The Observation Deck

Great post Thealexa!

Give it to 'em.

Gordon Brumm, Logic Master of the "Come Let Us Reason Together" Kumbaya would be proud to see you flashing the torch of reason and pragmatism on the deep well of feeling that splashes over the LO Deck.

The polarity between thinking politicians and feeling people is bridged by charisma and duration.

To rush to the center with political ambition generates a community projection screen for all of us to shoot the nectar of love and venom of resentment. That is why so many politicians are prone to carrying water for special interests.

Floating adrift here in my own leaky lifeboat of felt thought concerning Tom flying the Lakewood chicken coop for Columbus... What can I say - man overboard. Gary, can you toss Tom the chicken coop ladder?

Kenneth Warren

According to the Cuyhoga County BoE, Skindell's term expires 12/31/2010. Tom will be on council for another year and 7.5 months. He'll leave three quarters through his term, if he wins.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:I know many, many people that have chosen to do a job well and finish it, instead of going for the raise and the promotion.

Is council's job ever finished? Do you blast Kucinich for running for president?

You know I want to run for council but I am in Ward 3 and I like Summers. But I would love to run because I honestly have my eye on the mayor's seat. Sorry Mr. Fitzgerald, but I have my eye on your chair. *giggles to self* That is about as high as I want to go ever, because seriously people scare me.
Back to the matter here....I like Tom as a person, and he has a few times made me laugh. I dont know him politically to make any type of comment on what he does with his future except the whole dog issue. But I do wish anyone good luck on moving up.

Charlie Page wrote:According to the Cuyhoga County BoE, Skindell's term expires 12/31/2010. Tom will be on council for another year and 7.5 months. He'll leave three quarters through his term, if he wins.

Am I supposed to say, wow that's closer to two full terms?

Charlie Page wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:I know many, many people that have chosen to do a job well and finish it, instead of going for the raise and the promotion.

Is council's job ever finished? Do you blast Kucinich for running for president?

Well first time no, as he was one of the few backing my thoughts at the time that the war was a criminal activity. Also he never promised me he wouldn't. Get it?

As for the second time, yes I did for about a week. Then I heard why he did it, and it made all the sense in the world. (more then welcome to read my emails to him and the responses.)

Now maybe I can be convinced Tom has Lakewood's best interest in his heart, and is truly a woodie, not just a collector of our street art. But as of right now, I have very little to go on that would really make me think that way. What 5 things make you think he will serve the PEOPLE of Lakewood over his interest, the interest of his party, or his career advancement?

Will
There are some politician and civic leaders that do not do it for the $$$$, the advancement, their career climb, or even ego.

Charlie, Thealexa, Ken

I get it. Yeah good luck Tom.


FWIW

.

Good for Tom if he wants to run, so be it. I won't be voting for him.

I don't think Tom should be judged on how long he has lived here or how long he has been in office, but on how well you think he has served our community. I think there are others who have done a better job as public officials in Lakewood and I will choose to support them (Nickie Antonio would be my choice, should she choose to run.) I'm not convinced that Tom Bullock is really in it for the good of Lakewood or the community. He seems to be more interested in what is good for Tom.

I'm not from Lakewood either, but I became very involved in the city. I did it because I believe in community service. I wanted to do my part to help the community. It certainly helped me learn what issues were important in order to connect with voters - without a doubt, it came in handy at election time. I did relatively well in at least one of three tries for office (Ed, I won't quote any numbers since I don't remember them exactly, but I did come close to beating Nancy Roth in 1999. Mary Louise Madigan in 2003, that was another story. )

I had hoped to make a run for this seat at one time, but that's not in the cards for me now. Though if enough folks run, maybe there's a chance to slip past the pack!

Gee Ryan, perhaps if you chose to run for re-election in 2007 we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Despite my disagreement with you on some issues, you were a good, hard-working councilman and would likely have beaten Tom handily.

Looks like Lakewood politics will remain interesting for the next few years!

Ed,

I would have hoped that you would have read my post a second time before engaging in a rant. Maybe I was unclear. The election that I was refering to was 2001, where I ran for Council-At-Large and nearly beat Skindell. That was my reference. Skindell then turned around within a month and decided to run for State Representative. Hence leaving a seat on council for appointment. Take a breath and slow down, it's like I attacked your prodigal son or something (oh, wait...). And let us not forget that Skindell showe you who was boss in an election also. So get off the high horse, almost anybody could have gotten 60% against Tom George in that race.

John you make great points. While I dread the thought, I would easily support Nickie Antonio over Tom Bullock. Much like the Fitzgerald controversy in the 90s, he just kinda showed up and has no significant legislative record. It's easy for Fitz to defend him because he has been in the situation, plus he will become part of the machine. It also justifies Fitz abandoning Lakewood for county. The money is gonna run out eventually and there will be nothing left to cut, so get out while you can. I understand where he is going with it.

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

Sentence first, trial afterwords.

Ryan, you're missing the point, perhaps intentionally.

If voters want to judge Tom Bullock for having lived here for too short of time, they have every right to.

But for you to be throwing stones at anyone is just too galling for words. In twenty years of living here and being active in local politics, I never had an opponent, except you, mention my Catholic faith as a reason to vote against me. You made those comments publicly, on multiple occasions, and on video. I don't think you even realize how inappropriate those views are, which is even more disturbing. They were bigoted and indefensible, period.

You may view the fact that Tom Bullock moved here in 2004 as a disqualification, but I and many, many others feel your comments are a much more serious matter, and I intend to make that very clear repeatedly and forcefully throughout the election season.

Ed, you can try and spin my alleged comments however you believe it is most politically beneficial to you. I would expect nothing less. Please be aware that the record of comments regarding Irish surnames, middle names, and other comments of that nature have been slung in humorous and annoying natures at city council meetings in the past. I don't know that the distraction you are trying to create here has any relevance, but if we want to review the entire record of what people have said and when they have said it, so be it. I intend to focus on who really wants to fix Lakewood for the long haul and who is just here because it is a pit stop along the way.

The remarks, which are not "alleged" and can be substantiated if you would like to deny them, were not said in any humorous or joking manner.

What you said, quite pointedly, and on several occasions, was that you were more suited to hold office because you were, unlike me, not Catholic and did not have children which would distract you from the job.

No "spinning" is necessary. The comments speak for themselves, and were and are bigoted and inappropriate for anyone holding themselves out as a community leader.

Ed, feel free to substantiate as you like. I have called several Catholics who are active in the community and they can recall no such remarks. All they recall is that most of my biggest supporters are Catholic and that I have a record of supporting LCA while on Council.

What is really being called into question these days is the timeline and your forthrightness with the St. James community regarding the church closing situation.

wow, nothing serves this city better than a good bout of mud slinging.

So much for "Clean, Safe, Fun".

where'd that banjo guy go?

Gentlemen!!!! Back to your corners please!!!!

Dont make me start singing. It wont be pretty, ears will bleed, dogs will howl, and some might even run away screaming.

Wow, glad I came on for a minute to see a male cat fight - YOWZA.

As to the Tom Bullock question. I've heard Tom at City Council meetings and his inexperience and inability to grasp the workings of Council and problems with understanding issues before Council count him out.

He's too inexperienced for State Rep. Actually he's too inexperienced for Council which is what I realized when I started working with him on his campaign and quit after a month.

Tom needs to stand down and watch and learn before he goes anywhere.

I'd also think that a little less talk and a lot more action.

Personally, I don't think he has a chance to win the seat of Mike Skindell. Big waste of money that could be spent on a viable and quality candidate.

Sharon

Welcome back, hope you are feeling better.


.