When these two young chuckle-heads are given equal time, Luke Ravenstahl comes off sounding like Cicero.##
Tony Oliva (L) seemed like an intelligent, reasonable, impressive young man -- who has not a single interesting thing to say.
We get the impression he would seek to lower our taxes, but we still have absolutely no idea how he would pay for it, and we have no clue how he would address this through our state oversight entities.
He evidently did not prepare well-enough to have command of any major issues. He was always playing catch-up, and meandering around for his answers. He did not put forward any fleshed-out plans or programs. [striken]
Ryan Scott (SW) seemed like an intelligent, passionate, impressive young man -- who had not a single thing to say in answer to any question.
Ending the Cuban embargo is one of his campaign's "central demands": hands off Cuba. He wants to improve public safety by keeping the police out of the neighborhoods. He wants to handle our pensions crisis by seeking justice for the Jena Six.
His politics are not the problem. If he is running for mayor, and he is invited to share the stage at a major civic forum, he should have the courtesy to learn something about the questions he will be asked, and to answer them.
There are ways he could have gotten his radical message across, without totally blowing off everything central to the task of managing the City of Pittsburgh today. He was a clown.
We have nothing against Mr. Oliva and Mr. Scott appearing on the ballot. We have no problem with their having taken part in this last, most recent forum. We certainly have no problem with them campaigning throughout the neighborhoods in the coming month.
We have no need to see them in another serious debate. Get them off the stage. They are detracting from what could be a very important and serious discussion.
It was so embarrassing. Whatever Scott was asked, the first words out of his mouth were mumblings about the Jena Six.
ReplyDeleteBeing as Luke, Scott and Oliva are close to the same age (closer than DeSantis), Luke looks mature and on top of it compared to those two. Especially the Socialist.
I bet Luke fights tooth and nail to have Frick and Frack appear everywhere.
Shades of Santorum and the Green Party?
ReplyDeleteAgreed, and its good to see they are not on the stage tonight. No idea why Rauterkus gave up his place on the ballet for Oliva. At least we know that Rauterkus would have had plenty to say. . He has the answers for every issue out there you know.
ReplyDeleteBram, you're wrong.
ReplyDeleteI am so sure of this, that I'll post a real reply on my blog.
"He was a clown."
ReplyDeleteHysterically funny. And they say *I"m* condescending . . .
I'm with Bram - these guys are not serious about running for mayor. Tony talked about changing things but he offered up ZERO suggestions or idea. Scott was on another planet as far as the issues were concerned.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite was when he said the corporations hope their employees die so that they do not have to pay them.
The quality of these particular third-party candidates is not the issue. The issue is whether they appear on the ballot, and they do. I understand they don't have a shot in hell of winning, but the history of this city over the past 70 years suggests that Mark DeSantis doesn't either. It shouldn't be a criteria for participating in the debates.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Jonathan. That's why I had no problem with their participation in that first major debate. But from then on, I think "are you making any sense up there?" and "are you adding anything to the discussion?" are appropriate litmus tests.
ReplyDeleteWow, you guys don't like democracy and free speech very much do you?
ReplyDeleteBram - what right, sir, do you have to demand the exclusion of other points of view? Who gets to decide which are "acceptable"? One thing is for sure, it won't be you. Or me. Or anyone who shares any of the concerns of "normal" people. These decisions would soon be made by the moneyed elite, if they aren't already. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
So let's see, where has this two-party duopoly gotten our city?
We are one of only a few cities in the whole country that is *losing* population (and has one of the oldest), one of the most heavily taxed, and we owe a billion+ dollars. We will not be able to tax our way out of this, we must grow, and this means for instance, opposing the "Pour Tax".
Tony Oliva is indeed a serious candidate, he is a smart and capable man, and is doing his best to address the issues. Since he is not part of the power structure, it's a little more difficult for him to cite specific budget items he would cut for example, as Shultz seems to expect.
Plus, it's a little hard to relay an entire platform when given 3 minutes to speak at the end of a debate as an afterthought.
But you don't have to specify the exact number of degrees to say "Turn the car around" do you?
This country was made great by having a diversity of ideas, and I hope you folks will give other points of view more of a chance in the future.
-Dave Powell
Chairman, Libertarian Party of Allegheny county
Dave,
ReplyDeleteListen to Tony Oliva on the Honz's show. He has no idea of how city government works. When asked what expenses he would trim from the city's budget he mentioned the North Shore Connector project. He has either has no clue or has not spent much time preparing for the race. He needs to spend less time campaigning at bars on the Southside and more time hitting the books.
shultz - why is cutting the North Shore connector project a bad way to trim the city's budget? Out of $435 (1999 dollars)our share is ~$60-80 million...for 1.6 miles of subway?
ReplyDeleteThat would pay all the cops or firemen or *gasp* reduce the deficit of the pension fund.
This would be a bad idea? IMO let the sports fans walk...