Friday, September 29, 2006


Sue Kelly's slap down in Somers...

As most people know, the League of Women Voters is a non-partisan group. Indeed, it's the very first thing you see when you Google the group. For the past few weeks, the Somers chapter of the LWV has been trying to get Sue Kelly to commit to a debate at the Somers Library on Oct. 16. Though they've sent three invitations, Sue hasn't had the courtesy to respond, according to this item on the Journal News's political blog.

As the JoNews noted, local LMV members are miffed at Kelly's rudeness. "It's disgusting," said Carol Fox, who serves as voter services chairwoman. So how do Kelly's folks respond? By anonymously attacking LMV members as "bitties" (we think the poster meant to say biddies) who are a "bunch of rich and/or retired self important busy body do-gooders." Needless to say, Sue's valiant defender declined to provide his real name.

"the League of Women Voters is a non-partisan group" - Take19

Keep telling yourself that, doesn't mean it will become the truth.

Here are a few interesting questions to ponder that present a very serious challenge to that statement:

Why is it that whenever the voter registration for the LWV moderators/questioners for these debates is searched they always show up as being registered Democrats?

And why is it, if this group is so "non-partisan" that whenever fmr. and current members run for office they always do so as Democrats?

And why is it that the leader of this "non-partisan" group, Carol Fox (who is a Democrat) is taking the unprecedented step of shilling for a political camp and attacking a candidate?

I'm not endorsing Sue Kelly's decision not to debate, in fact I whole-heartedly agree with Ms. Fox's assessment, however I cannot sit-back and allow such mis-information to be spread.
To Interesting1: This blog is about Sue Kelly and the miserable job she’s done as a member of Congress, so I don’t want to digress too much, but saying that the League of Women Voters is anything other than a nonpartisan organization makes as little sense as accepting Sue Kelly’s bogus argument that she’s an independent.

And to your concern that there may be registered Democrats that participate in, and maybe even lead, League of Women Voters – would you consider your local PTA to be a Republican organization if the PTA president happened to be a Republican? Would you consider the local garden club to be a partisan Democratic organization if the president happened to be a Democrat?

And, although there is no data (contrary to your saying it as a purported factoid) to show this, should you really be surprised that people who sincerely believe in high quality, open, and effective government might, in their lives separate from the LWV, tend toward the Democratic Party?
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?