We all know John Ise. He lived in the Park for years, then moved to the Shores. When he was here, his big issue was that he wanted a dog park. After he left, Howard Goldmann moved in, and he took up the campaign. Well, we still don't have a dog park, but that's another issue.
Anyway, John got himself a side job. He writes a regular column for the Biscayne Times. I think he writes almost exclusively about the Shores. But occasionally, he gets interested in his old stomping grounds: the Park. And so it is this month, in anticipation of the November elections.
We have five candidates for BP Commission, and John decided to do a column about the election, and about the five candidates. Since John is not a slouch at reporting, he took the approach of actually making contact with our five candidates. Well, he tried. And he's trying.
John reached out to each of them by phone and by e-mail. Then, he checked in with me. The problem was that he wasn't getting the responses he expected from five people running for office. He wanted to know what's going on here.
Jared Susi replied to John, and he agreed to be interviewed for John's piece. Betsy Wise replied, too, but she said she had to discuss this with the Village Manager. What?
I then wrote an e-mail to the other three characters, to tell them to respond to John. I heard back from Dan Samaria, who told me essentially that he didn't trust John, because, according to Dan, John misquoted him about something a few years ago. I passed this along to John, who didn't recall ever quoting Dan at all about anything, let alone misquoting him.
John passed along to me the response he got from Manny Espinoza, stimulated by my telling these people to contact John. This is what John wrote to Manny:
Dear Mr. Espinoza.
My name is John Ise and I serve as the Greater Miami Shores “Neighborhood Correspondent” (which includes Biscayne Park) for the Biscayne Times (for previous pieces, you can see link under "Greater Miami Shores" pasted below). I see from the Village web site you are a candidate for Village Commission. I’m interested in doing a column on the Village election, profile of candidates, issues emphasizing, and general direction of Biscayne Park.I’m planning on column running for the October edition so no rush. Please let me know if interested in chatting and if so, we can arrange a mutually convenient time. I appreciate your consideration. CheersJohn Ise
This is what Manny replied to John:
Good afternoon. Before I engage my self with any type of media, I like to do my due diligence to find out who the person is trying to obtain some personal information and future plans. With all my respect, I’ll get in touch with you by tomorrow afternoon to setup a day and time for the information you will like to make it public. I appreciate your understanding. Thanks Manny Espinoza.
What?
Will Tudor never replied to John or to me.
So John wrote back to me to say it seemed to him our current candidates, apart from Jared Susi, are "a bevy of oddballs." If John is waiting for me to disagree with him, I hope he's not holding his breath.
That's the sweetest description of our slate of candidates. If decisions before commissioners weren't so important, being "oddballs" wouldn't matter so much. However, they do exercise control over our quality of life and our property values, and we're re-starting with one who has shown herself to be worthless and another who is shameful. We need three new commissioners who are better than "oddballs." I have one of my votes locked down, but the other two are up for grabs or won't be used at all, which is also a powerful way to use one's vote. Other than "popcorn at the park" on Saturday, does anyone know if we'll ever get to see our "bevy" answer serious questions in a public forum?
ReplyDeleteI'm confused. Which one is worthless, and which is shameful?
DeleteYou can play any game you want with your ballot, but three people are going to win. It doesn't matter if they have hundreds of votes, or 12. You can say what you want about how they should feel about the few votes these winners might get, but they're the ones who will vote on things. Unless one is a Tracy stooge, in which case we're back to Tracy deciding everything. But that only happens if one stooge gets (re-)elected.
Thanks for shout out Fred. Manny got back to me within last hour (maybe saw this?). Thank you Manny. Any other candidate who wishes to chat, there's still time as I don't put pen-to-paper (as they say) until Wednesday. I can be reached at iseinhaiti@yahoo.com.
ReplyDeleteCheers...now about that dog park....
Fred you are right that we will have 3 commissioners no matter how we vote. This is what we have and this is what we have to work with so I for one am going to try however I can to get them to see the bigger picture. I have met with 2 so far hoping to meet a 3rd today. Maybe I also want that mystical dog park that no one ever gets but Im willing to try.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing to consider is that none of these running except for one have held public office before so they may not have the political wisdom to know what they should and shouldn't be doing.
ReplyDeleteArt, I regret to say that the one now in public office has proven lack of political wisdom. The others only have hypothetical lack of political wisdom.
DeleteFred I miss you on Nextdoor! Hypothetical or otherwise its missing.
ReplyDeleteArt, just between you and me, I think it's bizarre that Will would run for re-election. I'm surprised he's not too embarrassed. He shows us complete vacancy and lack of substance as a Commissioner, month after month. I met him a couple of times before he got elected, and he seemed like a nice enough guy. But there's nothing there once he takes his seat at the Commission table. He doesn't want anything, he's not about anything, and he doesn't seem to know anything. It's always sort of comical when Big Mama calls on him for a comment. When Will is smart, he says he has no comment. When he forgets, and tries to put something together, it's just aimless rambling that almost always finds its way around to "concurring" with Big Mama. The best he can usually do is to repeat phrases others used before it was his turn. Or just rely on stock stuff.
DeleteI still hold that not using all three votes means something, when necessary. I have always voted "for" things and people rather than using my vote as a weapon or a cockblock. (So much more fun here where I can type things like 'nads and cockblock.) We still have weeks until election day, and hopefully we'll have a legit debate among candidates (as opposed to glad-handing at the rec center) so I can make informed choices. Art, did I hear a rumor that you and David are organizing that at the Log Cabin? Here's hoping ... the perfect guys for the job. That's the event we really need. The ideal format would be to pose a question, give each candidate one minute to respond ... then open up the topic to the entire group to discuss (debate) freely unstructured. I know "debate" scares people, but we have serious topics that need to be addressed .. and we need answers, opinions, and to see how these folks interact in a group setting, who's a leader vs. follower, who's wallpaper and who's a dick, etc. (Wouldn't we have loved to have seen the current group in that setting before "hiring" them? It's all fair game, and it mimics the setting of a commission meeting where the real work will get done. It's time for this village to grow up about how our government operates. We can't afford the wasted time and resources any longer.
ReplyDeleteMac, let me illustrate what withholding your vote might mean. Suppose-- and I'm just making up an example-- you and let's say Dan Schneiger decide Manny Espinoza did not work hard enough to impress you. So you vote for Jared and Dan (those are the two signs in your yard), and you withhold the third vote. And let's suppose Will or Betsy wins a seat by one vote, and Manny loses by one vote. That means you and Dan helped elect Will or Betsy, or you elected them, because you withheld your votes. If that's what you're willing to do, then vote for Will and/or Betsy. Do it actively. Three people are going to be your new, or re-elected, Commissioners. Try to choose them. Are you aware of how many people complain that voters don't vote? And it has very real consequences. Withholding a vote is not voting.
DeleteOne correction: if you think it's exactly the same thing whether Will, Betsy, or Manny gets elected, then there's less harm in withholding your vote.
DeleteA "bevy of oddballs".....John is being WAY too nice. I think we can all come up with a long list of far more descriptive adjectives for this sorry slate of candidates with the exception of Jared.
ReplyDeleteAnd Art I must respectfully disagree with you. Jared hasn't run for office before either but knew how to handle this situation - and I will bet he didn't feel the need to talk it over with the village manager. I look at it this way - if they can't handle a reporter and reporters questions they are not ready for prime time!
At this point knowing what I know about the remaining four I do think it's all the same no matter which two get in. It's all bad just different kinds of bad. Maybe I'll change my mind but it's gonna be tough.
Janey, what I said was that the four candidates other than Will had, according to Art's comment, only a hypothetical lack of political wisdom. That is to say none of them has, or has had here, shown us what he or she would look like in elected office. That's not the same as saying they have no wisdom. The only candidate whose lack of political wisdom I can vouch for, because I've witnessed it, is Will. And he hasn't learned anything in two years.
DeleteAs far as any difference among any of the candidates this year, I have only one standard by which to judge: do I think they will get brain dead in Tracy's presence. Will, yes. I've seen it consistently. Betsy, I assume so. She came indirectly from Tracy, and she has no Village meaning before now. Jared, I have extreme doubt about it. Dan, I'm not sure. Manny, I'm also not sure. But if I doubt it about one, and I'm not sure about two, and I'm very sure in a bad direction about two, then I want the three who have promise. All it takes is one stooge in Tracy's presence, to match Jenny, and we're dead for two more years. Are you sure that among Dan, Manny, Betsy, and Will, they ALL, in your opinion, have the SAME likelihood of turning into Tracy's bobbleheads? Or maybe you don't even see that as the big problem, as I do. If you're thinking about something else, then I'm sorry I misunderstood. But I hope you will agree that Tracy and Jenny plus one more stooge means that whatever you didn't like about the last two years you'll get for the next two years, too.
It may have taken me a while to have my "come to Jesus moment" as they say but I can assure you I do see handing Tracy a majority as a very bad thing. And yes = 2 more sad and sorry years. I'm just not convinced that for their own and different reasons Dan and Manny aren't just as likely to cave or at best bring equally problematic baggage. Maybe I'll get there. I will try.
ReplyDeleteWell, there's your answer. If you decide that in your opinion, Dan and Manny are "just as likely" to cave as are Will and Betsy, then you're right, it doesn't matter.
DeleteNot to harp, but when it was "anyone but Fred," if you look back on it now, would you say that "anyone" was better than Fred? Anyone? Tracy, Jenny, and Will are better than Fred would have been? As bad as Fred was, it's better to have what he have now? Knowing Fred as I do, I can tell you that had he been there, not only would Tracy not have controlled a majority, but she wouldn't be mayor.
Here's another hypothetical ... more hypothetical with names swapped out to protect the innocent:
ReplyDeleteI support candidate Rosanna. She's smart, she's honest, she's always prepared, she thinks ahead, she knows the rules and the players ... and she's kind and thoughtful and clever in true "village" style. I really want Rosanna to win, and she's my only real pick from the current litter.
But, I decide to use my other two votes "just because I can/should" or as a cockblock against Stacy, the myopic one who manipulates, dictates and manhandles the others. So, I also vote for Bill and Penny. (Had to throw a man in there so I don't look too feminist, but a total chickfest on the dais would be just fine with me.)
And the votes are in!
Stacy 10 votes
Penny 7 votes
Bill 7 votes
Rosanna 6 votes
One of Rosanna's six votes is mine, but so are one each for Bill and Penny, who ended up beating Rosanna with my one vote. I just ensured my candidate's defeat! I made my candidate lose because I used my weapon as a vote against Stacy, who won anyway. I just shot myself (and the village) in the foot.
Perhaps votes being used "against" rather than "for" are what got us into this mess in the first place?
Yup, you're right. That's the other side of this game.
DeleteBut why did you vote for Penny? Just to fill your ballot, or because you thought she would be better than someone else? And are Bill and Penny any better than Stacy?
Yes, perhaps so.
Mac that is a perfect example of what could very well happen. And the other issue that weighs in here is top 2 candidates get 4 years, 3rd gets 2. My hope is for Jared to not only get elected but to get 4 years - so I would have to think hard and long about 2 others that I would want to add to their vote totals.
ReplyDeleteGood point. EXCELLENT point. Christ, "if only" two years ago, we wouldn't have a bull running amok in our china shop today.
DeleteHere's another curiosity. I have two signs in my yard. They're Dan's and Jared's. They're next to each other. Dan's sign disappeared, and Jared's didn't. Interesting. Has someone given up trying to defeat Jared, but thinks Dan may have a chance, so took only his sign? Who? And what are they trying to prevent, by working just against Dan?
ReplyDeleteDan and Jared both asked (my) Dan and me to place signs in our yard on a busy street. We said "yes" to both without hesitation because we like to support the electoral process altogether. If Manny, Will and Betsy asked, we would gladly offer our swale in support, too. Hell, I'd even let Stacy, Penny and Bill place signs out front ... and I'm considering writing in "Rosanna" on the ballot with a pink lipstick!
ReplyDeleteYou support the electoral process by voting. Not by advocating for candidates you don't like.
DeleteMac and Janey, I'm sorry to belabor this. There's a skew in our arguments, and it's critical. There are two dynamics involved, and you're discussing one, while I'm discussing the other.
ReplyDeleteYour approach is to look at the five candidates, and rank them as to who will make the best Commissioners. You have concluded that Jared Susi would make the best Commissioner, of the five, and the other four are tied for second place. You don't distinguish among them. So let's suppose you apply yourselves heroically, and you get every voter in the Park to vote for Jared Susi. And for whomever else. Most people won't vote only for one person, and if everyone did, and everyone voted only for the same person, we would have a failed election, since we need three winners. So you get Jared elected. Then what?
And I'll ask you to consider the current Commission as a frame of reference. Would it be fair to say that there is one adult in the room, and four very bad teenagers? But the adult is tied to a chair, and she has her mouth gagged. The bad teenagers are rampaging around, breaking everything in sight, and eliminating all over the floors. The gag on the adult is not tight enough, and she can sometimes be heard, over the teenagers' loud music, to say something like "That's not good; you shouldn't be doing that." But the bad teens don't care.
If you get Jared elected, and if Will also gets elected, or if Betsy does, or if both of them do, we're back to the mayhem. It doesn't do you or Jared good for him to get elected, if Will, Betsy, or both also get elected. He might as well resign the second he gets elected, if one or both of them also get elected. I would tell Jared it's a waste of his time to be on a Commission like the one we have now, which will be repeated if Will, Betsy, or both get elected. I would venture to say Roxy might tell him the same thing.
So if our votes don't prevent Will and/or Betsy from getting elected, we have wasted our votes. They mean nothing. It has to be Jared, and Dan, and Manny. And even that's a guess, and it depends on Dan and/or Manny not surrendering their intellects and souls to Tracy. Which they might. Jenny and Will and Harvey did.
I don't know anything about Betsy Wise, so I can't comment on her. I'm looking forward to hearing about her expertise as a "branding" expert, skills that could be enormously beneficial to us when looking at the big picture. Ditto Manny ... met him once recently and he seemed like a fine guy who wanted to discuss finances, for the most part.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do consider the condition of a candidate's home when evaluating how much she/he "cares," what image the property projects onto the community at large, their interest in aesthetics, how they juggle and prioritize things in their lives, and how seriously they take responsibilities. (Yes, home ownership and maintenance is a RESPONSIBILITY, as dictated by current Code. Code isn't just a good idea, it's required.) Having said that, here's what I see:
IMMACULATE HOMES: Manny and Jared are the bright spots on their blocks, showing complete "pride of ownership" and working hard to elevate BP
MINIMUM STANDARDS MET: Will (no driveway after all this driveway chatter?)
WELL BELOW STANDARDS: Betsy and Dan. At least cut your grass and clean your roofs, folks. You're asking to be a leader, and in Betsy's case your promote "fair" code enforcement. I just got a warning to clean my roof (that was cleaned in the past six months), so clean yours, please. "Fair" is fair.
Mac, here's what else you know about Betsy. She has no profile in the Village, except she happens to live here. Whatever pride or interest she says she has in the Village has not translated into joining any of the functional arms (Boards) and has not led her to attend various Village meetings. What you might also know, if you believe the rumors, and if you wonder why someone completely uninvolved and manifesting no interest suddenly decided she should be on the Commission, is that it was Jenny Johnson-Sardella who encouraged Betsy to run.
DeleteThere is nothing known about Betsy that should cause anyone to think of her as independent of the crushing majority under which we all now suffer. And for what it's worth, other examples of current Commissioners whose properties display constant affronts both to the Codes and to any sense of pride in the Village would be Tracy's house/property, and Jenny's. There's the appearance of real consistency here.
Jenny is an attorney. That hasn't done the Village any good. Tracy often claims to have training in some form of engineering. That hasn't done the Village any good. Will alleges something to do with either finance or security. None of that has accrued to the benefit of the Village. Betsy claims expertise in "branding?" Oh.
Fred I completely agree. And if what you heard IS true the dots are now connected. It just made no sense that someone living here 21 years with ZERO civic presence would suddenly jump into the mix. But - she is a marketer and much of what she says - especially for the majority of the (uninvolved) residents touches all the right buttons.
DeleteAnd... Chuck and I were looking at Betsy's site, with the knowledge that Betsy has no reason to know anything about any of what she referred to, and we began to think the way the site was put together seemed very, very much like the displays Tracy does. So we decided this was really Tracy's doing.
DeleteMac, while I agree that the candidate's home is a moderately good indication of how much one might "care", I think that many of the issues that you brought up are a question of taste.
DeleteIMMACULATE HOMES: What does immaculate mean to you? I keep my lawn mowed, and my roof clean and my house looks great to me but I would imagine that you might be mortified by my choices.
MINIMUM STANDARDS MET: What would these minimum standards be? Who gets to decide? I love my vegetation, but you might not. I love lots of shade and what I like to call the "old Florida" look and you might not. Many people here in the Park are using a landscaper that they all think is great, I don't happen to value that look, so I say again, who gets to decide?
These things are a matter of discernment and personal preference and, barring something totally decrepit, they are just choices.
Bramblewitch, Mac can respond for himself. But let me jump in for a second. Do you happen to know where Tracy and Betsy live? Have you seen their landscaping "choices?" You said, as if it were some sort of minimum standard, that you keep your lawn mowed. Betsy doesn't. And I don't think anyone would look at Tracy's yard, and call that the result of "choices." It's mostly weeds, it's haphazard, and there's a lot of what I think anyone would call debris out there. If Tracy was 90 years old, blind, deaf, and stood around holding a gun and scowling, I think anyone would think what she has was the best she could do. But she's not. And it isn't.
DeleteBut more to the point, do you really want elected officials whose credentials are that they barely meet minimum standards?
And Bramblewitch, I will also tell you I had never heard of Will Tudor until the end of my term on the Commission, when I, and I'm sure the rest of us, started getting e-mails from him protesting the requirement for parking on the property. He viewed it as the government "taking" people's private property. But it was our Code, it had been for a very long time, and it's still our Code: you have to provide an "approved parking surface" ON your property (not just the swale). Will still hasn't put in a parking surface on his property. He doesn't want to. And he's got Tracy to run interference for him. We have a Commission that is dumbing down the Village, and we have the opportunity to re-elect part of it, and reinforce another part of it. Funny enough, Harvey Bilt, who is not running for re-election has a high personal standard for his property. He has extended himself to improve the area around his house, even including the median in front of his house, beyond what was necessitated by the Code. But he appears to have been so blinded either by losing himself to Tracy, or reflexly arguing with anything Roxy proposed, that he stopped demonstrating any concern for the Village as a whole. We now have the opportunity to replace him with Betsy, who is more of an object lesson in dumbing down, and grudgingly and incompletely adopting only something that approaches minimum standards. FYI, Jared's and Manny's properties are adequately impressive, demonstrating real pride in personal property as well as in the Village.
DeleteI hear what you are saying Fred, and I don't disagree. I was probably responding more to Mac's verbiage than anything else and just wanting to point out that aside from the minimum standards (mowing, etc. which Mac brought up, not me) many choices in style are just that, aesthetics.
DeleteFirst of all - Mac the idea that you would get a Code warning for anything let alone a dirty roof defies any sort of logic. Sounds like some spite work to me.
ReplyDeleteOk, now on to the candidates and my take.
Manny - I like the idea that he's a numbers guy. But - it's hard for me to get past his being rather self-serving. His running for commission back in 2013 was fueled by his being pissed because the city wouldn't bend the rules for him regarding front yard fencing. If what I hear is true there's a similar situation going on now. Hard to have a lot of confidence in him not caving if he thinks it will get him what he wants.
Dan Samaria - ok, I just can't go there. It would be too mean.
Wil Tudor - can't say anything that hasn't already been said and I agree completely. Hard to be confident in a commissioner who barely even speaks to his own agenda items.
Betsy - branding and marketing - while certainly skills we could use - are only good if one knows one's product. She's lived here 21 years and has had zero involvement but yet feels qualified to make the sort of decisions that commissioners have to make which deeply affect all of us. And when I consider her stressing of surveys and how her agenda will be driven by what the majority wants I come away with the impression that she is just one more who will be unable to make the tough, and often unpopular decisions that will need to be made if we are to survive. Then of course there are her comments on code. I've heard ALL of those before and 100% of the time what that person really was saying is that they don't support strict code enforcement. Even with all that I still am hoping to meet with her in hopes of digging a little deeper into what she is all about.
Right now though I am having a really hard time not being a complete pessimist.....the next two years are looking very dismal.
Janey, and Mac, we're getting three Commissioners as a result of the November election. Three. There are five running. Which three do you want? Do you agree with me that Jared + three or four Tracys is the same as Rox + four Tracy's? So pick three of the five running. We're getting three of them.
ReplyDeleteThe election is still more than a month away, so I remain optimistic that I'll learn more about all of the candidates so I can truly vote "for" three rather than against or as a cockblock to anyone. I especially look forward to learning more about Betsy, regardless of who may have recruited her or what her motivations are. She's on the ballot now. I glanced quickly at a "Betsy for BP" site yesterday, but when I went back to look more closely this morning I can't find it now. She's an attorney (not worth much to us), a comedian (that could make meetings more entertaining if not more productive), the mother of young twin kids (can't even imagine, so god bless the notion of trying to squeeze BP into that mix) and a branding expert. I can't find much about her own "brand" online, which is odd. If she claims to be an expert, I'd like to see some of her work and the results that it drove for clients. Results and growth, not just actions.
ReplyDeleteAll of your theorizing goes away if Betsy, who has no reason to be on the ballot, just goes along with whatever Tracy tells her. There is every indication that's what would happen. The only possible indicator that it wouldn't is if she told you she would be independent. Of course she'll tell you that. Will told us that. They would all tell us that. And she can sing you any song you want to hear about what she'd like to see for the Village, and how she'd work to get us there, but she's a shill. She has no agenda, and she has no Village agenda. If she did, we would have heard from her long ago. She's a put-up. Maybe she's intelligent. Maybe she's a nice person. Maybe she's a good mother. None of that matters. She's on the ballot for a reason, and that reason has nothing to do with Biscayne Park. It, like everything else, is only about Tracy Truppman. It still amazes me to watch attorney Jenny Johnson-Sardella, whatever-he-is Will Tudor, and photographer, and long time and seemingly dedicated Village resident, Harvey Bilt TOTALLY collapse and fold during every Village meeting. I don't know if anything is available with any of these people in reality, but it's all gone on the Commission. Betsy Wise? Yeah? So?
DeleteI see this has sparked a bit of spirited dialogue in my old stomping ground. The dialogue here is so much more in-depth than what'll end up in a meager 2 paragraphs in the column of 1100 words (embarrassed to say).
ReplyDeleteThe canned questions to each of the candidates were:
Why are you running for Commission? What do you bring that other candidates do not?
What's your past history with Village matters?
What is biggest challenge facing Village? What are the opportunities you see?
Given small size and budget, Biscayne Park has built-in limitations. In past, there was efforts for expanded incorporation to grow Village boundaries. Is that idea worth continued consideration?
EVERYBODY running should be able to rattle answers off these softballs (and if they cannot, well....)
John how are the candidates answering the questions? If it's in writing I'm thinking you're going to be getting some "ghost writing" submissions.
ReplyDeleteI would hope the interviews were in person or at least on the phone so the reporter knew who was answering the question. Softballs to say the least. Please ask Will Tudor, "What are you two biggest accomplishments from your current term? Why should residents re-elect you?" Will is the only candidate running for re-election, so that question relates to him only.
ReplyDeleteMac the problem with a phone interview is that if they were given these questions in advance there is time for "coaching" for those who shall we say might have difficulty in formulating solid, informed well articulated answers. And for having notes to read from rather than having to think on their feet.
ReplyDeleteI will say that William Tudor did call em last night and am very appreciative he did. We had a pleasant chat. He thought some candidates might be wary of speaking to "media" (I'm hardly media..I liken writing for BT to jury duty) was due to the malarkey about previous police chief. Again, all this will be distilled into two paragraphs so more in-depth (and ideally civil) dialogue really belongs at candidate forums and on-line.
ReplyDeleteJohn, not to impose partisan politics into this, but my suspicion about Will Tudor is that he is a right winger. If he is, he may have ideas about the "media" that not everyone shares. Also, as with Betsy, I'm sure they would feel they had to check with Tracy before they would speak to you. She would likely provide talking points for them, especially if you gave some inkling about the questions you would ask.
DeleteI imagine you, or anyone who doesn't attend BP Commission meetings, would likely think I was inventing what I say about Tracy's stranglehold on three of her colleagues, or their complete mindlessness. It would sound like that to me, too. All I can say is that anyone who doesn't believe me should come and watch.
John, can you post a link to your article on here when it's released?
ReplyDeleteHi Kennedy. Should plop on your driveway at beginning of month. It just touches surface though. All candidates have now contacted me and no ghostwriting as it's all in their own voice (otherwise they should fire the ghost writer). A thanks to Fred for shaking the Village tree in getting a responses.
ReplyDeleteI had a recent conversation with someone which leads me now to conclude that Betsy being a Tracy tool is no longer an assumption. It is a reality.
ReplyDeleteThe question, if there is one, is what conversation could you possibly have had, and what could you possibly have learned, that might have led you to conclude Betsy is NOT a tool of Tracy?
DeleteAnd let me say again, I don't know Betsy. I've never met her. For all I know, she may be a delightful person. But that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. I always liked Harvey. He's quirky, but a nice person who always seemed to care about the Park. I thought Will was a nice guy, from the perspective of my having met him twice before he got on the Commission. Jenny seemed like a nice enough person, although I admit I didn't really know her. But all of that goes completely away once these people surrender themselves, for whatever are their reasons, to Tracy's domination. And I don't know why they do it. Are they actually weak-minded? Does Tracy have something on them? They're all clearly out of their depth, but that wouldn't have stopped them from relying on Roxy, who is clearly remarkable, and not on Tracy, who is patently scrappy, dishonest, nasty, and plays dirty. And Roxy very obviously knows what's going on, and Tracy doesn't. But no, Tracy it is. And there is no evident reason not to assume exactly the same thing about Betsy.