Now is the Time to Renew

Posted by Patrick D. Burk on January 17, 2009 - 1:32pm
Tagged in
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friend

I have not been on the Batavian in some time and I must say that I do miss it.  Since it's inception it has allowed many people in this area a chance to speak thier mind and to inform us of issues and ideas.  With all that being said, and perhaps in an effort to keep my thoughts simple, I would like to just say that the awe inspiring rescue from Hudson hs given me time to reflect and renew.  It did prove two things to me:  ONE - People can and will reach out to help others in need.  The very basis of people helping people was proven in the most populous city in our nation.  TWO - Prepartion is the key and you need to prepare with your heart.   How many of us are sure that we would jump into freezing 35 degree water to help others in peril.  Not only do we need to prepare with our minds, strength and equipment, but we need to prepare with our heart.  Plan & simple.

Lastly, It is time that we all stood up and told the naysayers to take a hike.  I have already heard several nasty  things against President Obama and the Democrat led nation that is about to be a  reality.  To those who wish to unleash this nastiness, please realize that "what goes around - comes around".  It is a time that we give our new leaders a chance to govern and yes, to change.  Don't count them out or damn them to failure before anything is tried or accomplished....  As always, as good Americans....we need to give all our leaders a chance.

Thanks for listening....and here's to a more successful year.

 

 

Posted by Russ Stresing on January 17, 2009 - 7:47pm
"Preparation is the key and you need to prepare with your heart."

"And you need to prepare your heart"

I'm considering that a collaboration and keeping it as a quote.
Posted by Lorie Longhany on January 17, 2009 - 7:59pm
History in the making. Just watched President-elect Obama's arrival by train to Union Station in Washington. Something about a train. Soothes the soul.

Glad you're back, Pat!
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 17, 2009 - 8:43pm
This is like a pre-Super Bowl celebration if you already know your team wins.
Posted by Wayne Speed on January 18, 2009 - 8:20am
I am hoping and praying that President Obama will lead this country well and that God will bless him.

Your remark that "what goes around comes around" is interesting. When does going around begin? President Bush has been thoroughly torn apart at every turn by the opposition. Does that mean that President Obama should receive that same treatment from his opposition? Probably so, but I hope that conservatives will be more kind to him and the Democrats than what they have received themselves.
Posted by Dave Olsen on January 18, 2009 - 12:32pm
HI Pat; I take your point about giving our new leaders a chance. Granted, the guy has even been sworn in yet. But, if we don't hold their feet to the fire, they start doing what they want instead of what they were elected to do. Mr. Obama has already started back-pedaling on his campaign promises. He has said that it may take up to 4 years to close Guantanamo, and we have to be cautious about getting our people out of Iraq. Please, do not let this guy off the hook. He told this country that he was the best person for the job and would straighten out our problems, and then during his interview last Sunday with George Stephanopolous, he said that he's not going to be able to implement policies on the same timetable as promised(paraphrase). He also said he's not going to make judgements based on his own campaign rhetoric. Anyone with any sense at all knew that during the campaign, but if he knew it, why didn't he just say so. I'll answer my own question; because he knew he had to stretch the truth if not outright lie to get elected. Now, don't get me wrong, I want to see his administration succeed in getting the economy better, ending war, protecting the homeland and improving everyone's quality of life here in the US. But. he just seems like another politician, who thinks it's OK to bullshit the American people in order to get elected and then do what he wants and the heck with us who aren't in the loop. I have never wanted to be wrong more.
Posted by Patrick D. Burk on January 18, 2009 - 2:20pm
I am just a guy who thinks that all of our leaders deserve a break. I dislike the Ann Coulters of the world that preach hate and nastiness. I dont remember people implying anything about GWB because of his name, his education, his skin color or his financial situation. That has happened so frequently with this past election cycle. I just think it is time for us all to take a deep breath and renew. Give him some time to work on what he feels is important and then judge the outcome. Look to the miracle of the Hudson River and know that we truly as a people can indeed be great citizens of this world.

In response to Mr. Olsen, Guatanamo will close and we will do what has to be done to achieve that....BUT....have you ever started a job and then realized it may be tougher to finish it than you originally thought? That does not make you a backpeddler it only makes you flexible to finish what you said you would do rather than abandon a job or idea. I also feel he did not outright lie to get elected. He made promises. Since he is not in the job yet, lets see what he can or can not accomplish before we through the "lie" word around.

I thank you all for your comments.

"We need to prepare with our heart."
Posted by Patrick D. Burk on January 18, 2009 - 2:24pm
Throw not through.... as in "before we throw the "lie" word around. I should watch my spelling.

Thanks again....... PB
Posted by Dave Olsen on January 18, 2009 - 3:18pm
I really dislike Ann Coulter et al as well. I'm also glad to see Bush go. Yes, I have started a job and realized it was going to be tougher than I thought. I just think the way our elected officials act and become isolated from reality is what really needs to change, and Mr. Obama ran on that platform. I promise to give him a chance before I make up my mind. Also, I'm willing, as are most people I believe, to "sacrifice" or contribute somehow to helping the common good. However, President elect Obama and Gov. Paterson, among others, are saying we all have to share in the sacrifice, and I say, OK, what are YOU giving up? This inauguration celebration is costing more than any other ever has when we are in economic straits. The reason is given by the media, that this is necessary so everyone will feel like they're a part of it. I'd rather have the new President take his oath and go to work, since it's more daunting than he thought. I'm not seeing much "change" so far. Anyway, I really do wish him and all our leaders well. Thanks for sharing your opinion.
Posted by John Roach on January 18, 2009 - 3:21pm
Pat,
You were almost right. Liberals jumped on GWB for his education and money from day one. To deny the hate that many of them displayed from day one would be a lie. But it should not be repeated.

Obama deserves a break, but many on the other side will say time for a payback.

I say give Obama a chance, he won.
Posted by Jerry Buckman on January 18, 2009 - 4:05pm
Find Ann Coulter offensive? Check out this lovely site and compare with Ann's worst rants: www.democraticunderground.com.

I'm with John above. Obama won and gets a chance.
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 19, 2009 - 1:46pm
In all fairness Mr. Roach, liberals jumped all over GWB's education because he was a terrible student at a school he would never have gotten into if he didn't have the family legacy.

Conversely, the Republicans this year were attacking Barack Obama because he was apparently too smart....
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 19, 2009 - 4:47pm
Burk said,In response to Mr. Olsen, Guatanamo will close and we will do what has to be done to achieve that.

My question is why? and if closed should we bring the blood thirsty killers to America and if we do will you let them enroll in Batavia Government Schools? or maybe letting these killers of Americans move in with you and your family first, just to see how it goes.
Or is it just another liberal democrart flagging his arms and crying over a new victim group for us to deal with.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 5:02pm
Chris,
Go back and check your facts. His grades were not too bad and about the same as Al Gore's. By the way, we will never know if Gore got into school because his of his dad also.

Point is, after the election, even if you didn't like the result, they never gave Bush the break they want for Obama.

But then neither side they will play fair, did they?
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 19, 2009 - 5:16pm
Moving detainees from Guantanamo into prisons on US soil is not the same as setting them free and allowing them to , as you say, 'enroll in Batavia Government Schools.'

Bringing them here WOULD give them a right to due process of law and, while I'm sure many on this site would disagree with me on this point, I think it is of the utmost importance that we treat these people fairly.

By granting them due process we, as a nation and as a culture, will be setting an example for the rest of the world.

Being respectful is akin to being respectable.
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 19, 2009 - 5:20pm
No, Bush's grades weren't that bad, but they weren't quite Presidential either.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 5:31pm
For however unfair the early criticism of George Bush's intelligence might seem to some of the Republican commenters, how fair does it look in hindsight? And before anyone brags about how safe from a major attack he kept us, I offer that his presidency started 9 months before 9/11. "Ok, except for that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?"
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 5:50pm
Russ,
Sort of like Jimmy Carter, who was a great student. He had great grades and had a horrible presidency. Horrible economy and the Iran Hostage disgrace.True, after leaving office he did well, but not while in the White House.

You never know when they start out how they will do. On paper, Truman should have never have done well. But he did and is now considered one of the greats.

On paper, Obama should do well, but we’ll wait and see.
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 19, 2009 - 5:51pm
Chris said,Bringing them here WOULD give them a right to due process of law and, while I'm sure many on this site would disagree with me on this point, I think it is of the utmost importance that we treat these people fairly.

Thats where you are flawed in your education. ONLY AMERICANS have rights in this country not these killers of Americans and should not be entitled to our court system. You let them step foot on US soil you will never get rid of them. The dems will make sure we give them food stamps, welfare, education, legal fees then the right to vote.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 5:59pm
Ok, I don't care if you're a human Stretch Armstrong doll, you can't begin to make the reach to equate Carter's presidency with Bush's. Carter inherited a country that was still staggering after the Vietnam War and the Nixon presidency while Bush took office when we hadn't been involved in major military action for decades and the federal budget was running a surplus. One was a lackluster performance while the other was an enthusiastic piloting of the Titanic into the iceberg like it was a speedboat.
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 19, 2009 - 6:08pm
Bob, all questions about the quality of my education aside, I urge you to grab a copy of the United States Constitution and read it carefully. The only rights limited to citizens by the Constitution are the right to vote and the right to run for Congress or President. All other rights are afforded to 'persons', 'people', or 'the accused.'
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 6:14pm
Russ,
The hate never stops does it? At least we agree Obama should be given the benefit of a doubt and wish him well.

Going back to another topic. Do you finally have the courage to say if you think requiring some city employees to live in the City while others are exempt, is fair?

Do you favor the idea of, or the concept of, or in principle, the merger/consolidation of the Town and City of Batavia? You have avoided answering for almost a week.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 6:20pm
What hate?

And John, not to belabor the point, but you ain't the boss of me.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 6:30pm
Russ,
"you ain't the boss of me". What, still not willing to give an opinion. Hiding are we?
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 6:32pm
"We"? You got a mouse in your pocket?
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 6:43pm
Russ,
That’s the best you can do?

I told said you were easy. You’re still afraid to give an opinion. That’s ok; some people just can’t take a stand, or even say they don’t care. In your case, you can’t do any of the above.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 6:46pm
No, not the best I can do. Just all I need to do.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 6:48pm
Nice dodge, just doesn't work.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 6:49pm
Works for me.
Posted by Charlie Mallow on January 19, 2009 - 8:03pm
Why don't you give each other a break? I know you both and your both good people. You just don't know each other. Take it from me, you both have much more in common than you think.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 8:12pm
Nope.

My heart and efforts and feelings go out to people who accept different ways of belief and faith (or lack thereof), and who entertain that they might not hold the keys to ultimate truth. My respect goes out to people who entertain moments of self-doubt and intellectual curiosity.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 8:32pm
Charlie,
That's his way of saying he can't take a stand or give an opinion on very simple things related to the of the City. Since he is a member of the Dem. Party City Committee, I expected more from him. I was wrong.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 8:39pm
You generally are, John.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 8:41pm
Nice try, but you are still too easy. Why hide?
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 8:43pm
You generally are, John.

"related to the of the City"
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 8:44pm
Russ,
Try this one, it might not be too hard.

Should members of City volunteer Boards and Committees be appointed by the City Manager or by Council members?
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 8:48pm
"Pull my finger".

John,
However much you might embrace yelling at clouds from your porch swing, you don't get to define every argument.
Posted by John Roach on January 19, 2009 - 8:50pm
Another dodge from you. I just wanted to have you on record as hiding.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 8:51pm
Boo
Posted by Ken Toal on January 19, 2009 - 9:55pm
It does not matter if anyone takes a stand or not, the city just side steps the issue, or changes the rules in their favor!
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 19, 2009 - 10:13pm
You need to prove me wrong then but in all means please tell me what section and article of the US Constitution where the enemy is given the same rights as an American.
There could some protection for some under the Constitution
when certain treaties sign by our government could come in play, but I don`t remember any terrorist group signing any treaties in the last 8 yrs. Before 9/11 President Clinton tried to bring criminal charges against our enemies and it did not work, these killers are not worried about our court system. I don`t even blame Clinton for this, he and the rest of country did not know how bad these terrorist wanted to kill Americans at the time.
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 19, 2009 - 10:17pm
You need to prove me wrong then but in all means please tell me what section and article of the US Constitution where the enemy is given the same rights as an American.
There could some protection for some under the Constitution
when certain treaties sign by our government could come in play, but I don`t remember any terrorist group signing any treaties in the last 8 yrs. Before 9/11 President Clinton tried to bring criminal charges against our enemies and it did not work, these killers are not worried about our court system. I don`t even blame Clinton for this, he and the rest of country did not know how bad these terrorist wanted to kill Americans at the time.

Don`t now why this post twice? only hit the save tab once,sorry
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 10:23pm
"Posted by Bob Drewinski
You need to prove me wrong then but in all means please tell me what section and article of the US Constitution where the enemy is given the same rights as an American.
There could some protection for some under the Constitution
when certain treaties sign by our government could come in play, but I don`t remember any terrorist group signing any treaties in the last 8 yrs. Before 9/11 President Clinton tried to bring criminal charges against our enemies and it did not work, these killers are not worried about our court system. I don`t even blame Clinton for this, he and the rest of country did not know how bad these terrorist wanted to kill Americans at the time. "

Bob,
What's your native language?
Posted by Howard Owens on January 19, 2009 - 10:52pm
Bob, you don't blame Clinton, but the truth is, Clinton faced two challenges in taking more aggressive action. One was GOP opposition, which claimed a principled stand against "nation building" and "aggression" at the time, and Monica Lewisnsky, which uncut his popular support to take action.

The second item squarely falls on Clinton's shoulders, but the first item is a clear example of what is wrong with this country -- where partisanship takes priority over principle.

And I say that as somebody who is now a non-interventionist. But clearly, the GOP applied two different standards -- apposing Clinton's neo-con foreign policy and then turning around and supporting many of the same policies and programs under Bush.

If Clinton/Gore had received the same GOP support as Bush, we would have invaded Iraq long before 1993, long before 9/11.

I use this as an example not to support invasion by either Clinton or Bush but to illustrate the hypocrisy of partisanship.
Posted by Russ Stresing on January 19, 2009 - 11:08pm
Howard,

Horseshit.

Bush gained office with the support of people who had years earlier authored a letter to Clinton that supported the invasion of Iraq. Clinton ignored that letter.

Bush ignored warnings from his own national security briefings that specifically mentioned that terrorist organizations were working on plans to use commercial airliners to terrorize American cities.

Clinton's neo-con foreign policy? Honest to god, Howard, do you read what you write?
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 19, 2009 - 11:09pm
Show or tell me the section of the Constitution and remember 1776 the nation was formed on laws for its citizens at the time against King George. Not to give terrorist freedoms under our laws.
Posted by John Roach on January 20, 2009 - 6:47am
Russ, you're are a Dem. party hack.
Your hate is coming out again. Your guys never, ever, do any wrong and Bush is always evil.

Clinton let OBL go when he had the chance to have him handed over.

As the 9-11 hearing showed, Clinton let his people write rules that would not let the FBI work with the CIA. Did that help or hurt this country (Another question for you to run from)?

But to cut Clinton a break, if he knew what his actions or lack of actions would help cause years later, I would bet he would have made changes. You would have to be a special kink of stupid to think either Clinton or Bush wanted 9-11.

And before you go off on another one of your fits, I am not a Bush supporter, but I am more honest than you.

Howard is right.
Posted by Howard Owens on January 20, 2009 - 7:36am
No name calling.
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 20, 2009 - 9:50am
Bob, if you're absolutely sure that every prisoner in Guantanamo is the enemy then what's the problem with giving them a fair trial. If you're right then they'll all be found guilty and put to death.

Of course if evidence against them was gained through torture (which I'm almost positive you support) none of it will be admissible in a court of law. Oh what a tangled web we weave.
Posted by Chris Charvella on January 20, 2009 - 9:53am
One other thing: It was the Declaration of Independence that was written in defiance of King George, not the Constitution.

The Constitution, if you were unaware, is the law of the land.
Posted by Robert Drewinski on January 20, 2009 - 12:02pm
Just show me the area in the Constitution where it says we have to provide fair trials to the terrorist. And stop doing the liberal democrat spin on everything,just answer the first question. If we as Americans need to have some 3 world nation torture a few scumbags to save even 1 liberal democrat American I still would support it. Remember democrats only have power when the middle class have jobs.Someday the well will run dry and you only have yourselves to blame.