Fire Co. to buy new tanker

[Guest]

[Guest]

My biggest objection is not to this site in particular, but to the general tone of discourse on the web. Every poster is an expert. Anyone who disagrees is an idiot. There is a mean spiritedness and aggressiveness that none of the posters would maintain in a face to face discussion.

Likewise, the level of vitriol toward the TC and township professionals on this board is never displayed in person. I am not sure what this says about the psychology of people in general, but I don't think it is good.

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

The irony of the tea party movement is that it is supposedly against big government spending yet didn't seem to feel the need to emerge during the decades that Reagan and both Bushes mushroomed our national debt. Even with all the extraordinary spending during Obama's crisis term, a vast majority of our debt was created by Republican presidents. If the Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans have been the debt and spend even bigger party -- consistently spending more, overall, than Democratic Presidents. Clinton even carried a deficit surplus for a while.

So I don't find it at all inconsistent that one could be a Democrat in Cranbury and be against unnecessary spending initiatives. That doesn't make them a tea bagger. That makes them consistent with the Democratic tradition of spending less. It is only a minority of Democrats, especially NJ politicians, who like to freely spend as if our tax dollars are bottomless.

[Guest]

[Guest]

But according to Mayor Stouts endorsement if you voted for Jay then you must be of an "extreme political ideology".

Which I can say I am not since I am a registered democrat who voted for James and who will not be voting for Mayor Stout when he runs again.

It's Mayor Stouts "extreme political ideology" that has hurt our town over the last many years and he is the reason we even have half the issues we have.


For the record both James Taylor and David Cook have been doing a fine job for our town so far.

[Guest]

[Guest]

Another example of the snotty tone on this thread. I actually agree with little bits of the last two posters though I hate the tone of the posts.

As we see both parties move to placate their most extreme elements we see no ability to compromise. The teabaggers go after any republican who isn't sufficiently "conservative" by their somewhat questionable definition of conservative. Meanwhile the left wing of the democratic party drives Evan Bayh into retirement because he isn't "progressive" enough, again by some made up definition of progressive.

As a result both parties cater to their bases. We have gridlock on legislation, or worse, wild swings, from one extreme in legislation to another as one party gains power and cudgels the other.

How does this post relate to Cranbury? I see a lot of anger on the thread usually directed at TC members or township professionals. Little of this has actual solutions proposed, mostly ranting. Maybe it serves as a type of therapy to the poster, but I see little value to it beyond this. Case in point, I don't care what Menendez's talking points are.

[Guest]

There is a very small minority of residents in town who believe party affiliation is first and primary for all their actions. They believe their party and ideas and only their party and ideas is right so anything contrary is simply unacceptable. This is true for Republicans and Democrats, libertarians and progressives.

There is a vast majority in town that sees a middle ground where it is important to have people who are qualified and who represent the interests of residents. These people are Democrats, Republicans and Independents, but in the end they don't care who is doing the work as long as they are working in the town interests.

Unfortunately, we have seen more control of the town and a vocal small minority group who believe in party first, second and third. As though managing the town is a contest. We won so our party controls things and you lost so stop whining. That is the problem. Elections in Cranbury should not be won or lost based on political party. I really believe that the majority of people vote in an election for the best people not for the party they represent. If it means Democrats or Republicans are the majority party so be it. It should not matter.

We also see a very small, but vocal contingent who will do everything they can to support this group of ardent party followers. If you disagree with us, you are the problem. When someone takes stand and says this is not right, then they evoke the party politics again as a defense.

The fact is, people don't want politics involved in Cranbury. They don't want elected officials labeling people as extremists because they are not in their political party which is the sole reason for the statements. This shows more about the person making the statement then it does the person running. They want people who work together in the big scheme of things to help the town.

[Guest]

Exactly.

Back when Win Cody was running for office someone sent a letter in the Press saying they were a Democrat but voting for him and suggesting party politics shouldn't matter in a local Township election, that we were a small town and neighbors first. The next week someone else published a response to it saying party affiliation absolutely mattered and should be the basis for how people voted for Cranbury positions. I'm a Democrat but that response sealed my vote for Win. If it is true that the Mayor really refuses to appoint anyone who isn't a Democrat to volunteer township positions and that Richard Stannard really did praise Linda Greenstein during a Township meeting for abstaining in a vote on COAH as has been posted here then that is deeply disappointing. It saddens me to hear local residents who seem more interested in either broken party than doing what's right for their neighbors.

[Guest]

How about we move the politacal discussions to a more appropriate topic and keep this one about the Fire Co. new tanker.

[Guest]

What color will it be?