While I've done my share of criticizing the stands taken by Nancy Krake, I've never ridiculed her personally here, for good reason...because I remember her for how she was years ago.
What happened? At the risk of sounding too philosophical, I think she is a classic example of what happens when a human being surrounds themself with constant negativity. It's gotten to the point where the negativity has metastasized, sadly becoming part of her very being. I am sure that she feels she is simply doing her job by standing up for the clerical employees, but she fails to realize is that sometimes the ends don't justify the means, especially when those ends involve soiling yourself in the crap laid by self-centered ego-maniacs like Joe Pilchesky. Now she is in this constant cycle of mud-slinging that is getting her as dirty as the targets she strives to hit.
To Nancy, in all sincerity, I offer the following advice (from Gandhi)...
"Keep your thoughts positive, because your thoughts become your words. Keep your words positive, because your words become your behavior. Keep your behavior positive, because your behavior becomes your habits. Keep your habits positive, because your habits become your values. Keep your values positive, because your values become your destiny."
-- Edited by Agamemnon at 22:35, 2007-03-29
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
I guess a lot has changed in her life as well...without getting into details, the instability that comes with who she involves herself with in her private life must be confusing and immense. I for one am tired of her weekly know-it-all drone each week. The loss of innocence has occurred, on more levels than politics.
Oh yeah, if this were DD.com I'd have named names.
I for one hope that names are not named. Mind you, I have no love for much of what Nancy Krake has said, but I'd like to believe that buried underneath the layers of bitterness a good person still exists. That and the fact that we are better than that crew-o-thugs across the hall.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
I'd never release names of who she's involved with, but I'd laugh out loud of someone were to post her dd.com username. Especially since most of her posts come on company time (taxpayer time).
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Nancy Krake is currently negotiating a new contract for the clerical union. During these negotiations she berates the administration on camera every chance she gets. How wise is that? Seems if she were working for me as a union rep I would want her gonzo. But what the hell do I know; I've been working without a contract for over 20 years (private industry).
You are right Lord Chesterfield ... it is not a good idea to publicly humiliate the people in which you must sit across the negotiating table from ... I personally wouldn't take that approach ... most matters can be settled in a civilized manner! That's probably why they must go to arbitration so many times and also why the Police and Fire Depts can't get together for negotiatons with the administration ... I am thinking that Nancy Krake will find herself in the same boat.
Just think about which Union is not publicly airing dirty laundry ... and isn't it funny they were the ones who were successful in contract negotiations ... that should get the other Unions to think ... but I guess they aren't as smart as the guys that are hauling away our trash. Think about that one!
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
The only reason she does it, is so when the negotiations fall through (and they will), she can then point an accusing finger at the administration and scream "foul" because the administaration didn't like what she said about them at council. There's a method to her madness. Whaaa whaaa whaaa.
Well reasonable people ... and I don't mean the Doomers or the DD gang ... know that airing your unions dirty laundry in the public is not a good idea ... especially when you are looking for something from those people you are trashing on a weekly basis ... how can they even be civil after the thrashing Krake and the rest of the Unions (not DPW) give them on a weekly basis ... they may be elected officials ... and contrary to what Granma believes ... they are human beings ... I don't even think if it were me ... I would find time for a meeting with these people if I were being treated in that manner ... but hey that's me and I'm pretty much a bitch! So who knows how she will make out at the table!
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
OK then here's my take. The public safety unions are the 500 lb gorillas in the room. Nancy will forward the cause of these two unions at great expense of her own people if necessary and this means stalling negotiations until the current administration is history and a more union friendly one in place. The council podium is an ideal place to promote agenda (facts are difficult to check in real time and few speakers are called on facts). Consider some of the things that have been spoken at that podium and not challenged. I could never stand for it. I am glad to see Judy occasionally say "enough". Any thoughts?
Oh I always have a lot of thoughts ... so here goes ... hope it is what you were looking for!
You are right they are like having a 500 lb gorilla in the room ... they are the ones who carry the clout ... more so than the clerks ... Nancy thinks that the clerks are the important one ... and I'm not saying that the are unimportant ... but what I am saying is this ... When the city laid off from the clerical Union were the citizens up in arms ... Not really ... oh a few made a comment here and there ... but did they go down there and demand that the City bring back the clerks ... No they did not!
Now what do you think is going to happen ... Here is Nancy ... making a stand with her buddies Ann Marie Stulgris, Nelson Ancherani, and Dave Gervasi ... she is fighting the fight with them ... she pisses all over the administration every chance she gets ... Nelson who speaks just about every week ... well he's always respectful ... Dave Gervasi ... usually has it together ... Ann Marie ... rarely shows up ... and there is Nancy who is pissing all over them week after week ... now if your correct and it is her thought to wait for a friendlier administration ... well charges should be filed and she should be removed for dereliction of duty ... or if election of officers is close at hand she should be voted out of office. You see even though clerks are very important ... their value is never truly realized ... and when they cut jobs ... clerks always get the job done ... so they prove the point the Administration is trying to make ... I personally don't think I would air the Unions Dirty Laundry in public and when I had information that I thought would be helpful for me to have for negotiations ... I certainly would not let my hand show ... negotiations are like a poker game ...
Nancy has her own agenda ... what it is I do not know ... but if she cared about the people that she represents ... she would not jeopardize their futures ... and in my opinion that's what she is doing ...
I don't even know if I made any sense! Sorry my thoughts are all jumbled and I confused even myself.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Tonight (Apr 19) I Listened to Nancy K present a valid and convincing argument against draconian penalties for non payment of R.E. taxes and actually present a viable and attractive alternative solution (something we need more of at the podium and I'm looking directly at you Janet Evans when I refer to viable) in the form of an amnesty day. So impressed I was that she didn't pee all over anyone. Although I saw her at the podium only once and may have missed an earlier presentation.
Any thoughts - pro or con?
Amnesty day = quick cash for city, break for people possibly in need, nothing lost from city coffers because most if not all penalties would have gone to a collection agency anyhow. I think the amnesty should include a reasonable interest rate attached to the overdue fees so as not to encourage future non payments.
I don't disagree with all of the ideas at DD...but I do disagree with all of the tactics they employ. The idea of an amnesty is a good example, as I do think it seems like a good idea, provided that the amnesty is for single family dwellings only, not slum-lords.
Another area where I would tend to agree with the DD crowd is in the notion that the fire and police department unionized employees do in fact deserve a reasonable contract that includes some kind of cost of living raise. As I've said here before, the Mayor needs to settle these contracts once and for all. Simply litigating these contracts through the court system is doing nothing but costing the city money, driving away good employees and generally cheesing people off. Yes, I think it was very important for the Mayor to set a tough tone with the unions early on, but we are now half way through his second term, and it's time to be pragmatic when it comes to dealing with the unions.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
at you Janet Evans when I refer to viable) in the form of an amnesty day. So impressed I was that she didn't pee all over anyone. Although I saw her at the podium only once and may have missed an earlier presentation.
