Thursday, July 7, 2011

It's time to remember a few things...

In her two times running for City Commissioner, Cara Jennings never ran as a radical.  Sure, her background as a radical cheerleader was used in negative campaigns by her opponents, but she presented herself as someone who could be considered part of mainstream society.  Her message was simple, her pictures full of smiles with hair perfectly in place.  She was packaged as pleasing to someone who, if they lived on North Lakeside Drive, would be comfortable voting for Cara Jennings.  Never mind that she detested the presumed consumer-oriented lifestyle of that voter.  It was all about getting through the the fifty percent plus one test offered by the electoral process and securing that Commission seat.  Once there, she and her supporters were on their own, which granted her a large berth.  The exception is those times where we have an issue like PBSO that immediately galvanizes the community for or against a certain issue.

The bottom-line, it is all about getting into the seat of power - not being true to the actual message that gets you elected.  Look at the promises about the casino building, about John G's, etc.  All of those promises pandered to public opinion to get elected, but the reality has turned into something completely different. Note too that Ms. Waterman denies knowing Ms. Jennings, except for having some of the same friends.

That is the danger that we have in this run-off election.  Click here for a link to a document that contains wording from the Waterman campaign.  This is what is being sent out to probable absentee voters.  Reading through the message, you would have a difficult time distinguishing that from the messages from the Ramiccio camp, including  the possibility of selling the electric utility to FPL.

The exception to what is included in this message is what is said about PBSO.  "We must work with the Sheriff to ensure a long-term, win-win contract for the safety and prosperity of our city."  Well, didn't we just do that?  I think it leaves the door more open to "changes" in our law enforcement contract beyond what we already have made - and this is consistent with the mutterings from the other members of the dais that happen to fully support Waterman.  Not to mention the city manager who continues to lament about her lack of control over a law enforcement department.

But that would not necessarily be apparent to the casual observer/voter.  What this message represents is what both campaigns think is the "winning" message - it's essentially the same one!  Then you have to ask, what then we are basing our decision upon when electing someone to this office of Mayor for three and a half months?  Remember, your past record is the best predictor of future performance.  Do we really want another clone from the Cara Jennings' camp to continue the cozy relationship between the city administration and love of the status quo, or do we want someone in there that knows how the system used to work and bring a different point of view to the center seat?  We need someone there that is not afraid of asking the hard questions.  Is that Waterman or Ramiccio?  We need a set of experienced eyes and ears up there.  That person is Tom Ramiccio.