Comments on: A Damaging Case Against Jerry Abramson

By: Ed Springston

Ed Springston — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:45:08 +0000

Well said AB I only mention a one termer because when the clearing house starts many will be offended and I doubt someone making that many enemies from the entrenched would gain a second term.

It really depends on the people. Sacrifices would have to be made by all and really how many are willing to sacrifice in today’s world?

Jerry keeps getting reelected and we keep suffering for it. Why? I have sacrificed and continue to do so. Are there enough of us out there to force the changes necessary?

We shall see……………..

By: AB

AB — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:44:49 +0000

I appreciate Ed Springston’s comment about a one-termer, but I wonder if anyone could make a serious enough dent in the Abramson mess in just four years. There is a huge housecleaning required and it is a government role, not private business where the cleaning could take place more quickly. I would also love to see someone investigate Abramson’s dealings with the development of the former Southfield police facility on Flat Rock Road. Of course, you could turn over pretty much all of McCheese’s rocks and find snakes.

By: Larry West

Larry West — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:33:18 +0000

In regards to the “unfair” tax burden, remember that a lot of the reason for the poor having a higher burden in Louisville is that, unlike the state taxes, the local taxes are not progressive. Even if you make minimum wage, you have to pay the TARC tax, for example.
The mayor wanted the library tax to operate the same way, meaning that he wanted to place further burdens upon the poorest among us.

By: ex-park-user

ex-park-user — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:48:13 +0000

I suggest it also be brought to the attention of the public how his buddies in the Parks Dept have been given demagogic powers and the free hand to promote their personal agendas.

By: Larry West

Larry West — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:13:23 +0000

Kudos to Brad Cummings for this. I wonder had Jack Richardson (previous Republican Party county chairman) gave a similar speech a couple of years ago if Abramson would be mayor today. Of course, Richardson attacked mostly other Republicans and by all evidence wanted Abramson to be mayor. He even put people who donated money to Abramson on the Jefferson County Republican Party Executive Committee.

By: Ed Springston

Ed Springston — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:11:28 +0000

I agree Jake. It is a mutual benefit society when it comes to taxation. I am impressed with Cummings speech I admit. Most everything he outlined has been reported on by myself and countless others including you and Rick over at thevillevoice.

The question really is are enough people sick of the sham that Abramson, and his insiders that benefit from him being Mayor, has always been and will they help change it?

Whoever gets elected next should consider themselves a one termer and make the changes necessary for the long term by ridding ourselves of Abramson tactics. King, Tandy, and Dave Karem, who has been mentioned in some circles, are the same or worse.

Time for new blood and less term limits such as a 2 term max for Mayor and Council.

And please no more lawyers.

How many would jump on that proposal.

By: jake

jake — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:27:11 +0000

I’m pretty sure the Kentucky Democrats are also to blame for a screwed up tax structure.

And I haven’t heard a damn peep out of Steve Beshear about comprehensive tax reform.

By: Brendan

Brendan — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:23:09 +0000

One thing that has to be noted everyone talks about the “unfair” tax burden in Louisville compared to other cities is that every time I’ve seen the numbers actually broken out it is not city or Metro taxes that disproportionately hit middle and lower income families — it’s state taxes.

Kentucky’s income tax hammers working families but touches higher income households with a gentle and loving caress.

I’m no fan of Abramson, but that’s not his fault. We can blame the Kentucky GOP for keeping taxes unfair.

By: Optimistic Dem

Optimistic Dem — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:20:04 +0000

Conservative – the difference is they wouldn’t find anything on John Yarmuth because he has the highest ethical standard of any elected official out there. He could turn his guns on him and wouldn’t find anything.
If you don’t like the way he votes that is one thing but this whole thing is about ethics and I can attest to the fact that Congressman John Yarmuth is unparalleled in the high ethical standards he practices. Kentucky and Louisville/Jefferson County are very lucky to have a man that is as ethical and effective as Rep. Yarmuth.

By: Steve Bittenbender

Steve Bittenbender — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:04:54 +0000

Not that I’m a member of the GOP (I used to be, but I’m about 4.5 years sober now), but if I were still a Republican, why would it be in the party’s best interest to encourage the incumbent to step aside. I’d think the party’s best chances would be to run against the incumbent and run on the incumbent’s record.

Does the GOP have data showing they fare better running against a Dem not named Abramson?

Something doesn’t add up for me here.