Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Want to hear a good one?
The Republican Committee is considering School Board Director Dan Remely as the Republican hopeful to run against Dan Miller for Matt Smith's old House seat. I understand Remely will be running for reelection with Dale Ostergaard for School Board. Does the MLRC think that Dan is doing such a bang up job with the high school renovation, to be a viable candidate for higher office? Still not going through the vetting process, guys? When will the MLRC break up the good old boy network? I wish I could be a member of a party I respect.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
42 comments:
HA HA HA HA! HA! HA HA!
As a Republican, I will REFUSE to support, yard sign or otherwise, Mr. Remely. He snowballed the community on the HS project and hasn't reigned in a thing.
In fact, Remely is just the candidate that will most likely send my Republican but scurrying to get behind Mr. Miller who, while a democrat, has shown fiscal restraint.
Can't the Republicans find someone who can actually make a case? What is Remely going to say? He raised taxes numerous times on the SB. Supported a fiscally idiotic project....I am so disheartened I won't even go on.
Holy cow! Do you mean to say that the local Republicans actually took my joke seriously?
"Up for some entertainment?"
December 2, 2012 8:04 PM
EG:
Perhaps Mr. Remely will forgo reelection to make a run for the 42nd District General Assembly seat as a Republican candidate, opposing Dan Miller. That would certainly be good news for Mr. Miller!
Rmeley is a joke for either office.
Maybe if Remeley runs for the legislature and the school board he will get the sympathy vote for school board.
You are right Richard, it is excellent news for Mr. Miller.
I certainly hope this is a joke, otherwise the MTLRC is more comatose than I thought.
Let's see, here's my tally on Mr. Remely. Am I correct on these?
We have Dan's co- leadership on the HS project to reflect on. His vast experience in building management has certainly kept us from paying for odd looking change orders.
In 2009 school district expenditures were approx. $72 million/year. This year they're hitting $80 million. Thank god we have Dan keeping an eye on things.
We won't mention Dan's private interest. Cool Springs was one of the nicest driving ranges in Western PA. I quit using it after it turned onto an ugly overpriced quagmire.
But the best memory I have of Dan is the way he covered running mate Mark Hart's back, when Labalme and Roycroft crew went after Mark when he was board president.
I wouldn't elect this guy to be head pooper scooper at the new doggie park. My opinion
Those are my opinions for what they're worth.
Obviously,the MTLRC thinks differently.
Oh crap, now that we've alerted the MTLRC about Remely's chances, I hear their fall back candidate is Kubit!
Now that is a funny joke.
To be far, it'll will be interesting to hear Dan's rationale as to why he believes we should send him to Harrisburg.
What's he going to say... look we only missed our projection on the high school project by $18 million dollars or so?
I'm done being a Republican. Roddy is a joke and obviously his lack of leadership is endemic with the local committees.
Even funnier, I hear Tom Stevenson is their fall back candidate after Kubit.
"if I woke up tomorrow with my head sewn to the [change order] carpet, I wouldn't be more surprised than I am now!"
- Clark Griswold
If you don't respect them, why are you still a member of the party?
And after Tom Stevenson, Al Frioni? He has an ax to grind with Miller over the Parking Authority. He's one of the good old boys.
Elaine
12:33 PM, that is a good question. I ask myself that quite a bit.
Elaine
If the MTRC would clean house, I think we would all be better off. That good old boy network is not doing the committee any favors.
Elaine
Sorry, I meant MLRC.
Elaine
Because you believe in the republican principals is why one should stay a member, 11:33. If you walk away then you have no chance of moving the party back to those principals.
But you're right, many locals have walked away.
If only the MLRC would kiss and make up with you Elaine.
Oh, that is a good one! I think Dudley, the dog has a better chance at that, than I would. No, that can't happen because I am not on the committee. But thanks anyway.
Elaine
Maybe if the party would get their act together, adhere to their stated regulations and start getting rid of phonies like Birks and Kubit, more real Republicans would stay. Right now the local group is circling the wagons and licking their wounds. So sad. Don't know who's running the show there because the website is a joke but whoever it is, they're failing. Maybe they can ask Raja to come back since he built up so much support.
Has Dan been fired from his property management job?
11:11 and 12:35 Tom Stevenson is Dan Remely's attorney.
I don't know how Remely or Kubit could possibly believe that their base beyond the MLRC would be excited by either of them. Numerous tax increases, poor management, ridiculous litigation and construction costs millions of dollars over their last set of campaign promises. Oh wait, maybe they would do well in Harrisburg!
Mt. Lebanon Republicans:
Your local committee lists their principles here: link #1
Your local committee lists their leaders here: link #2
If you compare the list of people in link #2 (in particular those shown under "School Board") to the principles listed in link #1 you'll see the problem.
Yeah, they are right on top of things, RG. Sue Rose is no longer on the school board. Mary Birks switched parties and is now a Dem. but hey, if you count the names listed, we are well represented on the SB.
Elaine
We had two republicans that tried to apply the republicans principles on the school board and one currently serving on the commission.
When the two on the school board were under assault by Posti and friends no one from the party including their compatriots on the board stood up for them.
The same goes for Matt on the commission now.
In my opinion thee fact that the party endorsed JoeD over Elaine is another reason to believe the party as a group is brain dead. If they endorse Remely for state rep that will be the final nail in the local party's coffin.
Perhaps the MTLRC is looking at the fact that Remely has won an election. So has Kubit. James Cannon, who tends to be a more hard-line conservative lost badly.
Perhaps the MTLRC looked at the more heavily conservative candidates in the most recent general election--folks such as Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. They can win primaries, but can't win the seats.
The MTLRC knows that an ideologically pure candidate won't win. He/She will pull R votes, but no D votes and a D candidate such as Dan Miller will pull R votes. The election wouldn't even be close.
When the Republican party of Mt Lebanon did not excommunicate those elected Republicans involved in the Taj Mahal school project immediately, they lost all respect I had for them.
When this is one of their primary principals:
"Government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn."
and they clearly have people they helped to elect who violate the primary principals, what does it say about them?
They instead let them run again on the Republican ticket despite the fact they were also running on the Democratic ticket.
Then perhaps the republican committee should reinvestigate whether they are really republicans. Then once they figure that out, think about what is the purpose of running a candidate.
Is it just to win? Count the 'republican's' on the school board - Remely, Kubit, Ostergard, Goldman and Birks (when she ran). The Rs hold the majority, but do you see one vote that represents the republican principles? Did you she one of these candidates even attempt to stand up and argue for the R principles on any decision?
The Rs used to be the majority in MTL voter registration, now they can barely find candidates to run and they don't have a clue as to why?
But there's something else wrong with your observation 2:22.
Matt Kluck (R) ran as a conservative and won. JoeD a liberal R lost. The Remely, Hart, Silhol ticket ran on a conservative platform as did Kubit and Fraasch.
Plus basing anything on the James Cannon III race needs a deeper study to examine the iappeared illegal activities of the PTA and School board ex-president.
2:22
Here is where you miss a little bit.
James Cannon III, James Fraach, Mark Hart and others didn't run on a socially conservative platform and they didn't campaign on abortion, gay marriage, or any of the other hot-button issues that seem to divide many in this country.
These people were FISCAL conservatives. This is the part that is part of the conservative and Republican foundation. They were or are fiscal conservatives that opposed lavish spending on salaries, construction, and anything else not related to the education of our students.
This principle of fiscal restraint is what is lost in the local Republican party. You don't see anyone saying, "Man, if only Cannon would have been more lenient on gay rights he would have won". No, he lost partly because the R committee in Mt. Lebanon waged a campaign against him and in favor of the sitting Ds. Kubit/Remely/Ostergaard all wanted a D to win over fiscal conservative Cannon.
Add to that the PTA mafia organized by Ms. Birks and Posti at the time and you got yourself a successful negative word-of-mouth campaign against a fiscal conservative.
The R's don't want fiscal conservatives. In fact, they will expunge them from their committee if they come across them.
As evidence, you just wait for this next budget discussion. When Klein introduces her 5% tax hike due to reassessments and nary a R on the board says a peep. I think you will have your answer.
Excellent examination, 10:11. Remely also won in the race where Posti nudged out Silhol because he was still touting that he had an $85 million high school plan. His perceived opponent would have been the free spender democrat Rob Garcner, proponent for a $150 million high school.
Had Remely stuck to his guns and not put on that ludicrous dog and pony show comparing a renovation only with the Celli plan he might have a shot at beating Miller for the representative seat.
His apparent born-again republican-conservate play acting regarding change orders only highlights Dan as the chameleon He really is IMO.
Another proof of the deliquent republican principles on the SB.
When they had a free throw to appoint and vote for anyone they chose to fill the vacant seat, whom did they select. A staunch fiscal conservative, a defender of the republican principles?
They could've put in anyone, the public had no say.
No they chose Larry Lebowitz, a guy that gets excited over spending other peoples money and instructing companies on how to get around rules intended to protect American workers.
The republican party in Mt. Lebanon is essentially dead and has too many executives on it's board looking out for their own interest in my opinion.
Remely will have the same problem Raja had. He isn't a bad guy or a liar or anything like that.
He made some extremely poor votes that went against exactly what he is going to promote in his campaign.
Dan R cannot run on fiscal conservatism when he championed a $113 million high school project from the beginning and has voted in favor of every teacher contract and raise that has ever been put before him.
Just like Raja couldn't run on fiscal restraint when he borrowed money to do annual street repair.
Stupid stupid ideology and votes on those topics already did Raja in (perhaps permanently) and will do in Dan R just the same.
12:11 you right, Dan isn't a bad man, but just being a respectivle citizen does not make you a good representative.
I believe you are incorrect though when you say Dan championed a $113 million project from the beginning. I'm certain he campaigned to keep it under $90 million and got on the board in the first place criticizing the runaway change orders and spending ion the elementary building renovations.
1:31
Did Dan Remely vote for or against the Act 34 budget of $113 million?
How can you say he wasn't for it when he actually voted for it. That was a 6-3 vote if I recall correctly and Dan Remely was one of the 6.
Just weeks before that vote he campaigned on doing a $95 million renovation. Then he voted for something $20 million MORE than he campaigned on. The previous poster said he wasn't a liar...but given the weeks apart flip-flop, what is he?
3:20 Please read carefully, I never said Remely never voted for the $113 Million project or against the Act 34 budget.
I was simply point out that when he first got a seat on the school board he camaign on building a less expensive project. In fact if you look back, you'll find he offered the Remely/Silhol plan as an alternative to the Gardner/BOSN-Roycroft girls pursuit of a brand new $150 million dollar plan!
Has he gone along with the everything else you cite, from promoting the $95 million estimate, to voting for the final design and every budget increase, pretty much he has.
Why he changed, I don't know but I no longer consider him the republican flag bearer I voted for.
Dan is the child of a school principal and a teacher.
We will never win until we perge RINO's and modderates and can persent a consistant message. That will eventualy win people over.
Dan Remely either misled the public or was incompetent in controlling the scope of the project. Neither scenario is comforting.
10:24
I don't think its a matter of "purging" any kind of person from the party. What needs to happen is a restoration of and recommittment to fiscally conservative principles.
The tent should be big enough for social moderates who still believe that the greatest threat to the future of our country is the lack of fiscal discipline shown by most elected officials and its constant growth in the size and scope of government..
In my opinion there is room for disagreement within the party on gay marriage, on abortion, the size and scope of government (as long as all agree it should be smaller).
But there can't be disagreement on the fact that this country is going the way of Greece and we need people elected at all levels of government who understand this and commit to a plan to make ourselves better.
6:19, you are incorrect and it's your type of wishy-washy thinking that got the party to where it is now---weak and ineffectual.
What room for disagreement is there on gay marriage exactly? The party is either for it and should act accordingly, or is against it and should do the same. So no, there's no discussion there. Same thing with abortion. Women can't have a kinda sorta half abortion. It's either the whole fetus or none.
The party is a pathetic shaking little shell of what it used to be. The party that gave us Nixon and Reagan is now the party willing to increase taxes on millionaires out of fear? They're giving away ALL leverage? Our local situation is just a reflection of what's happening on a national level.
1:28 sorry to disagree.
There are other positions available in the case of your examples of gay marriage and abortions.
I may oppose abortion, but believe I nor the government have no business imposing my beliefs on someone else.
Same with gay marraige. What gives me the right to force my views on whom someone should love or marry. Maybe we should change the classification from marriage to civil union or legally recognized bonding.
Post a Comment