Why am I a bigot? Is it because I told the town board that if and when RUPCO is ready to lease homes to the public, I would like to bring busloads of city people up to apply? I really would, and I really will, if the town lets RUPCO build Woodstock Commons, but it's not because I am trying to punish the town or scare the planning board into denying the project.
It was the town itself that wanted to house current Woodstockers in need of affordable housing. That was a need that was supposed to be met by Woodstock Commons, and it won't be. Instead, absent my participation, loads of people in Kingston will gladly move up here and commute to work down there, or take the UCAT bus to Kingston Plaza to shop for groceries.
All I'm doing is suggesting that we bring real artists and others who will appreciate being here, rather than people from Kingston and Saugerties who have ties to their neighboring communities already, who will live off our tax dollars and give back nothing in return.
And as for being a racial bigot, excuse me, but I'm just not. I have lived, not by necessity but by choice, in several predominantly non-white neighborhoods, including South-Central Los Angeles and West Philadelphia. My current profession is authoring and publishing books for children in large cities, about large cities, which celebrate diversity and the creative sharing of space that is a large city with a diverse racial makeup. I have spent just about my entire life living in large cities with diverse populations, and I would say that each and every one of them exhibited greater openness of thinking than the faction of city-hating Woodstockers.
And who is Jim Charles? Well, for one, the Woodstock Times, which asks me for my address and/or phone number each and every time I submit a letter, even though editor Brian Hollander lives TWO HOUSES AWAY from me and we see each other and chat frequently, apparently is not aware of who Jim Charles is, or isn't. Editor Hollander emailed me that he had thought he knew Jim Charles, but maybe not...
Look Woodstock Times, that is not a consistent letter policy. The Woodstock Times has allowed a person with an unverified identity to accuse me of bigotry. I will not let that go.
Jim Charles is not in the phone book. Jim Charles, at least by that or a similar name, does not vote in Woodstock. I can't find title to property in Bearsville linked to his name. Nobody seems to know Jim Charles, but Jim Charles seems to be intimately aware of everybody in town.
Even David Boyle, that angry, red, infection on the complexion of Woodstock, read the Jim Charles letter. It's getting around. Somebody will answer for this letter. If Jim Charles' identity is not clarified in the next couple of days, the Woodstock Times will have to answer for him- their letter policy, their responsibility.
And speaking of Boyle, he has "reported" numerous falsehoods about me on his show. I was considering suing him for slander, but alas, one of the requirements for winning such a suit is to prove that he damaged me, and as far as I can tell, nobody takes him seriously, so his words really have no value. They do have a reverse value, however. Ironically, since his words about me are negative, they have a positive value: I have been welcomed into various circles by strangers, on the street in Woodstock, Bearsville, and even in a parking lot in Kingston. It seems that being trashed by David Boyle on his Rabid Dog Bite Review is a badge of honor. So thanks, David, for placing me in the elite circle of people who think and speak sensibly about life here in town.
And while I'm reviewing my nonexistent and existent detractors, thanks also to Gordon Wemp, who, upon reading my Q&A in the Woodstock Times, could do no more than critique the literary format I chose, rather than anything of substance. He made fun of me for posing a debate between me and myself, which is not at all what I did. Q&A, real or posed, can be purely informational; it's not necessarily a hostile form of conversation. That Gordon thinks it is just shows that he sees hostility everywhere, even where there is none.
Robin,
ReplyDeleteMy letter was whimsical at best. I never stated or implied hostility. It appears that perhaps you are the one "seeing" hostility everywhere.
I'm sorry, Gordon. I couldn't tell that you were trying to be whimsical; the hostile undertones rendered your whimsy rancid. In future, stick to the facts like I did, and then we will have something to talk about. Criticize my format or psychoanalyze me, and all you do is show that you have nothing of substance to contribute.
ReplyDeleteI tried having conversations of substance with you but it went into a circuitous gallimaufry rather quickly. You have insulted everyone in RUPCO, the planning board and several other people and entities who don't agree with your conclusions. Calling you out on your aberrant behavior is not psychoanalysis it's just that, in the short of it, I must say that you can dish it out but you can't take it.
ReplyDeleteMy blogging skills must be lacking. Gordon submitted a comment and I tried to publish it but it does not show. So here it is:
ReplyDeleteGordon has left a new comment on your post "80- Mystery Jim":
I tried having conversations of substance with you but it went into a circuitous gallimaufry rather quickly. You have insulted everyone in RUPCO, the planning board and several other people and entities who don't agree with your conclusions. Calling you out on your aberrant behavior is not psychoanalysis it's just that, in the short of it, I must say that you can dish it out but you can't take it.
In response to Gordon, I don't know what gallimaufry is, but I won't look it up. I have better things to do. The reason I have insulted "everyone" in RUPCO is because everyone whose work I have reviewed is either incompetent or crooked, or both. And as for the planning board, they are not qualified to make decisions about the elements of this project that they are responsible for. They and their paid advisors have very little background in affordable housing. Not one of them understood the tax credit system in place and the property taxes based on it, least of all you, Gordon. If you feel insulted as a result of my observation, how about stop complaining and brush up on your property tax law, and while you are at it, give a seminar to spread your knowledge, instead of blaming me for hurting the feelings of the incompetent who are charged with looking out for the town to which I pay taxes. I'm not saying the planning board is totally incompetent, but they have been charged with evaluating a project that they are simply, in their volunteer and untrained status, not qualified to manage.
ReplyDelete