Suspended animation

Is a one year suspension a major or minor penalty?

Watching the selectmen's meeting last night, I am beginning to realize that the Number 1 viewing show in town really is the selectmen's meetings.  I mean how can you top what goes on there.

Two members from the BPW show up to complain about what appears on this blog. 

Seriously, elected officials from one board go running to another board to cry foul about what goes on in a public forum.  It would be comical if it wasn't so pathetic.  

They realize the Selectmen have all ready voted to eliminate them from existence right?

I really am going to have to review the tape for that one again.  It was surreal.  One might even add bizarre. Not to mention pathetic.  

By the way, knowing the players involved let me tell you, there ain't no way in my humble opinion that everyone on the Board of Selectmen was surprised by what happened.  

I know good choreography when I see it, even if the acting is terrible.

Another by the way, if you think things are "bad" here, you most definitely aren't going to like what goes on when I reach the point that the only hat I wear becomes that as blogger.  But that is for a time down the road.

To my buddy The Code, and any other person wishing to comment on anything published in this blog, any person who stays within the parameters of the original terms of participation noted a long time ago, will certainly be free to do so.  

To those who go running to the selectmen for protection, well simply shame on you. 

By the way, was the Selectmen Chair correct in saying that he didn't have a clue what you were going to do?  

Because if he didn't, I only want to criticize him for allowing you to abuse the agenda. Something he seems to have no problem prohibiting other people from doing, including his fellow Board members.

Kind of hilarious when you think about it.  Selectman Bowcock shuts off Selectman Espindola consistently for discussing matters not on the agenda.  Now you know the secret Selectman Espindola, just complain about this blog.  

Any public official afraid of public opinion, thought, or comment no matter who from, is the one who should seriously be considering taking a seat in the penalty box. 

One thing you were right about Mr. Code was the fact that the Chair of the Board of Selectmen clearly allowed a discussion to occur which should have been stopped.  In fact despite his protests to the contrary, he contributed to it.

For my part, I want to thank the two BPW members for the free publicity for the blog.  There was a significant spike in hits the hour after their appearance, and I imagine the word of mouth and eventual replay will certainly add to the interest.

To our Board of Selectmen, by all means read the blog pieces.  Please feel free to discuss them.  Humor the poor offended BPW members.  Soothe their grief and slighted egos.

Just remember what you allowed to happen on Monday, you better darn well allow for everyone.  You won't. We all know you won't.  But after Monday, you pretty much have run out of any rationale reason why you won't.  Now everyone will know there is a double standard.

Those two individuals are most definitely no more deserving then numerous persons I have seen shut off by the Chair.  They aren't, but they were given free reign.  My buddy the Chair, well unfortunately for him, the BPW folks were the ones who got to eat up all of the time. The Board was just too darn busy to allow a response.  Not quite busy enough to allow the complaint which was totally out of bounds, just to busy for your response. 

Seriously, complaints with recommended sanctions? Then expressions of sympathy and understanding followed by feigned ignorance.

You had to love the line that the decision to do Dogwood was to save us money.  Seriously.  I could find a way to save the town a whole lot more money, but in my humble opinion the two roads I am looking at are the two roads in most need of work and benefit to the town; and, if you are going to spend money on road work, it should be spent on need and benefit.

I certainly hope the Chair of the BPW is going to get up at Town Meeting and argue that Dogwood should be done instead of Cook and exactly why.  I want to hear the statement made that  based on professional assessment it should be done first.  I want him to get up and tell us all that politics didn't come into his Boards decision.  I want him to tell us all exactly why Dogwood comes before Cook on any other basis than pure politics. 

Let's put it out there folks, point blank.  Cook is the #1 street in actual need on the pathetic list submitted by the BPW.  They haven't even finished Cottonwood and they want to start Dogwood (by the way, I am aware of the problems down that end too). 

Please find me a person with professional experience, qualified to make a judgment on road work who is going to get up and tell us why we should let Cook Street continue to crumble so you can pave Dogwood instead.

By the way, no one promised you your two preferred streets.  The statement was pick two.  Maybe you will get lucky. A bit flip I know, but when you know that the answer won't be based on actual need, what the heck.

While we are at it, let's point out the complete contradiction in what was said by the Chair of the Selectmen later in the meeting to my buddy The Code, and what he said while the two BPW members were there.  Watch the tape, judge for yourself.

The irony of the whole thing, at least for me:  You have two elected BPW members going to the Board of Selectmen for "action".  This is the same board which is pushing to abolish the BPW because it isn't needed in the DOR point of view.  

Well it is hard to argue the need for an elected Board that has to run to another elected Board for protection (or a bail out, or to figure out how to get out of a paper bag).

It is even harder to argue for continued existence for a board with a pretty long history of less than effectual work. 

Not to worry though.  It won't happen this May.  Not because the BPW deserves to continue to exist, because it doesn't. It will continue because its perceived "protector" isn't going to be able to muster the right argument in sufficient time to get rid of it. 

Folks free speech is free speech. It is not a matter of convenience.  It isn't a matter of one group simply deciding what is appropriate.  It most definitely isn't for two elected officials to decide what can be said. 

As long as anyone wishing to comment stays within the the rules of the blog, they are going to be able to comment.  You don't like what is said about you, try responding here.  No wait.  It is easier and safer to run to the Selectmen to complain.  Especially when no one knows you are going to do it.

I don't always agree with what people say in their comments, but that isn't the point and it should never be.  Indeed if I heard right the bulk of my guilt was as a result of publishing the comment  of another, and thus I must by default condone it. 

Well it is a sin I am most willing to accept guilt for, and one I will most definitely commit over and over again should someone wish to comment.  Complain about it, seek sanctions, attempt to conduct a private investigation.  Be my guest.  Indeed I truly hope all of the same come to a reality.

When you attempt to silence your critics, no matter who they are and how they may serve, you will forgive me for saying but I think it is time to seriously consider a self imposed sanction.