15 thoughts on “I QUIT !

  • August 7, 2014 at 5:02 pm
    Permalink

    A lot of us would you would like you to become uninvolved with any and all city politics. We’re so tired of your grandstanding and handing out booklets at council meetings.

    Reply
    • August 7, 2014 at 5:10 pm
      Permalink

      I, for one, would like for her to stay and serve at least one 4 year term on the council. Maybe some things will change for the better. A lot of citizens would like to see that also.
      Bob Pohlmann

      Reply
      • August 7, 2014 at 6:20 pm
        Permalink

        Yes Bob, Mayor Green supporters. However, I don’t think there is a “lot”.

        Reply
      • August 7, 2014 at 8:22 pm
        Permalink

        The fact that you support her makes me like her less. Maybe her next letter will say;
        Dear Bob,
        Stop Helping!
        Sonya

        Reply
  • August 7, 2014 at 5:21 pm
    Permalink

    Sonya is little more than a laughable characterchure of Mayor Green and the good old boy network.
    Not only is she a LAZY VOTER voter having voted only 4 times in her entire life ….. She is also a LAZY BOARD MEMBER having missed nearly 40% of the Audit and Budget meetings.
    Her her father has a job at the City complete with health insurance benefits because of the Mayor’s intervention., She has no practical accounting experience beyond what she obtained working for her father, her husband and herself.
    She was appointed to the Audit & Budget committee by the Mayor to serve as a foil to Ted bringing yet more embarrassing financial incompetence before that board.
    She constantly lectures about how ethical she is and then displays the ethics of an alley cat in taking the maximum contribution from her Riverwalk Buddy who she would have to negotiate with on the taxpayer’s behalf – wink wink.
    She is running for Council solely at the request of the Mayor in hopes of collecting a ‘hail Mary pass’ and defeating Bob Ford.
    At the last Council meeting she and windbag Burnette took a kill shot at Ted and missed.
    The Green Kennedy Burnette coalition is about to be no more.
    Make no wonder she is quitting and heading for the hills.
    Good riddance.

    Reply
    • August 7, 2014 at 11:10 pm
      Permalink

      I agree. I was a true Laney fan. Go girls! Not anymore. Judy Anderson and Laney’s low blow shots were disgusting. I’v been watching Ford closely for dirty politics, hoping I could see both sides, never in my mind did I imagine I would make a complete 180 at one city council meeting. BOB FORD is straight FORD. LOL. I must amuse myself at moments, sorry. My vote has changed!!

      Reply
      • August 8, 2014 at 10:41 am
        Permalink

        I too have watched Bob Ford for inconsistency….have not seen one instance of that……I have found him to be the same in very different settings.. …a quality I deeply value ….
        …..He certainly wants to win this one but he will not compromise his core principles to do it….he approaches life and situations from a very consistent moral construct…..ok…..why I believe that:
        Bob stepped up to help our little neighborhood when we needed help …and we were not a deep pocket…or any kind of potential political asset……we were if anything a liability….but he came to our aid really quite fearlessly……without equivocation…..and found a reasonable compromise for both sides…..and he wanted both sides treated fairly….that was clear from our first interaction….he was consistently evenhanded and sensible in his approach…always willing to explain his thinking…always willing to listen to others with respect and an open mind…he was very approachable….he was unfailingly civil…and he stayed the course…..these are all the reasons I have become a devoted supporter..my perception..
        Bob Ford is just an inherently decent man….. and a reasonable person…..it’s his nature.

        Reply
      • August 8, 2014 at 5:09 pm
        Permalink

        I agree. We are in trouble if this woman is voted on the council. She has a condescending attitude and would be a nightmare in the political arena.

        Reply
        • August 9, 2014 at 7:01 am
          Permalink

          Thanks Samantha …I am so with you on this one……
          Fairness, civility, decency, authenticity, humility, empathy, friendliness, compassion……these are things that are perceived by human beings on some visceral level…not an intellectual process… at least not for me…..show me ..don’t tell me…someone repeatedly telling me how ethical they are without that being demonstrated in their behavior……and behavior that I can measure either through personal first hand experience or through friends or acquaintances……that is how we all make judgments about other people….all this other stuff…… a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

          Reply
  • August 7, 2014 at 10:51 pm
    Permalink

    She took separate contributions from both a Mr and a Mrs Lacour from the same address. Clever. That same disclosure also showed a contribution from Allen Green. It’s all available on the City website. You have to view each disclosure to see the actual contributions for that period. I wish they would list them all together on each disclosure for easier viewing. It is clear to see the Mayor and Lacour support the same candidates. I would assume that is a mere coincidence. She is not the only one I believe Mr. Junco has contributions from the pair. Another coincidence I assume. Sonya your an accountant. What are the odds of coincidence on these contributions? Cheap insurance in my mind. Business is dirtier than politics. I think. The two paired together are potentially volatile.

    Reply
    • August 8, 2014 at 5:17 pm
      Permalink

      right on annon. they don’t want us to connect the dots and come up with suspicions and speculations. if they could they would pass a city ordinance forbidding suspicion , speculations and blogs.

      Reply
  • August 8, 2014 at 5:43 am
    Permalink

    IF SHE GETS UP IN FRONT OF COUNCIL ONE MORE TIME AND SAYS “IM A CERTIFIED CPA AND RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WELFARE OF FOUR PEOPLE. I STAND FOR ETHICS”, I think I’ll lose the contents of my stomach. Change it up a bit Sonya you’re boring us.

    Reply
    • August 8, 2014 at 5:49 am
      Permalink

      What does CPA stand for? Couldn’t Pass Arithmetic?

      Reply
  • August 9, 2014 at 11:57 pm
    Permalink

    Money is the mother’s milk of political corruption
    Posted Tue, 2011-06-14 21:54
    By STAN ESCUDERO
    It is truly said that money is the mother’s milk of politics. But our political system has long since ceased to be nourished by this special milk.
    Instead the flow of money has corrupted our system so completely that even those politicians who want to be honest cannot remain so and retain their offices. If some semblance of honor and honesty is to be restored to American politics, our system must be weaned away from financial contributions.
    The non-partisan Center for Representative Politics estimates that the total cost of the 2008 elections was $5.3 billion! The average cost of election to the House of Representatives is now $1.1 million, for a two-year job that pays about $170,000. An average Senate race costs $6.5 million.
    The Democrats have famously bragged that President Obama will raise over one billion dollars to fund his 2012 re-election race. Only a tiny fraction of these amounts will come from small private donors like you or me.
    The great bulk will be donated by unions, large private corporations, financial institutions, very wealthy individuals and the like. Is there anyone so naive as to believe that those who contribute these vast sums are simply altruistic?
    The sad truth is that the donors expect to receive and the politicians expect to give extensive and valuable favors in return for the money that pays for their campaigns. The prevailing fiction is that these donations guarantee only access to elected officials but that is – you guessed it – a crock of crap!
    It is in fact a form of legalized bribery and it poisons our political system. To sweeten the pot some donors offer a variety of personal benefits to Members or their families and the more corrupt Members readily accept them. But even those who do not spend a great deal of their time, from the moment of their election, raising the money they will need to fund their next election.
    Most of them resent the need to do this but they also realize that if they do not raise the necessary amounts they will lose and, if they fail to provide the expected benefits to the larger donors, money will flow to their opponents in the next election.
    This is nothing new. Both parties do it routinely.
    Large donors often cynically donate to selected members of both parties to ensure that they have rented enough influence and votes to protect their positions no matter who wins.
    And it is getting worse.
    The Obama Administration is already the most blatantly corrupt in my lifetime. It scares me to think what a second Obama term would be like.
    So what is to be done?
    Congress has made several efforts to reduce the corruption stemming from campaign contributions, most recently the McCain-Feingold Law, but all have failed or been circumvented.
    In my view, the problem lies with the fact that anyone can contribute to the election of any public official. I believe that all such contributions, in cash or in kind, should be banned and that all elections, federal, state or local, should be paid for with public funds from the tax base.
    Anyone holding office or obtaining the requisite number of signatures of registered voters should be able to run.
    There are several problems with this idea.
    First and foremost, the US Supreme Court has held that monetary contributions to political campaigns are a form of free speech enjoying constitutional protection. With all due respect to the Supremes, who have in the past held that slavery and Jim Crow laws were OK and that women could be denied the vote, I believe they are again wrong.
    The damage done to the country via monetary corruption far exceeds the benefits conferred by the right to make such contributions. Many politicians who benefit from existing arrangements even as they regret the need to raise campaign funds would oppose my proposal.
    A contribution ban would also be opposed by the lobbying industry, which would be driven to fundamental reform if they could no longer funnel cash to politicians.
    Even the media, which makes a fortune from political advertising, could be expected to oppose.
    Yet the benefits to the United States from publicly funded elections would be huge. The change I propose would significantly reduce the exposure of our politicians to cash and thus their opportunities for corruption. It would lead our leaders to spend more time educating the population on the issues and selling them on the facts of their positions in order to be elected.
    And, no small benefit, it would severely reduce the amounts of money spent on election campaigns which would mean shorter campaigns and an end to the state of permanent campaigning which we all now endure.
    Oh, I know it will never happen, but still I can dream.
    NSBNews.net, also known as VolusiaNews.net, provides Volusia County 24 / 7 Internet newspaper coverage, 100% free with breaking news, news of record and investigative reports from New Smyrna Beach, FL, for a 21st-century digital world.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.