. So, it seemed petulant at that juncture to point out that, at the time Owens decided to stay in the race, it was far from apparent that his presence wouldn’t cost a stronger black candidate victory.

"Rev. Al Mulls White House bid" – Daily News, 11/23/06.

Gatemouth's Homepage was updated on 11/23/06; for more fun and laughter, visit here.

There are some things on which you can't put a price tag. It is too bad the future of our children ain't one of them.

Back on March 23, 2006, I posted my first piece on "Room 8", and said, in part:

"today's decision by the Appellate Division, 1st Department, in the CFE case, together with the impending attempts to convert Roe v. Wade into an empty shell, highlight the problems with "merit selection". Those who control the Executive Branch determine who has the "merit". The First Department's appointed Appellate Division largely consists of upstate Republican hacks imported from the vicintiy of the Cheese Museum. In many ways, the byproducts (AKA our local judicial bench) produced by our own local political culture (which is, at least, more liberal and more racially diverse) look far better in comparison."