The Observation Deck

This is one heck of a not-so-funny way to get to a kumbayah moment, but it would seem that I too, find myself in agreement here with Bill.

What kind of a shambles of a town are we going to be left with, when the current batch of politicos move on?

96 gallon dumpsters indeed. That's a good place to put all these new programs being put together, I do believe.

This is what happens when people get complacent.

Oh well, time for us all to wake up, I suppose....

Now, where was that banjo?

Holy crap. I agree with Dee, Bill, Jim, Gary on this one too.... amazing.

And after reading that list that Jim put together on the progress made in his term, I cannot help but think "Good Riddance."

Without commenting on anyone's post directly, or my council colleague personally, I am reminded of a 2006 exchange between Tim Russert and the junior senator from Illinois, who at the time was serving in his first term:

MR. RUSSERT: [W]hen we talked back in November of '04 after your election I said, "There's been enormous speculation about your political future. Will you serve your six-year term as United States senator from Illinois?" Obama: "Absolutely."

SEN. OBAMA: I will serve out my full six-year term. You know, Tim, if you get asked enough, sooner or later you get weary and you start looking for new ways of saying things. But my thinking has not changed.

MR. RUSSERT: So you will not run for president or vice president in 2008?

SEN. OBAMA: I will not.

It should be noted the junior senator from Illinois, not an Illinois native, carried the state of Illinois in November 2008 by a 62%-37% margin over the senior senator from Arizona, a victory I cheered.

Kevin, by simply mentioning it you think it has relevance to this situation. It should be noted that Tom Bullock is no Obama, and thankfully so. In addition sports fans, look for Nickie Antonio to announce her intentions to run for State Representative soon. If this is the case, she will most likely run for re-election and attempt pull the same political trick that Rep. Skindell did on me in 2001.

He ran for re-election in 2000, then in January 2001 announced he was running for State Rep. Our circumstances were different then, but nonetheless, I lost the race to him by 4% and then council got to appoint an unelected politico who didn't have to work for it. This kind of stuff burns voters and if we want to change it we should amend the city charter to stop it.

BTW- I think Mike Summers would be just about the only councilperson that I would give a pass in this scenario. He is someone who has put in his time and is certainly vested.

I know this is but one point of the many made on this topic, but I have to say, as someone who moved to Lakewood in 2005 and therefore is also a "newbie," I feel quite unwelcome and slightly offended by some of the comments in this stream. Just because I was not born and raised in Lakewood does not mean I do not have talents to offer this city. That sort of mentality is exactly what will keep young, talented, bright "imports" from choosing our great city when we need them now more than ever.

Lorri,

You make a good point and we all need to be careful of exuding that sentiment too much. Yet we should acknowledge that we all undergo a period of suspicion in any new environment that we enter anywhere in America, be it a school, workplace, church, or the civic space of a town. In Councilman Bullock's case the scenario is a little different. He showed up roughly three years ago, promised to do great things, got elected, and is suddenly ready to move on.

This is far different from someone who is vested in a community stepping up to the plate to serve in a greater capacity after putting a few accomplishments on the table. Think about how you might feel if this was the case with a significant other past or present. They pop into your life and then the next best thing comes along and... You get the idea, not exactly the same, but analagous nonetheless.

Lorri Stewart wrote:I know this is but one point of the many made on this topic, but I have to say, as someone who moved to Lakewood in 2005 and therefore is also a "newbie," I feel quite unwelcome and slightly offended by some of the comments in this stream. Just because I was not born and raised in Lakewood does not mean I do not have talents to offer this city. That sort of mentality is exactly what will keep young, talented, bright "imports" from choosing our great city when we need them now more than ever.

Lori

First, I am sure you are welcomed, and we are all lucky to have you here. We are always looking for ways to bring new talented people to Lakewood and get them involved in the process and the city.

But I would ask you, did you move here because you liked the city, or because you thought you could change the city they way you see fit, then move on? Or did you move here to change it and make bullet points on your job resume before moving on? These are very legitmate questions raised by Tom's announcement.

As I have mentioned, I like Tom Bullock, love sharing a drink with him, and always find him engaging. However when it comes to the city I generally find him unable to understand this unique community.

Please feel welcomed, please get involved, please feel at home.

.

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote:Kevin, by simply mentioning it you think it has relevance to this situation. It should be noted that Tom Bullock is no Obama, and thankfully so. In addition sports fans, look for Nickie Antonio to announce her intentions to run for State Representative soon. If this is the case, she will most likely run for re-election and attempt pull the same political trick that Rep. Skindell did on me in 2001.

Wow! You slammed 5 people in one paragraph.

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote:He ran for re-election in 2000, then in January 2001 announced he was running for State Rep. Our circumstances were different then, but nonetheless, I lost the race to him by 4% and then council got to appoint an unelected politico who didn't have to work for it. This kind of stuff burns voters and if we want to change it we should amend the city charter to stop it.

You would advocate amending the charter to give empty seats to LOSERS?

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote:BTW- I think Mike Summers would be just about the only councilperson that I would give a pass in this scenario. He is someone who has put in his time and is certainly vested.

I have always supported Mike Summers, but I don't even understand this.




Shower time, "sports fans".



.

Ryan:

I'm curious. Are you an exception your own rules, as you once said on the floor of City Council that you were eventually running for the U.S. Senate? Does that mean you were planning pre-emptively to "selling out Lakewood"?

Also, I'm not clear on exactly what standard you follow when considering whether someone is qualified to run for local office. Does it include your statements in 2007 that you had "time to be Mayor because I'm not Catholic with 5 kids"? Does someone's religious affiliation play a role in your determination of who is sufficiently committed to Lakewood to run for office?

For someone who ran for three offices in three consecutive years to then criticize anyone for excessive ambition is completely absurd.

Finally, I was puzzled by your claim that you had lost in your bid for State Representative by only 4%, a claim you have made on other occasions. The funny thing is, I don't recall that election as being close at all.

Sure enough, I finally checked the Board of Elections website, and it states that you lost to Mike Skindell by a margin of 63.86% to 36.14%. It's surprising, to say the least, that a candidate would confuse a 4% margin with a 27% margin. Maybe the true margin of defeat can give more insight into why you were not appointed to the resulting City Council vacancy.

Wow, I love a good donnybrook. Honey, could you please pass the popcorn, thank you.

Corey

All I have to say is may the best man win.

It's a free country, if Mr. Bullock wants to run for office, it is his right, and the natural order of the political system for him to do so. I don't think anyone would accuse him of not caring about Lakewood if they stopped to think that in representing this district at the State level he would be able to do more for this area.

And in reality, every community has its problems, and many of them will never really be resolved, and if they are, they will simply yield new ones. To say that he "hasn't fulfilled his promise" because Lakewood isn't perfect is too rosey a view for the world we live in.

True, a big part of his running for higher office is political maneuvering, which again, is part of the natural order of politics. But if you stop to think about the worse things that he could be doing, trying to advance his career is really low on the list.

It seems as though a great deal of this thread is devoted to personal resentment and bitterness.

If I were most of the people on here, I would stop taking every action made by a public official personally. If you don't want Bullock to win, just don't vote for him. That is, after all, the strongest voice you have in an election.

But seriously, the conspiracy theories are really getting out of hand. If I were a politician, I would be scared to run for office in Lakewood at the risk of being maligned so quickly and without adequate background information.

Thealexa Becker wrote:All I have to say is may the best man win.

It's a free country, if Mr. Bullock wants to run for office, it is his right, and the natural order of the political system for him to do so. I don't think anyone would accuse him of not caring about Lakewood if they stopped to think that in representing this district at the State level he would be able to do more for this area.

Thealexa

Please do not read into my comments to much. I never said I hope he doesn't win. I merely said I wish he would keep his promises.

Anyone can run against anyone, and certainly many politicians do not care about promises made, or anything but themselves moving forward on their own career path. It is America, he can do it, and in America I can express my disappointment, that Tom decided to merely use Lakewood as a stepping stone.

I would ask you, what makes you so sure he would have Lakewood in the front of his mind or approach at the state level? Because he has rented here for nearly 2.5 years?

If what you said was true, then it would not be a huge issue. But if he told me that, I would have to think back to the promise for at least two terms.

Again, I like politicians that actually do what they promise. I guess you do not feel that way.

FWIW


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
Thealexa

Please do not read into my comments to much. I never said I hope he doesn't win. I merely said I wish he would keep his promises.

Anyone can run against anyone, and certainly many politicians do not care about promises made, or anything but themselves moving forward on their own career path. It is America, he can do it, and in America I can express my disappointment, that Tom decided to merely use Lakewood as a stepping stone.

I would ask you, what makes you so sure he would have Lakewood in the front of his mind or approach at the state level? Because he has rented here for nearly 2.5 years?

If what you said was true, then it would not be a huge issue. But if he told me that, I would have to think back to the promise for at least two terms.

Again, I like politicians that actually do what they promise. I guess you do not feel that way.

FWIW


.

Jim

It isn't fair for you to read into my comments the way that you claim I read into yours by saying that I don't like politicians who do what they say.

All I mean to suggest is that sometimes people in this forum tend to overreact and say things off the cuff and take personal offense easily, as you just illustrated. My comments were not directed at you, but to everyone, and yet you thought I was attacking you personally. It was not my intention.

I was trying to be rational in what seems to be an increasingly heated and not factually based debate. Guess it didn't work.

Perhaps we should ask Mr. Bullock to make a statement before we string him up for being a dastardly deceiver.

Thealexa

My response was merely an over correction to your comments.

What many of us fail to realize, including myself is some of the personal
information we bring to the table.

Again, outside of the "promise" We have a politician that seems to have
changed Lakewood forever, with very little depth on history or what makes Lakewood difference. Now after not even two years we find out that many if not all of this was possibly part of a plan to move up the ladder, and possibly even out of Lakewood forever.

When Tom was running many of us saw the "stars" in his eyes. That is one reason I asked.

Please accept my apology.


.

I doubt that you will find any politician who will state publicly that he is running for a local office, and will do his best in that office, but that if another office comes open, and he has a decent chance of winning it, he will run for the other office. That would be a suicidal statement.

So while you will find no one who will make such a statement, I am certain that most politicians harbor such sentiments.

Face it, the reality of politics in this country is that incumbents are almost always reelected, unless they are term-limited, or are caught in an embarrassing position. One never knows until the time comes that a higher office will open before a lengthy period of incumbency. For example, most potential presidential candidates today are not considering running in 2012, as we seem to routinely reelect our Presidents.

So I think it is very possible that someone would run for council, fully intending to serve out the term, and even run for reelection; but that a year later another office comes open, and he must decide to run for that office now, or face a lengthy period before the office comes open again.

I wouldn't resent anyone who grabs for the brass ring when it is available, and I don't think it is an indication of congenital dishonesty that he takes action when circumstances change.

As for representing the citizens of Lakewood, are there any who are not in the district for which Mr. Bullock may be standing? If not, it would appear that, if elected, he will continue to represent us, but in a broader forum.

As for having a thin resume, that will be something for the voters to take into consideration, but we have elected many people who don't have as much experience as some of us would like.