MsKreed

Perhaps signs of usage would be enough justification to perform a sobriety test on the driver....but searching the vehicle for what? A substance that is legal to possess?

It is mind boggling that no one has pulled any quotes, examples or citations from New York State sexual harassment laws....instead of constantly pointing out when there aren't allegations of "inappropriate touching" as if that's a legit defense. Suggestive comments of the nature that he has freely admitted to making.... are absolutely, irrefutably, 100%, unquestionably, always and forever....illegal sexual harassment when they're from a superior. Zero tolerance. According to the verfy laws he signed to strengthen workplace protections for women. Workplace condions that expect some to tolerate lecherous comments or gestures violate the law. It's one thing for a server or bartender to fend off occasional advances from patrons or guests.....but bosses and coworkers is a zero tolerance matter. And saying "that's just the way he is" of a boss is not an excuse. In fact, it's literally a training example of unacceptable excuses.

It always makes me sad to see cold cases getting colder as time passes. 😢

While I do understand there are people, businesses and organizations that are extremely lax, ultimately, we're all responsible for our own risks, not others' behavior. I choose to be cautious because I don't want to unnecessarily expose a high-risk household member and completely support anyone else who wants to be careful. I shop online and order curbside pickup as much as possible. I am liberal with hand sanitizer, I use wipes or paper towels for door handles.... and I and carry/use my own stylus for touch screens and keypads. Yes, I also wear a mask in accordance with Executive Order 202.17 ...."when unable to maintain, or when not maintaining, social distance" (which I personally try to set at 8-10 feet). But it seems as if too many people have spent the last several months putting way too much emphasis on masks. Only masks. Masks at any distance. I have seen many people at a distance (retail employees, customers, medical staff) removing or lowering masks. And unless I have a particular need to interact with them, I have no reason to approach them, and they aren't violating any orders. I have rarely encountered someone who failed to pull it up when they get within 6 feet of someone. I will tell you, I am 100% infinitely more comfortable with an unmasked person 10 or more feet away than one wearing a mask and stepping close enough for me to slug them if I swing my arm.

If he isn't removed by impeachment, it seems likely he'll have to have more than Sex and the City as competition for the Democratic ticket....in addition to whoever is running for other parties.

Quite possibly....she did spend a lot of her short career drafting the "how to" guidelines for filing sexual complaints. But even so, pretty incriminating for his legal team to go along with such a "voluntary reassignment" in lieu of following the reporting process that is mandated by law (that AC himself enacted)....unless they had strong reason to suspect that would result in proving misconduct on his part.

Six...as well as attorney's suggesting a probe into the decision to circumvent the legal requirement of Governor's Office of Employee Relations (GOER) investigation when #2 first complained last year. https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Cuomo-faces-new-allegation-of-sexual-harassment-16011424.php

I agree, the invitation that Moss extended to use the Wings of Eagles facility made much more sense. Easy highway access and ample space/parking.

Kind of obvious that he must have been considering some statewide office to be hanging out with constituents in AOC's district.

At least Spitzer knew when to quit. There are 2 points Cuomo's second accuser that scream how narcissistic he is: 1) In is defense (apology?) he said he was "trying to be a mentor to Ms. Bennett". Really? Discussing sex lives is part of "mentoring" in his world? 2) For as young as she is...she spent a good portion of her short career working on "Me Too" Advocacy . Hint: before you start trying to "mentor" a young adult, maybe read their resume. You know, so you have a general idea of who they are, what they've achieved so far:

Funny how Nipple Ring claims that he didn't mean for some things to be taken as suggestive.....but somehow only made those playful friendly comments when he happened to be alone with them.

Did I miss the response agreeing to the terms of that bet?

Right. It's not like any multinational corporations have seen any increased profits in the past year. It's been as devastating to big tech and pharma as it has to small business. Like how Netflix and Disney+ are bankrupt while the Heights Theater's profits soared, right? It seems obtuse to me for anyone to think very rich and influential corporations are somehow too altruistic to exploit a crisis or use their influence to promote whatever soap they've got for sale. Do you honestly believe that the folks at Pfizer and Moderna are heartbroken to have a product that everyone on the planet is being compelled to get...at a "money is no object" price paid for by taxpayers all over the world? Or wouldn't try to persuade politicians to make this a repeating event if they can?

From the way I read that, in the event that the threshold of signatures is met, the "if" part of holding a referendum would be out of the Chair's hands (even with the unjustified authority the Legislature has given him). I've no doubt that several would try their best to make any commission (and any subsequent proposals) as self-serving as possible ....and it's possible that just being compelled by citizens to submit the referendum at all (or do anything that wasn't their idea) would sting enough to start considering public interest more.

In addition to contacting their own legislators, members of the public have spoken out on social media, written letters to the Star Gazette, responded to online polls, spoken at Legislature meetings and submitted public comments to the clerk on many topics that the Legislature has still refused to act on....term limits, legislator compensation/benefits, public participation ....and even live streaming was refused until the governor forced them to offer it. Clearly, most of them have no inclination to to voluntarily accommodate the will of the citizens. https://www.dos.ny.gov/lg/publications/Adopting_and_Amending_County_Charters.pdf Chemung County cast 30,464 gubernatorial votes in 2018... So 3,047 signatures on a petition to form a Charter Commission and offer a referendum to amend the charter with "X, Y or Z" would trigger a mandatory action from the Legislature. The resulting referendum may or may not pass, but it would at least remind them that the body exists for the citizens - not for themselves. Unfortunately, that would take at least 30 people gathering 100 signatures each, and I just don't see that happening without solid support from a few people with community reach and influence (media, business leaders, activists or former elected officials, etc etc)....and a little experience with law or local government.

Seems like the USS Comfort and the Army Corps hospital built at the Javits Center could have been used as a "buffer" to send NH residents in downstate (the vast majority) that didn't need to stay in hospital beds that were desperately short in the NYC area. Did he ever offer an explanation why they weren't used for much of anything?

I wonder how many of them live on or near district borders.....and could possibly face the karma of them being displaced to a whole new district. 😄 I will say that the 2 legislators who have public web pages and "public figure" FB profiles that I follow are open and receptive to everyone who engages on their page. The rest do seem to rely on the strategy of having an uninformed and/or apathetic public. And sadly, they are probably correct. Even people who are eager to rant, protest, like/react, complain, sermonize, question and otherwise "engage" in local politics on social media don't seem compelled to take action that could effect change. It was proven that even hundreds supporting a (non-binding) online petition for live streaming was ignored....until the Governor mandated it by executive order. I tried a year ago to get people on board with finding (or forming) a group to look into and identify "actions" that could be taken by citizens...like drafting true petitions that could require a legislative response, etc. If such a citizens "action" organization exists in Chemung County, they are a secretive bunch...and I found maybe 3-4 people that display any interest in that sort of thing before the pandemic hit.

OK…I finished the audio from the advisory committee meeting (2/22). The participation from CGR representatives and the members’ questions to them were worth listening to. As Exec Moss pointed out, these consultations historically result in “nicely packaged study of what the legislature, who commissioned the study wants outlined in the report”. With that in mind, the discussion in yesterday’s meeting certainly did not contradict Moss’s hypothesis…. It’s perhaps worth noting that the backgrounds of half the members of the CGR team are in journalism and sociology. That fact does seem to insinuate that “messaging to the public” is a significant priority for the $48k service. It is also a bit concerning that the CGR lead noted [at around the 50 minute mark] that the committee will receive a Draft Report that is not subject to FOIL until…. “we make sure that it’s an accurate reflection of the work you’re expecting from us”. In other words, “the committee can withhold any data that doesn’t support their agenda” from the final report and public hearing presented by CGR...and the public will never be given access to that, even if they try to request it via FOIL. If a redacted version of the report can be offered, then all the oozing about “ensuring transparency” by an independent study is nothing more than posturing….no matter how professionally prepared and expertly messaged the report CGR presents is. The last 10-15 minutes sounded like a lot of lip-service for the tape recording. While I’m sure some of it was sincere….the assertions that ‘it’s all for the good of everyone in the county’ and ‘no politics are involved’ fall flat in contrast to the earlier declarations that some have zero interest in any concerns that aren’t from “their” voters. And speaking of committee members only feeling compelled to consider “their own” constituents.... They may claim not to have been contacted directly by “their constituents”, but at least one of the letters read aloud at the full Legislature meeting on 2/8 and listed in the minutes looked like it might be from a citizen in one of the districts represented on the committee. Even if the public comment has been from outside their respective districts.....it still raises a few points for me: 1) The excuse that “I have not been contacted by constituents expressing XYZ position” is hollow unless they can argue that they have been contacted by constituents supporting the opposite position. Otherwise, they’re really just speaking on their own behalf – not for any of their constituents. 2) Since part of the conversation included them all acknowledging that their districts will likely change, “no one from my district has contacted me” is pretty short-sighted anyway. Someone who may not be “their constituent” today…could very well become part of "their" district once this project is complete. During a campaign can be an awkward time to suddenly "care" about someone whose concerns you contemptuously dismissed in the past.

I haven't finished listening yet, but I think the audio recording link I posted above for the meeting is interesting. I think anyone interested in this matter would find it very informative and recommend checking it out. I have another 30 minutes to go and will share some of my own thoughts when I'm done.

That may have been what they were referring to....but I couldn't find it in SG without knowing a date and/or keyword to search.

http://www.chemungcountyny.gov/departments/a_-_f_departments/county_legislature/audio_recordings.php?fbclid=IwAR3CMwNlB4i-t_0NtnO6vN0NnsZPVd4WS1Ajakvh5LUDUBYbK-AT62lFcZI The repeated insistence from committee members that they're only interested in concerns of "their" constituents is appalling. There seems to be open contempt for anyone who isn't able to vote them back into office. They don't identify themselves in the audio clearly....but at least one committee member was pissy about the fact that people can write letters to the editor and get their views published without legislators offering a rebuttal. Gasp.... Eeek... how dare they?