Dems’ talk of doing away with Bennett just like bad old times

Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Text Size: A | A

Dems’ talk of doing away with Bennett just like bad old times

Kudos to Kathleen Moore, whose article, “Democrats mull axing Bennett,” on the morning after Hurricane Sandy missed us, told of the real storm that hit our city on Oct. 30.

Imagine the majority of the Schenectady City Council members secretly contemplating the ouster of the most progressive influence on the Schenectady Police Department in years — [Public Safety Commissioner] Wayne Bennett!

I’m a big supporter of our police and fireman, but when one of them is being a bad citizen, the citizens have a right to know. Whether it’s really about cost savings on a tight budget (“penny wise” to “no savings”) or about the majority members courting the powerful PBA, the very idea is wrong.

It’s taken a long time to improve the image of the department. Not having Bennett preside over public misconduct hearings having to do with illegal activities [would be] a return to the bad old days. It appears that this is the culture the council majority misses. Concessions for votes. Secret political meetings on public time.

I don’t know if it’s ignorance, arrogance or both, but I’ll be voting against all council incumbents this time around.

Thanks again, Kathleen! It was front-page news, but at least I found it, on Page B7!

Dan Cole


Sandy’s message: burning coal is not the answer

Global warming had dropped off the radar [before] Hurricane Sandy. Global warming skeptics will argue for coincidence, but it was no coincidence that the Gulf Stream was some six degrees warmer than normal. Is this a harbinger of things to come?

You will note how actively the coal industry is pushing coal with repetitive ads promoting “clean” coal; they don’t mention global warming in those. What is the solution to our energy dependence? Let’s drill for oil, mine coal and frack for gas. Never mind that burning 100 years’ of natural gas is the same as burning 50 years’ worth of coal — hardly a stellar sales pitch when you realize that all available carbon-based fuels will be experiencing increased consumption for decades.

Opponents of President Obama criticize his administration’s support for solar giant Solyndra; what the Romney campaign ignores is that the Chinese were “dumping” state-sponsored solar panels into the American market. In a $1.5 billion anti-trust lawsuit Solyndra states, “The lawsuit . . . alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy among Suntech, Trina, Yingli, their suppliers, banks and the Chinese government to destroy Solyndra and the U.S. solar industry by flooding the market with cheap photovoltaic cells.”

Would a President Romney support Solyndra’s fight against the Chinese?

Richard Moody Jr.


A lot of red tape to opt out of yard waste fee

With regard to the need to go through the notarization process to opt out of the Niskayuna yard waste fee, I believe [Supervisor] Joe Landry is being disingenuous when he states the reason for it is to ensure that it is the residents themselves who are opting out [Oct. 30 Gazette].

Does he really believe that anyone would go around filing forms to deny the service to a neighbor? And if someone did, wouldn’t it become apparent right away to whoever was duped?

The real reason is, as Town Board member Jonathan McKinney stated, it makes “it harder for residents to opt out.” If Landry was really interested in making things easier for residents to opt out, he should at least mention that Town Hall is full of notaries, so people could save a trip to a bank and/or a stamp by doing everything there.

Also, why is a notarized signature needed every year when the form is filed for the same property as the previous year?

William Wray


Don’t attempt to mix science with politics

In a Nov. 2 letter, Darrell Roeters questions why someone has “to show their political agenda” in the Oct. 20 Mini Page article about sugar maples.

The [article’s] comment was, “if the climate keeps getting warmer, sugar maples may no longer thrive.” I fail to see a political agenda there. I see a comment from an industry group on the fragile balance of the plants we rely on for food and the environment they grow in.

The writer refers to “the Sans Model,” and the fact that global climate has large changes without human carbon dioxide emissions. I don’t know what the “Sans Model” is but I can’t argue with that comment either.

But I thank the writer for bringing to light the fact that food sources, such as sugar maples, are in enough of a struggle without our carbon dioxide emissions.

If everyone, including the writer, kept this discussion in the scientific arena and out the political arena, we would all be better off.

Rick Lavigne


Letters Policy

The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.

There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.

All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.

Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.

For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.

For more letters, visit our website:

Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit


November 7, 2012
8:23 a.m.
gina99 says...

Dan Cole-You got your answer. Mayor McCarthy's hand picked Council person easily was re-elected. Until two party government returns to City Hall, with some checks and balances, nothing can improve and our taxes will continue to sky rocket. All 3 Council seats must go non-Democrat next year.

November 7, 2012
10:57 p.m.
JLibertarian says...

Richard Moody Jr., I don't understand why so many people still believe in man-made climate change (global warming). It has been debunked and proven to be just a political idea. There is a highly respected meteorologist named Joe Bastardi who used to work for Accuweather but now works for WeatherBell Analytics LLC as a Chief Forecaster. He also worked at Penn State where a lot of this global warming fallacy was generated.

He says that Hurricane Sandy was a result of the Atlantic Ocean being warm like it was in the 1950's when there were far many more Atlantic east coast storms than today. He asserts that the world was likely warmer in the 1930s than today, that human contribution of carbon dioxide is too small to have any effect, and warming is caused by sun spots and exchange with warmer oceans. Bastardi has also argued that carbon dioxide cannot cause global warming, because this would violate the first law of thermodynamics. He expects that over the next 30 years, the global average temperature will return to levels seen in the late-1970s due to a so-called "triple-crown of cooling" comprising oceanic temperature cycles, solar radiation cycles, and volcanism.

As as 53 year old who grew up in the 60's and 70's, I remember those years as cold and snowy in the winters and cool in the summer. Back then they were talking about another ice age because of pollution. Then it was changed to warming and now it is just called climate change because they neither cooling or heating has taken place. There hasn't been any so-called warming in 16 years. You should all realize that the earth is a living planet. There are volcanoes (both above ground and under the sea) and earthquakes. In fact, the Japan earthquake shifted that island country and move the earth's axis. What I am trying to say is the earth's climate is not constant and is affected by many things, the least of which is man-kind.

Log-in to post a comment.

columnists & blogs

Log into

Forgot Password?