Saturday, January 07, 2006

"I came, I saw, I conquered"

Once again, the self-proclaimed watchdog of Gray is watching out for herself and her friends, but not the citizens of Gray.

Her recent email to the CEDC, which she invariably cc'ed to the town council, only addresses the CEDC's take on the council. Curiously, there is no mention of the council's nasty attacks on the CEDC.

I'm saddened that I must share room in the journalistic community with a person who so willingly sets aside the journalistic obligation to fairness.

More than ever, this recent email leads me to believe that Prattle is determined to ruin anyone in town that opposes her viewpoint. Shortly after the June election, she crowed to a recently-retired town councilor, "I came, I saw, I conquered." What is she trying to conquer? And WHY???

Nathan Tsukroff

More Soviet-style journalism

Julie just got another note from Prata -- a beautiful example of Soviet-era party journalism in which guilt is prejudged and the only things left to discuss are recanting and penance. Email subject is "comment sought for article"; note that it is cc'd to council politburo. Wonder if they do that at the Washington Post?

You read this thing and you can almost feel Liz's grip on reality slipping:
From: The Monument Newspaper []
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 5:14 PM
Cc: 'John Welch'; 'Skip Crane'; 'Denise Duda'; 'Gary Foster'; 'Andy Upham'; [Entire CEDC, email addresses deleted]
Subject: comment sought for article

Hi Julie,

I am working on an article regarding the CEDC and the Council. As CEDC Chair I ask for your responses to the following for publication. Though if any other member has an opinion or would like to share information I would welcome it.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the Council indicated that they are dissatisfied with both CEDC’s attitude and CEDC's lack of work product. It is true that the CEDC has regularly indicated derision of the Council in word and deed since June. And the challenging and combative attitude displayed by members on Tuesday (one of your members had to be gaveled down and the meeting recessed) also tends to support Council’s concern about CEDC’s negativity. If Council decides not to abolish your committee, do you feel you can encourage your members to have a positive working relationship with Council? If so, how?

Two of your members stated flatly that the situation is not fixable. (Ralph, Jeanne). Do you agree with them?

If you feel the Council is in error in observing that CEDC has been unproductive, what can you point me to that shows productivity? I would appreciate it.

When CEDC asked to meet with Council and Council subsequently invited you to a meeting, why did you refuse?

When Council responded to your request for a task by asking you to look into the regulatory quagmire, and you stated flatly at the November meeting that you “have no intention of investigating the Planning Board in any way, shape, or form” was that because a member of the CEDC is on the Planning Board? Or is it because you did not want to complete the task?

Do you agree or disagree that citizen Lynn Olson’s comments at an earlier CEDC meeting were out of order? If they were out of order, why did you not indicate so to Ms Olson at the time?

Do you have further comment that you would like readers of The Monument Newspaper to know about the situation? I welcome your thoughts.

Thank you kindly,


Independent journalism, Prata style

Elizabeth Prata just may be the most delusional person in Gray. Following Tuesday's late-running council meeting, the manic Monument editor was up until the wee hours of the morning furiously firing emails at Julie and CEDC, making sure they understood the seriousness of their civic thought crimes.

Here's a snippet from a followup note la Prata sent to Julie and CEDC at 3:27am on Jan. 5. Always the loyal palace scribe, Prata cc'd it to her council lackeys. They were no doubt grateful to read such a stirring defense after their embarrassing performance the previous evening:
Council was deeply disappointed in the CEDC's behavior over the last six months and brought you in to say so.
Council not only has that right, but has that responsibility. I do understand that when the light of self -reflection is shined upon oneself that is may be difficult to examine what may not be working, but I hope and trust that you, and your committee, as a citizens who have chosen to serve, would be amenable to council's wish to engage in more positive and fruitful work on the Town's behalf.

Thank you for your time,

This from Gray's most bombastically independent self-appointed civic watchdog. Oy! Calling it hypocrisy doesn't do it justice.

Thursday, January 05, 2006

I didn't know that

I recently found out that Andy Upham applied for the job of Gray's Code Enforcement Officer in 2003 or 2004. His application was rejected by town manger Mitch Berkowitz.

Remember that the next time Andy passes judgement on Mitch's job performance.

Free speech is not a license to lie

Free speech.

America is based on the right to be yourself and express yourself in any way you wish, provided you do not harm others.

Part of that harm is lying.

Spreading lies in the press by printing only half the truth is harmful to others.

Free speech does not mean freedom to harm others by printing only half the truth.

Nathan Tsukroff

Newspaper of record . . . hides the record

The self-proclaimed Newspaper of Record has failed miserably in its sefl-proclaimed task.

Go to and you will find this week's prattle. But go to the archives and you won't find last week's prattle. In fact, the most recent prattle is from April, 2005.

Go to and you will find EVERYTHING.

What is Prattle trying to hide? Why can't we read the prattle from June, July, August and September?

It's obvious that the Newspaper of Record is a broken record.

Nathan Tsukroff

Now THAT'S Entertainment!

Tuesday night's council session was classic Gray farce -- Fellini meets "High Noon". A big crowd on hand. All 4 real members of the Community Economic Development Committee (plus viral implant Jeanne Adams) were called before the Inquisition to answer sundry nonspecific charges of malfeasance, incompetence, and heresy. I won't describe the entire exchange except to note that by the time it was over, the citizens of Gray had even more reasons to feel embarrassed by what a sad, pathetic spectacle our elected leadership has become.

Just two weeks after the the Clown Council spent a half hour on a shameful, one-sided, innuendo-laden attack on CEDC, they were backpedaling defensively, buckling under the combined weight of a righteously indignant committee and an outraged crowd. Julie, Ralph Wink and Jeanne Carpentier remained cool but pointed, while Jack Goosetrey provided the comic relief the situation obviously deserved. Good stuff. Unable to bully their victims, our pathetic councilors just wound up looking more ridiculously petty than ever.

To his credit, John Welch (and to a lesser extent Duda) displayed some backbone. Foster, on the other hand, appeared panicky and stricken, Crane was incoherent, and Lord Upham spent much of the evening in a scowling desultory funk. Gotta give Andy some credit, though -- he gave us the line of the night. When Julie asked him why he simply never called her to discuss his litany of Very Serious Concerns, Mister Take-Charge replied: "I didn't want to talk to you." Now THAT'S leadership, folks!

The clowns will make the decision to disband CEDC at their next meeting on the 17th, so there's going to be much more juicy demagoguery, bloviation and embarassing civic incompetence for your viewing pleasure.

GCTV has provided the library with both VHS and DVD copies of this very entertaining four-hour show. The first hour or so contains the CEDC drama. Definitely worth watching. It's truly one of the lowest moments this bottom-dwelling council has ever produced.