Subject: Re: NYC C.L.A.S.H. Update & Action Alert Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:50:40 -0500 To: Audrey Silk From: Bob Armstrong On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 04:12:49 -0500, Audrey Silk wrote: >=A0At least Mayor Bloomberg was sent a resounding personal message= with the =A0landslide defeat of his proposal to end partisan= elections.=A0=A0In essence, it =A0really was a NO vote for= Bloomberg=A0by NYC residents more than it was a vote =A0against the= proposal.=A0=A0Perhaps=A0voters thought it was the best way to =A0voice= displeasure=A0over his policies overall,=A0not understanding that= =A0members of the city council=A0are equally to blame.=A0=A0If true, the= =A0proposal's defeat=A0would indicate that there is more=A0support of= our =A0position=A0than was evidenced by the results of the council= races. I agree with your analysis . I lobbied for the proposal which= would have been an improvement , but constantly ran into the "ad hominem" if= Bloombutt's for it , it must be bad . I sent a letter to New York Times pushing the "vote against the= incumbent" argument but they published no letters contradicting their anointings .= I've appended it below . I would like to get previous numbers on council elections to see= if perhaps the margins of reelection were cut a little . But these elections= are such a machine vote . Great to see your endorsement of Dan Finley . He got a= surprisingly high total for any LPer especially in a City race . Land of the Free ? Used to be . --=A0 =A0Bob Armstrong -- http://CoSy.com -- 212-285-1864 Computing Environment : =A0http://CoSy.com/CoSy/ A WTC vision : http://CoSy.com/CoSy/ConicAllConnect/ Liberty : http://CoSy.com/Liberty.htm Restore our Right to Relax : =A0http://ny.lp.org/cgi-bin/petition.cgi?Against_the_Smoking_Ban =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A02003/11/07 11:57:11 AM -- To the editor: For the hundreds of thousands of us whose simple right to relax= with, eg, in my case, a cigar, a Guinness and friends, has been= criminalized, and for those of our fellow citizens who simply= believe in tolerance and freedom and property rights, our choice= is simple. Unless your incumbent is one of the brave few , Mssrs Addabbo,= Gallagher, McMahon, Monserrate and Reed in districts 32, 30, 49,= 21 and 8 respectively, who stood against this extension of the= drug war to tobacco use among consenting adults in private= establishments, vote for individual liberty and responsibility;= vote against your incumbent. For, unless your incumbent is one of those few, they clearly do= not respect you, rights of private property, or even logic= itself basing this prohibition of all on a privileged= hypothetical class incapable of starting and running their own= establishments where they may set their own rules. Perhaps most horrendous, at a time when the City is laying off= firemen and closing fire stations, these prohibitionists are= necessarily adding more than 20 secret nanny-police at a cost of= around $1,000,000 to persecute their newly criminalized fellow= citizens. Vote Tuesday. Vote to end this trend. Vote for individual liberty and responsibility. Vote against your incumbent. --