Can "Needless" Lowey Be Beaten?

I believe the answer is finally, yes! I received a mailing from her, probably the groundwork for other, future mailings as we approach the November Elections, where she claims she is lowering taxes for Westchester residents. Wow! It's an amazing piece of (false) advertising. If she keeps saying it enough, eventually even she will be able to believe it. But you shouldn't. She is one of the premier tax-and-spend representatives we have. 

The Republicans should be able to pick up a few political seats this November. Previous elections have been in favor of the Democrats. It's proven counter-productive, removing balance and proportionality from the creation of law and the tax-and-spend part of responsible and responsive government. We see this in many cities, towns and villages. My first hand account of a one-party debacle in high gear is the Town of Greenburgh. To read more, go to: ABetterGreenburgh.blogspot.com.

The Republican field of candidates hoping to defeat "Needless" Lowey has been huge. The order of appearance at the first Forum held for these potential challengers was Alexander Block, Mark Rosen, Patrick Whalen, Jim Russell, Paul Wasserman,  and Patrick Gillespie. During the forum, Patrick Whalen surprised everyone when he announced at the end of his half hour speech that his "advisors" recommended it wasn't the right time for him, so he dropped out. You're killing me Pat - why wait so long and drag this out if you plan to quit?Since then, Mark Rosen also dropped out siting his possible military reserve recall. Of the current batch of candidates, the only two viable candidates seem to be Jim Russell and Paul Wasserman.

I think Rosen may have seen the race as too difficult even though he seemed to have the unofficial backing of the Westchester Republican party. They circled the wagons and dismissed the other candidates. It was evident at the forum held in Hastings. When Rosen spoke, they were all in the room, then half the room disappeared when the others spoke. Even if the deal was done, shouldn't the party faithful have given the courtesy of listening to all the candidates? Certainly.

When Russell and Wasserman spoke, they spoke of issues. And, Russell had more of a tangible command of the issues. The republicans should back Russell. But, they'll probably go with Wasserman, the former democrat-now-turned-republican, because he has money and can raise more. Russell doesn't have that going for him. They never ask what someone brings to the party and what the party can do for them, only how much money they have. That's a sad commentary on our political process, regardless of party.

In the end, between T.E.A. party-goers, frustrated Americans, dishonest politicians, politicians who beat their wives and so much more, it's time for Albany to get some real change, positive role models and a tax system that offers not only to take huge amounts of your money, but to use it wisely.