ROCHESTER - So much is going on now that my head is spinning. Well, not really, but that doesn't mean I want to write lengthy articles about stuff. Sometimes a comment or two is plenty. Besides, I can get pretty wordy and or over dramatic if I start to get into something.
1. PAETEC scales back plans - Yes, again. This time, though, the City has suggested they reuse a building instead of building anew. A new HQ would be better, but can't knock filling already built empty space.
2. Stimulus Package falters - Not surprisingly, the Republicans are looking to score some much needed points by trying to nit pick this thing. It is refreshing they want that oversight after years of rubber stamping Bush, but is now the time?
3. Governor Paterson can't catch a break - No surprise here, but for years New Yorkers have been telling their politicians to tell it like it is. Our Governor does, and now everyone hates him. I still like him. He can have my vote any day.
4. Polar Plunge! Sunday, February 8th at noon at Charlotte. One of the few outdoor organized events in the city in the winter. Plus it is to benefit the Special Olympics!
5. Of course, we offer our thoughts and prayers to Officer Anthony DiPonzio. We pray for a full and speedy recovery.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Pot Is Gateway Drug - Gateway To Gold!
ROCHESTER - Our reigning Greatest Athlete Ever, Michael Phelps, has gotten into trouble out of the pool again. No surprise there. He is from Baltimore, which is not exactly Mayberry. Plus he went to Michigan, so he is a jackass. But let's get real. A 23 year old smoked up out of a bong. Yes, real shocking. Like I implied, he went to college (well, he went to Michigan). So he is like everyone else that has been to college and probably has smoked some weed. Big deal. Marijuana should be legal anyway.
The arbitrary puritanical approach in our country is ludicrous at best. Smoking cigarettes is legal. Alcohol is legal. Is marijuana worse or more dangerous than those two? Studies show that nicotine and alcohol are more addictive than thc, the active ingredient in weed. Some studies even show that caffeine is more addictive than thc. Smoking tobacco is being restricted more and more each day. Which is fine. When one person's bad habits negatively affect another's health, it is wrong. Which is why if you do anything bad while drunk, you are punished more severely than if sober. Why can't weed be regulated the same way? Yes, it can mess you up. So can 3 pitchers of beer at your local bar.
Back to our Golden Boy, the man with the plan, the prince of the pool, the normal 20-year old. You can be sad if you want. You can think he is a poor role model if you want. You are likely a hypocrite anyway. I hope it turns out that he is a total stoner and has been since he was 15. Many successful people (and that is the Madison avenue, cul-de-sac suburbia model of success) partake in a little fun sometimes. Some may even smoke up on a regular basis, the same way many of you have a cocktail after work. Those evil smokers still hold down jobs, live in McMansions and drive Bimmers. You would like to think they wouldn't use a marijuana pipe (whatever that really is), but the fact is, the stuff is pretty much as harmless as a bottle of wine with dinner. So get over yourselves, and let King Michael Phelps, the Greatest Athlete (in our current attention span) lead to realize that marijuana should be legal, because how harmful could it be if someone destroying the worlds best in the pool for piles of gold uses it?
The arbitrary puritanical approach in our country is ludicrous at best. Smoking cigarettes is legal. Alcohol is legal. Is marijuana worse or more dangerous than those two? Studies show that nicotine and alcohol are more addictive than thc, the active ingredient in weed. Some studies even show that caffeine is more addictive than thc. Smoking tobacco is being restricted more and more each day. Which is fine. When one person's bad habits negatively affect another's health, it is wrong. Which is why if you do anything bad while drunk, you are punished more severely than if sober. Why can't weed be regulated the same way? Yes, it can mess you up. So can 3 pitchers of beer at your local bar.
Back to our Golden Boy, the man with the plan, the prince of the pool, the normal 20-year old. You can be sad if you want. You can think he is a poor role model if you want. You are likely a hypocrite anyway. I hope it turns out that he is a total stoner and has been since he was 15. Many successful people (and that is the Madison avenue, cul-de-sac suburbia model of success) partake in a little fun sometimes. Some may even smoke up on a regular basis, the same way many of you have a cocktail after work. Those evil smokers still hold down jobs, live in McMansions and drive Bimmers. You would like to think they wouldn't use a marijuana pipe (whatever that really is), but the fact is, the stuff is pretty much as harmless as a bottle of wine with dinner. So get over yourselves, and let King Michael Phelps, the Greatest Athlete (in our current attention span) lead to realize that marijuana should be legal, because how harmful could it be if someone destroying the worlds best in the pool for piles of gold uses it?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Rochester School Board Melee
ROCHESTER - Melee, brou-ha-ha, whatever you want to call it, the wackiness on the Rochester City School Board needs to stop. A dysfunctional board does not help the kids, and in case you didn't notice, the kids need help. I ran for school board two years ago and it was an eye opening experience. Not only did I get an up close and personal view of the serious issues involving and sinking the district, I also got a view of how fellow citizens viewed the school board itself. I will share the secret: it is not held in very high regard. It seems as though the general consensus is that you have to be crazy to be on the board. What a shame. Our best and brightest should be on the board. Like they say about computers, garbage in, garbage out. I believe our board could function just fine with a few reforms that I suggested in my campaign.
First off, there should be a joint committee that has both school board members and city council members. The reality is that the city pays a huge amount of money to operate the schools, yet they have no direct say. I don't believe that they need a direct say, but they should certainly have a platform to offer input, ideas, solutions and concerns. Not in a confrontational way like last week, but in a constructional manner suitable to adults elected to public office to do a job.
Second, the budget should be a public vote, like in the suburbs. This gives more accountability to a budget process that is too often left in secrecy. At least this way, the residents can give a general reaction to the board's activities. Essentially, the biggest part of the board member's job is to construct the budget. If the residents don't like it, they have to wait four budgets to show their displeasure. Lets speed that up. More democracy is never a bad thing.
Finally, the mayor should not have control over the district. This is not a knock on our current mayor. I believe the school district would benefit from Mayor Duffy's insight. However, the city has plenty of issues that need to be corrected outside of the school district. The crime rate is too high, home ownership too low, and jobs too few. The city should take care of its own back yard before knocking on their neighbors door. Additionally, since the mayor controls so much in city government, an anti-education mayor may be well thought of enough in other areas to avoid accountability for his poor education policy.
Our founding fathers warned us of the concentration of power in an executive. I share this concern. The school board is evidently quite dysfunctional at the moment. We can not, however, eliminate its role without allowing it to reach its potential. If we fill the board with brilliant minds, and it still can't get the job done, then maybe we explore other options. For now, more democracy is better.
First off, there should be a joint committee that has both school board members and city council members. The reality is that the city pays a huge amount of money to operate the schools, yet they have no direct say. I don't believe that they need a direct say, but they should certainly have a platform to offer input, ideas, solutions and concerns. Not in a confrontational way like last week, but in a constructional manner suitable to adults elected to public office to do a job.
Second, the budget should be a public vote, like in the suburbs. This gives more accountability to a budget process that is too often left in secrecy. At least this way, the residents can give a general reaction to the board's activities. Essentially, the biggest part of the board member's job is to construct the budget. If the residents don't like it, they have to wait four budgets to show their displeasure. Lets speed that up. More democracy is never a bad thing.
Finally, the mayor should not have control over the district. This is not a knock on our current mayor. I believe the school district would benefit from Mayor Duffy's insight. However, the city has plenty of issues that need to be corrected outside of the school district. The crime rate is too high, home ownership too low, and jobs too few. The city should take care of its own back yard before knocking on their neighbors door. Additionally, since the mayor controls so much in city government, an anti-education mayor may be well thought of enough in other areas to avoid accountability for his poor education policy.
Our founding fathers warned us of the concentration of power in an executive. I share this concern. The school board is evidently quite dysfunctional at the moment. We can not, however, eliminate its role without allowing it to reach its potential. If we fill the board with brilliant minds, and it still can't get the job done, then maybe we explore other options. For now, more democracy is better.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Do Casinos Have Theatres?
ROCHESTER - Do casinos have theatres? Hmm, the obvious answer is yes. 'Why do you ask?' you may be thinking. Well, because we have a large scale project that wants a theatre but doesn't have one. We have an arts community that is telling us (and not at all showing us) we need one. This reminded me of the fact that in the not too distant past there was quite a bit of clamoring for a downtown casino. Call it Niagara Falls envy if you will, but a casino can be an economic driver if done properly. Oh, and just maybe the builders would see fit to add a theatre space somewhere among the buffet tables and the craps tables because, you know, sometimes casinos like to have shows.
Renaissance Square is a worthy project as a transportation hub and an MCC campus. We need both of those things. We don't need a theatre. Boo hoo arts community, but if you can't convince private folks to raise the money, I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing it. Unlike our County leaders, I believe in market capitalism. I will keep attending Eastman and the Auditorium in the mean time. When we get so smug and cultured that we need another artistic outlet, I am certain some enterprising folks will develop a space for us.
Casinos are not exactly cultured, but they don't have to be seedy, either. There is a huge difference between the run down gambling halls and the entertainment center casinos. Sure, they both lend themselves to the enabling of gambling addicts. So does the State of New York and its lottery. But, casinos can also represent an entertainment venue that goes beyond nickel slots and all you can eat crab legs. Some of the best chefs in the world maintain restaurants in casinos. Some of the most popular shows in the world are on stage in casinos.
I propose that we allow a downtown casino to be built. The beauty is that this project would be funded privately, not by a government. We would also snag a downtown theatre out of it, assuming the builders follow the blueprint of every other casino in the world. It would add two entertainment options to our downtown, provide construction and best of all, keep the public from funding a theatre the market can't support.
Renaissance Square is a worthy project as a transportation hub and an MCC campus. We need both of those things. We don't need a theatre. Boo hoo arts community, but if you can't convince private folks to raise the money, I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing it. Unlike our County leaders, I believe in market capitalism. I will keep attending Eastman and the Auditorium in the mean time. When we get so smug and cultured that we need another artistic outlet, I am certain some enterprising folks will develop a space for us.
Casinos are not exactly cultured, but they don't have to be seedy, either. There is a huge difference between the run down gambling halls and the entertainment center casinos. Sure, they both lend themselves to the enabling of gambling addicts. So does the State of New York and its lottery. But, casinos can also represent an entertainment venue that goes beyond nickel slots and all you can eat crab legs. Some of the best chefs in the world maintain restaurants in casinos. Some of the most popular shows in the world are on stage in casinos.
I propose that we allow a downtown casino to be built. The beauty is that this project would be funded privately, not by a government. We would also snag a downtown theatre out of it, assuming the builders follow the blueprint of every other casino in the world. It would add two entertainment options to our downtown, provide construction and best of all, keep the public from funding a theatre the market can't support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)