Re: Yearning for Disneyland? -- Columbia County Talk

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

Subject: Re: Yearning for Disneyland?

Author:
Thomas Koulos

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:32:01 07/27/05 Wed
In reply to: Ned Depew 's message, "Yearning for Disneyland?" on 11:04:53 07/27/05 Wed

Ned,Get your facts straight.We advocated and still advocate a balanced econmic tax base that's inclusive and not NIMBY oriented to meet local,regional and international needs.The FoH Stretagies to kill the SLC Replacement Proposal with their blame game devisive tactics are reaping the consequences of their short sightness as they go about looking for government subsidies to fund all the projects.
What are the City's,Towns,County,State and National PRIORITIES?With all the EXPERT PLANERS working for your City,Towns,State,and the Nation the hodge podge of their experties are at our doorstep with outstretched hands blaming each other for the mess they and their political allies have placed us in.But what's the use of Gene,Londa,I and others trying to open your eyes, ears and minds to the realities that confront any one willing to face the mud slinging that has made the exploiters of the POLITICALLY CORRECT Hype by promising undelivarable pie in the sky solutions to get elected and political appointments to their supporters.
Go talk to Sammy Boy,The Publishers of our local media,etc. who have all the answers on how to devide the community and milk the system.Tom Koulos

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> Subject: Facts? Straight? Tom? Which one doesn't belong?

Author:
Ned Depew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:03:54 07/28/05 Thu

Tom -

It is deliciously ironic that you urge someone else to get their facts straight!

You and other SLC advocates continued to urge acceptance of the SLC proposal even when dozens of individuals from various other economic segments of the economy, from manufacturers like Kaz and H.A.V.E. to the many small farms that have started up in the area to hospitality businesses, real estate professionals and many others all testified that they had reason to beleive (based on what had happened in other places) that their businesses would be damaged by the SLC project.

You clearly didn't care what happened to anyone but SLC. You were looking forward (and backward) - as you told us many times - to the new "good old days" when Cement Company payrolls dominated the regional economy, and you reminded us of how "prosperous" Hudson was in the 1940s and 50s, when it was nothing but a "Company Town."

Neither you nor HVEEC (which fell completely apart when its one issue - advocacy of the SLC proposal - went south) ever made any proposals for a "balanced economy" or advocated any such thing. You made a fool of yourself stumbling over your own words to try to argue in favor of that poorly-planned, poorly-executed proposal and now you want to re-write history to try to pretend that that did not happen. But it did.

It was not FoH that killed the SLC proposal, it was the New York State Department of State - as part of the very "process" of review by State Agencies that you and Gene and others urged us to "trust" to do the right thing.

Then, when it did the right thing, you suddenly no longer "trust" it yourselves or support "the process," but insist it has been corrupted by "politics." That is just another laughable attempt by you to save face. But anyone who has been paying the slightest attention knows better.

Until you come up with some positive proposals of your own - instead of just calling others names and criticizing others' efforts - you will be seen as nothing more than a self-important loudmouth, desperately trying to get attention any way you can.

I know you are better than that Tom, and I hope you will rise above that impluse and bring your considerable insight and expereience to bear on coming up with solutions (not simply bemoaning others' lack of them) to our problems.

[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Facts? Straight? Tom? Which one doesn't belong?

Author:
Thomas Koulos
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:36:54 07/28/05 Thu

Fact.you may be looking for a POLITICAL APPOINTMENT since you are not running for Publi Office and by the way I and others read your defensive hype of the FoH devisive rhetoric that you have been feeding us.The voters can accept or reject the proposed NIMBY PLANS because they and the rest of us have to live with the consequences of their votes.
As Gene,Londa,I and others have stated with our names on the record that too is a matter of HISTORY we stand by our opinions while the powers to be try to stifle ours with their so called United Commuinity rhetoric PATRONS.
A 42 year proffesional REPORTER was astounded at the lengths that the R.S. has gone to keep my and others views from being published by firing two of their well known reporters.While they think they have pulled the wool over our eyes,these and other revalations will come back to haunt them.Tom Koulos