This ad has reportedly been running on various sites, including Village14 in recent days. (Note Village14 has no editorial knowledge or oversight of what ads are hosted on its pages).
This may be a new low in Newton political ads. Yikes!
Unlike in some races there are plenty of substantiate and obvious policy differences between the candidates for this special election. How about all participants keep their attention there. Third hand quotes with personal attacks from the recently deceased seems like an exceedingly cheap shot.
…maybe that’s just me.
OK, this is as low as it gets. Who paid for this?
It’s a second hand comment, not third. He makes a statement that he doesn’t trust Barash. Where is the personal attack?
Can the special election candidates denounce this conduct?
There are no facts to back up the statement & zero focus on policy in this ad campaign.
So far, the city-wide conversation regarding these (great) candidates has been focused on policy differences and statements made in debates, which is wonderful & helpful.
Thanks
@John this was from the Save Nonantum PAC.
This is really disappointing on so many levels. The demonizing going on in this election is disgusting.
Putting words into the mouth of a recently deceased city councilor is really low, regardless of who is quoting him. One of the things I learned covering Newton government over the years is that city councilors have an unwritten code of conduct about what they will and will not say about each other publicly. (If they have the code of conduct about what they’ll say off-the-record, I seldom saw it in action.) Regardless of what Jay Ciccone thought of Bryan Barash as a candidate, I doubt he would have stated his thoughts in a campaign ad. I don’t care what his father says about Jay’s opinions.
I hope Bryan’s opponents denounce this ad.
And Emily Norton seemed to endorse the contents of the ad on Facebook, she at least explained it. When they go low….
@Andrea: That’s not entirely fair. Somebody on Facebook asked about the origin of the ad, and Emily answered the question. That’s not an endorsement.
I hope Tarik will denounce this ad and disclaim any connection to it. This ad is a disgraceful low.
It’s funny he should mention that…
Abe Lincoln actually told me, right before the house lights went down at “Our American Cousin”, that he didn’t trust Tarik Lucas!
Gail – not sure I agree, she certainly did not denounce it and seemed to be defending it. Maybe endorse was too strong of a word, my bad.
In my opinion, broad brush labeling folks as “racist” for opposing giant monolith luxury high density housing is pretty low and polarizing also….
I agree Bugek. Demonizing works both ways.
To anyone reading this, please do not ask my elderly mother to speak for me. Ever.
“Paid For By Save Nonantum P.A.C.” on the ad against Madeline Ranalli, have not seen the full image on the ad using Allan Sr. and Jay Ciccone for Tarik Lucas
Shameful and disrespectful. And totally out of character with the kind of person Councilor Jay Ciccone was. Even if he felt this way, he would have never allowed this to appear in an ad if he we’re alive. So much for the people in this PAC saying they want to defend the character of their village. They’ve just dragged the discussion into the sewer.
I think the ad is unfortunate in tone and if it did come from the Save Nonantum PAC, this, isn’t in my opinion, the 1st time they have struck the wrong tone.
Unfortunately, this will now become the drama of the day and the message is lost that Jay Ciccone’s dad doesn’t support Bryan Barash and does support Lucas. That is a very fair data point that might help people decide who they will support. If someone was aligned with Jay Ciccone on policy, they likely will support Lucas. If they didn’t they may decide to support Micley or Barash.
It’s just to bad that message will be lost in controversy.
@Gail, same here! My mother and I live on different planets!
Regarding earlier comments from you and @Bugek, I agree that demonizing can run both ways. However, I don’t recall having seen a flyer in support of Bryan claiming that development skeptics are overt racists. It is completely fair of my side to point out that red-lining, lack of access to credit, discriminatory policies in siting of highways, and typical suburban zoning combined to disastrous effect for Black people. It’s also fair to argue that continuance of traditional suburban zoning policies serve to “lock in” past inequities, with the important caveat that for-profit developments will only help a fairly small slice of the population lucky enough to get into the means-tested units.
Isn’t it obvious that Tarik is having a difficult time condemning this ad because he was aware/involved as it was produced? That’s likely the reason for Norton’s response so far too. So now I’m curious about Tarik’s other main supporter, Marc Laredo. Councilor Laredo, might you denounce this ad, or were you aware/involved too?
Gerry Chervinsky,
Tarik’s reaction or lack therof to this ad will speak volumes (I’m willing to give him a little time). But I don’t think it says that he helped create the ad.
No, that’s not obvious. Nor is it a fair accusation.
As for Councilor Norton’s Facebook comments, I would categorize them as justifying the ad, and amplifying the hearsay. Not sure if that matches the code of conduct you refer to, Gail.
Could someone post Councilor Norton’s Facebook comments so folks could judge for themselves. Also, what Facebook group is this anyway? I feel left out.
@fig – it’s the Newton Civic Action Forum
Impugning character without examples or evidence says more about those willing to do it than it says about their targets. I certainly think less of any public figure or group that would endorse such an ad.
@Gerry – we don’t know if Tarik has seen the ad and, if he has, whether he’s said anything about it. I hadn’t seen the ad until today and I don’t see every statement from a candidate the moment they make it.
The context here is important. If Tariks campaign asked for an endorsement and that’s what he submitted, given that it’s his son, It’s not as egregious although it is odd.
If tariq’s campaign had anything to do with crafting the ad then yes it’s horrible.
Given that The ad was posted by the pac It may have been done independently. It fits with the odd website they recently launched.
But it really would be good to hear from the campaign what the circumstances are around yeah because it makes a big difference.
Quick hits:
1. Save Nonantum more or less spells out on their site they’ve felt dismissed and ignored by Newton’s elected officials. Add to it all the flack they’ve received since announcing their presence, is anyone really surprised with an attack ad? Push a group hard enough, they will push back.
2. Does anyone really think Tarik will (or should have to) comment on this ad? Whether he knew this ad was coming out or not; whether he approves or condemns it; why would he alienate a voter base firmly planted in his corner? Would Bryan supporters flip their vote to Tarik if he did? #crickets
3. Has Newton politics hit rock bottom yet? We have 2.5 weeks to sink even lower.
Matt, take solace in fact that Village 14 is not representative of all on Newton. Not by a long shot
@Claire, what about Civic Action forum?
@claire – solace taken. :-)
But is it fair to say that the V14 crowd is more likely to hit the polls and if so how will they (we) vote on March? With Newton’s historically low turnout for special election, do the results really represent “all of Newton”?
Tarik/John supporters need to turnout on March 16.
PS… LAST comment on the SN ad….we ALL contributed to the ad being made with our collective decisiveness. This City needs more kumbaya.
Matt,
I suspect we’ll see a large turnout from Nonantum + “north of pike” folks who are sick of being bullied and having housing “dumped” upon them by the liberal elite.
@Mark B “what about Civic Action forum?”
Seems to me to be a handful of people talking past each other. And it is a private group so only members see the dialogue. It is “inside baseball”
I just want to share that I received a phone call last night from Tarik Lucas. He had just read my V14 post questioning his prior knowledge of the Ciccone PAC ad. Tarik assured me that his campaign had no prior knowledge whatsoever, and I believe him.
I had never met Tarik before and I appreciate him reaching out.
Civic is the same. They all for Bryan Barash who is seasoned politician and say whatever the unions and 50-100 ultra liberal kids in Newton want to hear
Matt, regarding your quick hits:
1) I respectfully disagree. I’m completely fine with Save Nonantum PAC saying they feel ignored. But the “flack” they received since becoming a PAC was mostly related to their website using cherished Newton and Nonantum traditions i.e. “…they will try to end our festival, our procession of St. Mary and our beloved Santa!” You really shouldn’t purposely be provocative to try and increase support for your organization and then complain when folks point out where you stretch the truth…no one is coming after those events. But even if Save Nonantum felt aggrieved and ignored, since when does that allow this type of ad? We can argue the reason, do we really have to condone it just because Save Nonantum is upset? I say no.
2) Whether Tarik *will* comment on the ad is one thing, whether he *should* is quite another. Of course he should. He can just say he didn’t coordinate it, and he’d prefer his supporters keep things positive. He could just say that he needed know Jay, but he is glad he has his father’s support, but that he’d prefer to keep things positive. Or he can just say attack ads by PACs are icky. As for whether it changes a vote, probably not. So what. Since when does doing the right thing only depend on whether it moves a vote? As for Bryan’s supporters changing their votes, who cares? Surely there are undecided voters in Newton, shouldn’t Tarik be trying to earn their votes? What do you think those folks will be looking to see? Partisan negative ads featuring quotes from tragically dead city councilors, or a mature candidate asking his supporters to support him a positive way? #adwasbadpolitics
3) Has Newton hit rock bottom yet. I don’t know. You tell me. You seem willing to excuse it. How much lower will you let it go before you stop making excuses just because you support the candidate?
None of us knows who will win this election. Special elections are impossible to predict. This ad doesn’t help Tarik. It costs him votes. It only speaks to his supporters. It is bad politics, bad optics, and puts Tarik in a bind about whether to stay silent about it or speak out and make his die hard supporters upset. It is also gross.
And no Matt, we didn’t ALL contribute to this ad being made. Save Nonantum PAC are adults. They knew what they were doing. It was a choice by them to use Jay in this manor, may he rest in peace. And it is my choice to judge them for it. But I don’t own a bad act by a partisan PAC just because said partisan PAC feels aggrieved. I feel aggrieved about a lot of things on a daily basis. I’m like the Hulk, my secret is I’m always angry. If I start lashing out and being awful about it, I don’t get a pass for my temper tantrum because I was aggrieved. Pretty sure I learned that lesson in kindergarten. You don’t reward awful behavior by excusing it. You call it out, you ask folks to behave better.
None of this ignores the fact that folks North of the Pike can feel aggrieved or angry. More than one thing can be true. They can be that way and Save Nonantum’s ad can be awful at the same time. We all get to vote on these issues and these candidates in a few short weeks. We just don’t need to go low to do so.
I see this, and many other recent posting on V14 as demands of ‘faux apologies for fake transgressions.’ If it hadn’t been so prominently placed on V14, I would have never seen this ad.
I’m also troubled by the claims of an elderly lady bullying Bryan. Really, this is a big issue? If the rainbow flag is truly inclusive of all people, then it would be truly inoffensive to all people. It would also be meaningless.
I love the rainbow flag, I first saw it at a no war in Iraq rally in Boston years ago. But I believe saying it is truly inclusive of all people is a lie.
I am supporting Tarik in this election, because I believe he is the less divisive candidate, more open and willing to listen to people who’s opinion differs from his own. His answers to my questions were more thoughtful and if he didn’t have an answer, instead of giving me a meaningless stock reply, he said he’d need to study it.
I would rather have a councilor who is open and willing to examine an issue than one who gives me generalized, vague statements of support for the issues I care about – like sidewalk snow clearing!
I also believe Tarik’s more unique life experiences will benefit our council. Bryan is a very nice, intelligent person, but much more like the typical non-diverse Newtonite (like me – another white elderly lady).
@ Mike Ciolini thanks for sharing that. I too have never formally met Tarik although I have attended various Newton community meetings where Tarik has participated. His outreach to you in private, one on one, reinforces my impression that he is not only not a grandstander but emotionally intelligent enough not to get sucked into what Lucia aptly labels at “fake transgression” and calls for Tarik to apologies for or explain the actions of others.
It is bad here but even worse on the Newton Civic Action Forum on FB where a some”dude” named Ben Ginsberg keeps trying to bait Tarik to get drawn into the drama. Good on Tarik to stay above the fray. He will be a welcome addition to the City Council
Honestly, I think the most negative thing about this post is Jerry’s headline.
As far as I can tell, we have a former counselor, expressing an opinion about the trustworthiness of a candidate for council. An opinion he says was shared by his recently deceased son, who was also a counselor. An opinion published and paid for by a group of residents who fear losing the character of their neighborhood.
@fig I don’t see how anybody possibly gains or loses votes.
Any outrage should be directed at Mr Ciccone Sr. Or even better, someone should call and ask him what he’s talking about.
@jerry As far as I’m concerned, the character of a candidate is certainly an appropriate topic for evaluating the differences between candidates. Some folks, like myself actually vote character before policy.
Mike, I’m not sure how any of this speaks to character of Bryan, but it surely does speak to the character of Tarik if he felt he had to tell you he had no part in running the ad, but isn’t posting it publicly. That’s too cute by half.
Look, I’m not Mr. Ciccone Sr. The death of a loved one is brutal. And I didn’t know Jay personally. I think a number of us are reacting to the idea that Jay’s “opinion” of Bryan is being advertised after his death, without context, when we think if Jay was alive he wouldn’t be ok with putting out an ad like that. Perhaps that is projecting our own thoughts on the dead as well. There were other ways to do it that were far more positive. And maybe Jay dying young makes some of us more sensitive to his memory being used for a partisan political manner. Even if it is his father speaking the words. Maybe more so.
Some things should just not be used for political purposes. I wish this ad hadn’t run. That’s my view. I’m not going to make excuses for why it ran, and I’m not going to research why it did either. I found it ugly, and I said so. And with that, my posts on this topic are done.
@fig I think if anything, it speaks to the character of Mr. Ciccone Sr.
Mike, I can’t go there. That’s why I’m done posting on this subject. Happy to converse with you in other threads, but I need to move on from this one.
@Mile Ciolino
Agreed
Pubishing an ad with personally disparaging words from a recently deceased man, words that he never uttered in public while alive, is what I’m objecting to. I find it reprehensible, repugnant, unfair, and disrespectful …. but maybe that’s just me.
@Claire : I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask the person the ad is about his opinion on it. Don’t really see how it’s “baiting” when someone else created the ad and ran it.
Glad I qualify as “some dude!”
By the way- it’s Ginsburg with a “u” – as in, “You are misinterpreting why I asked Tarik for his comment.” I have no qualms about sharing my last name publicly. Mind sharing yours, so we know who you are? Or are you just happy to share my name and not your own?
This is relevant because it’s purely negative campaigning in a way that we have never seen in Newton. Yes, candidates will argue in debates and try to position themselves against each other. But I don’t know if I’ve EVER seen an ad like this here. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m just blind to it, but for me this is entirely new.
As for Tarik, no he is NOT staying “above the fray” by keeping silent. This ad has his name on it. It came out one day after he proudly and publically accepted the endorsement of Save Nonantum. He could have been endorsed by them and not said anything… but that’s not what he chose to do.
He cannot have it both ways. He cannot say “thank you so much for this endorsement” and then stay silent when those same people start flat out attacking his opponent, regardless of whether he had a hand in creating the ad. My knowledge of Tarik is that he’s a really nice individual, so why would he want this as part of his campaign? I don’t get it.
I also don’t understand why Emily chose to comment on it in an attempt to explain it. She could have stayed silent with no real cost, she’s not running and it’s not about her. It’s the opposite problem!
@Chuck: People were asking what the ad was about. So I gave my best guesstimate as to what the ad was about, as Jay had told me more than once about how he felt betrayed by Bryan. All the pearl clutching on this post is something else tho – such convenient memory loss about the viciousness in our local politics over the last few years. The lies and mud slinging are usually done behind closed doors tho, is that better somehow? Certainly not for those of us at the receiving end of it. I know people have seen what has happened to me, including on this blog, and been completely turned off to politics, and that is a damn shame.
Hi Councilor Norton
You never would directly answer questions when I used to help moderate this site, so I don’t expect you will now that I’m just another prole. But I’ll give it a try:
Did you ever know Jay Ciccone to publicly engage in negative campaigning? And do you think he would have agreed to have done so today if he was still with us?
Emily
Thanks for the color and clarifications….I for one have always liked your caring and unqualified representation of the district and city…But if people really want to get nasty I think your mask is far too pedestrian for a city councillor!
@Robert – thank you and I absolutely agree. I have a wonderful Newton Community Pride mask but unfortunately it’s so great my 13 year old made off with it.
Councilor Norton, I think there are differing opinions about this blog and your participation in it. I think there is a difference between being challenged on your positions in a public forum vs. attacked verbally. . I don’t think any politician I’ve ever met like being challenged, and you often take these challenges personally. It is often a close call, and there have been times when folks on the blog went over the line. No public forum is perfect, and I know you’ve cared deeply about some of the issues you and Bryan have been on opposite sides of over the years. It has not brought out the best in anyone, from the blog participants of all sides to city councilors.
I do think that Newton politics have gotten vicious. On that we can agree. I’d never be willing to run for political office in Newton, both because of the time commitment and because I couldn’t take the stress. I admire you for your dedication to the causes you believe in (some of which we share).
I know your last campaign against Bryan was hard fought. But it certainly seems like you are running that campaign again, even though you are not on the ballet. And to me, it seems like you are right in the thick of the mud throwing this time. I guess one person’s “pearl clutching” is another person’s vicious attack putting words in the mouth of the dearly departed. It doesn’t have to be this way. I’m sorry that it is.
I’ve known Tarik Lucas for more than four years and I haven’t felt this passionate for any Newton candidate since I went all out for my friend Brian Yates four years ago, the same year that Tarik was a leader in the campaign to save our ward councilors.
So I was appalled that nobody even questioned the basic fairness of Gerry Chervinsky’s over the top statement that Tarik Lucas, Emily Norton and Marc Laredo might very well have conspired with Jay Ciccone’s father to craft the piece of campaign literature that’s been the subject of this post. Some may respond that Mr. Chervinsky never directly charged that such collusion took place. This may be technically true, but Adlai Stevenson once said something to the effect that the sly innuendo is more corrosive than the blatant lie or provable falsehood because it most often reflects something that has been manufactured out of thin air and is cleverly framed to be difficult to refute.
I believe Tarik when he states that he had nothing to do with drafting the piece of campaign literature that has set of this fury and it’s laughable that he, Emily Norton or Marc Laredo would have huddled together or acted separately to do so.
I’ve known Tarik Lucas for more than four years and I haven’t felt this passionate for any Newton candidate since I went all out for my friend Brian Yates four years ago, the same year that Tarik was a leader in the campaign to save our ward councilors.
So I was appalled that nobody even questioned the basic fairness of Gerry Chervinsky’s over the top statement that Tarik Lucas, Emily Norton and Marc Laredo might very well have conspired with Jay Ciccone’s father to craft the piece of campaign literature that’s been the subject of this post. Some may respond that Mr. Chervinsky never directly charged that such collusion took place. This may be technically true, but Adlai Stevenson once said something to the effect that the sly innuendo is more corrosive than the blatant lie or provable falsehood because it most often reflects something that has been manufactured out of thin air and is cleverly framed to be difficult to refute.
I fubelieve Tarik when he states that he had nothing to do with drafting the piece of campaign literature that has set of this fury and it’s laughable that he, Emily Norton or Marc Laredo would have huddled together or acted separately to do so.
I’ve known Tarik Lucas for more than four years and I haven’t felt this passionate for any Newton candidate since I went all out for my friend Brian Yates four years ago, the same year that Tarik was a leader in the campaign to save our ward councilors.
So I was appalled that nobody even questioned the basic fairness of Gerry Chervinsky’s over the top statement that Tarik Lucas, Emily Norton and Marc Laredo might very well have conspired with Jay Ciccone’s father to craft the piece of campaign literature that’s been the subject of this post. Some may respond that Mr. Chervinsky never directly charged that such collusion took place. This may be technically true, but Adlai Stevenson once said something to the effect that the sly innuendo is more corrosive than the blatant lie or provable falsehood because it most often reflects something that has been manufactured out of thin air and is cleverly framed to be difficult to refute.
I fully believe Tarik when he states that he had nothing to do with drafting the piece of campaign literature that has set of this fury and it’s laughable that he, Emily Norton or Marc Laredo would have huddled together or acted separately to do so.
I guess I am clutching those metaphoric pearls because IF tactics like the digital ad in question are effective, we can expect every campaign in Newton to go low from day 1 from now on.
It is idealistic to hold folks to a “keep it focused on policy” standard for campaign & PAC ads, though ideals are not a bad thing.
Bob — check the thread. Several of us promptly called out Gerry’s unfair accusations. I think most people just chose to ignore his comments, though.
Mr. Ginsburg, dude, welcome to V14. Please respect that pseudonyms are allowed here and shouldn’t be subject to shaming, as long as everyone plays by the rules.
So what went on here? A PAC (which by law must be completely independent of candidate campaigns) shared one of its families’ opinions in rather direct and blunt terms.
Then an online bunch of folks — self-assured they knew a son better than his father — accused a candidate of illegally coordinating with the PAC, questioned his character, and demanded he throw himself into their morass on V14 and Facebook to defend himself — against what?
@jack, no, that is a gross oversimplification. Here you have a PAC that came on the scene in the middle of a special election, but bristled at the idea that it existed, on some level, to oppose Barash and Ranalli. You can read the comment on my initial post on V-14 and on Facebook. The people involved repeated said that this PAC was about bigger issues regarding Nonantum and that it was focused on existing politicians, but would never lay out specific concerns. It talked vaguely about losing traditions that were never under any threat. When people would ask specifics they were told to contact individuals directly, but despite questions from the broader community, those questions were never answered.
Not long thereafter the PAC endorsed Oliver and Lucas, which seemed to confirm the initial suspicion that their actual goal was to oppose Ranalli and Barash. Lucas and Oliver publically accepted that endorsement. A day after that, the negative campaigns appeared. Personally, I do not think that Lucas had anything to do with this. Still, it’s about him, he needs to denounce it.
Also, let’s not forget that this election is particularly nasty. The only female candidate in the mix has received death threats. So save me your “pearl clutching” narrative. This is getting worse and it needs to stop. Lucas can have a hand in making this a better race and I’d like to see him do that.
“Unity”
“Decency”
“Build Back Better”
“Restoring political norms”
There is nothing more satisfying
than watching hypocrites eviscerate
each other…
As you were..,
@Councilor Emily Norton: Do you think this sort of negative campaigning should become normal in Newton politics?
Looking forward to your reply!
@jack Right? I’ve been watching this conversation unfold and thinking to myself what am I missing?
@chuck a private citizen gets on a soapbox, shares a firsthand account and endorses a candidate.
You can’t expect Lucas to denounce this man’s right to speak his mind. An old school Italian man grieving his son? Good luck with that.
It would be different if you thought that Lucas had something to do with this but you say you don’t.
@greg I understand what you’re getting at with your question, but it’s irrelevant. This man has a right to speak his mind. As a parent, how often have you done something that your son didn’t agree with?
@Ben – in my opinion negative campaigning has been going on for a long time in Newton, but apparently it’s only a problem when one side does it. Where was the outrage when a developer emailed my board at my day job to say I was “embarrassing” my organization by not endorsing the project she stood to make a lot of money on? She was out of luck though, the board member she emailed was a land use lawyer and said to me “Don’t worry Emily, I know what developers are like.”
Hi Councilor Norton:
I can understand how the example you cited was professionally challenging and perhaps personally upsetting (I once had someone try to get me fired from the chamber for something someone else wrote on Village 14) but it’s not “negative campaigning,” which was Ben’s very specific question.
But this isn’t about you or me so let me ask this: You served for many years alongside Councilor Jay Ciccone. Are you aware of any time he publicly engaged in negative campaigning? Do you think he would have wanted his name and picture associated with a negative ad campaign?
Thanks!
@Councilor Emily Norton:
Note that you didn’t answer my question.
I think any and all negative campaigning like this ad (and your story mentioned above) should not be a part of a Newton politics.
I’ll repeat: Do you thinking this type of negative campaigning should be normal in Newton politics?
Whoops, autocorrect / spelling error: “think,” not “thinking” in the last paragraph. Apologies.
Councilor Norton, whichever developer did that was wrong, and frankly counterproductive to whatever he or she was trying to accomplish. I don’t think I knew about that, or I would have said so at the time. There should be lines between the work you do for the city and your day job, and I agree they should not be crossed in either direction. But your response is very much two wrongs make everything right, which is just something I don’t agree with.
And the idea that any particular side has a monopoly on righteousness is clearly incorrect. You ever wonder why I continue to try and maintain my anonymity? When the Austin Street project was at the height of its controversy, I suddenly started to get calls and emails directed at me personally at home/work. Some of them were very angry. I had no involvement in the project, but that didn’t matter. I spoke up a few times on Facebook, that’s all. And then I went to an outside event for Austin Street, bringing my newborn with me in a stroller. Someone opposing the project confronted me after I asked a question, grabbing the front of the stroller while yelling at me. I’m sure they meant no harm, they were angry, the stroller was between us, and my baby was quiet. But they were angry enough to grab hold, and I felt trapped and scared. Really scared. Because of a silly park, and a parking lot development, and a question asked at a public event. And I’m not a public figure, or anyone important. I have not titles or power in any of it. I just spoke up and said my opinion. I now think twice before I post anything, and I don’t attend many Newton meetings in person, certainly not with my kids.
If we drive decency and kindness from the public square, we will deserve the world that it creates.
Jack Prior:
I don’t think you have it correct. I think the objection from most of us has nothing to do with coordinate between PAC/campaign. It is simply a reaction to putting words in the mouth of someone who tragically passed, especially since he did not speak and say such things in the previous election between Emily Norton and Bryan Barash.
Some feel his father had that right. I won’t address that. It just saddens me that folks supporting Tarik felt it necessary to run an ad like that. If Jay didn’t say it in the public sphere when he was alive when it was a hard fought election between Bryan/Emily, putting words in his mouth now, to me, feels like an abuse.
I didn’t know Jay personally. I cannot speak for him. But I would not my memories used in such a manner for a political campaign.
I don’t really care if Tarik denounces it at this point, and I believe him when he says he was not involved. But it certainly is more complicated and negative than your post implies.
Bryan Barash continues to have his supporters and minions do his bidding. Why doesn’t he have the integrity and courage to comment on the hard / controversial issues? We need a leader. This ain’t it.
@Ben: If with your question here, and the 20 or messages you posted at me on Facebook, you are trying to get me to denounce Mr. Ciccone’s statement, you are going to be disappointed. He is giving his views, bluntly as Jack points out, and I know the backstory, because Jay had told me himself more than once. My guess is that you will now post or message at me another 20 times to try to verbally bludgeon me into agreeing with you so how about we try another avenue, the tried and true “agree to disagree.” In any case I’m not going to respond to you anymore. PS It’s only men who try to beat me down with repeated messages, women who disagree with me tend to be much more respectful, which I appreciate.
@Greg: The whole POINT was to pressure me with the loss of my job in order to get me to vote for the Austin Street project. So it was very much negative campaigning. And as for the rest of your questions, see my answer to Ben above. Agreeing to disagree is a lovely way to live in a society where people have disparate views, take your opinions to the ballot box and move on.
This exchange makes me think of a few themes:
– Councilors have political power, which means residents expect restraint and support, even if they disagree on policy matters
– Councilors are human and have day jobs, which means they can’t respond to social questions immediately, and may choose to address some topics in person. I have seen examples of folks pushing Emily, Tarik, and Bryan hard for answers on social over the last year. Because someone takes 1-2 days to formulate a response, doesn’t mean they are ghosting. In some regard, I’m glad our leaders are not glued to phones nonstop. It would be efficient if a question or two related to these topics surfaced in the coming debates.
@Councilor Emily Norton:
I asked a specific question, which you have steadfastly refused to answer (of course, that is your right, and I truly am thankful that you finally responded to it above).
I didn’t ask you here about the veracity of your story, or the story in the ad. I did not ask you to denounce the statement.
I simply asked if you thought that this kind of campaigning was something that should be normal in Newton politics.
Your lack of an answer says something about your position on negative campaigning (when it’s not about you). So: thank you for your time. I appreciate you finally responding.
As for your ‘PS’, not sure what me being male has to do with this. Are men not allowed to ask elected officials for their opinions more than once? You keep saying I’m disrespectful, and yet I’ve simply asked for your opinion on a topic that is important to our city. A fascinating comment! Thanks!
@mike. This isn’t just about a father in grief. Had he personally paid for the ad that would be his personal speech. The PAC paid for the ad. It therefore speaks for them, as a whole.
@chuck I didn’t mean to infer his grief was a factor. I would have no way of knowing that and probably shouldn’t have used that word.
It’s certainly is his free speech though, and you are correct the pac is equally responsible.
@ben not for nothing but you sounding like an bully to me. If you think Emily is a hypocrite just say so and move on.
@Mike Ciolino, and a stalker. Ben’s been bullying Emily, Tarik and others over on FB and then decided to pop over to Village 14 I am assuming because people stopped engaging him. I find it best to ignore him
@Claire: Okay then- Nice comments and insults!
I actually had not even read the comments on this post, until another reader told me that you (unprompted) mentioned me here. So I clicked the link and read what you had written. I thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Ben Ginsburg writes: “I actually had not even read the comments on this post, until another reader told me that you (unprompted) mentioned me here.”
This is a rather extraordinary claim, Ben, since you have commented in this very post numerous times today! Indeed, you last posted here TODAY at 2:59 pm in a comment (yet again) directed at Councilor Norton.
When someone makes it clear that they have no desire to engage with you, it is wise to cease and desist lest you appear like a pest at best, a bully, or a stalker at worst.
Except you’ve asked the same question multiple times, both here and in your FB post (where you must have asked it at least a dozen times.) What’s fascinating to me is that you can’t seem to fathom why you’re being called disrespectful. But I guess since you had no problem arguing repeatedly with multiple people who commented on that post, using the phrase “the dude is dead” when referring to the late Councilor Ciccone, and starting several comments with “Sigh”, I shouldn’t be surprised.
(That entire post seems to have disappeared, by the way… did you delete it?)
@Lisa Parlagreco: Sorry, I should have been more clear in the comment you quoted. I did not see this Village14 post (and thus did not read the comments) until someone told me I was mentioned by Claire. If you take a look, until Claire mentioned me, I had not commented on V14 in this thread. I had not even seen the post. Again, I apologize if I wasn’t clear on that in my earlier posting here.
@Tricia: Sorry, I’m unclear on why asking a question more than once makes me disrespectful. I just asked her one question which she refused to answer. That’s all. I asked it as follows: “Do you believe this type of negative campaigning should be normal in Newton politics?” I don’t see how that phrasing is disrespectful, but to each their own.
Councilor Norton disregarded my question and didn’t even merit it with any response until I asked here, on this forum (and I appreciate her reply). I actually think it is disrespectful for a City Councilor to ignore citizens of their city simply because they don’t like the questions being asked – but that is just my opinion, and everyone is entitled to their thoughts, and I thank you for sharing yours with us.
As to why I asked: I was simply genuinely curious if a member of our City Council thought that this type of ad and negative campaigning in general should be a normal part of Newton’s political discourse.
Thanks for your thoughts, Lisa & Tricia!
@Lisa Parlagreco: For the sake of clarity, I should have included the timestamp of the comment where Claire first mentioned me. It is: “Claire on February 27, 2021 at 12:32 pm.”
Until after that comment at 12:32pm was posted and a friend told me about it, I had not even seen this whole post – that’s what I meant in the comment that you quoted and called an “extraordinary claim.” You won’t see me on this thread at all until after that – because, as mentioned, I did not even know about it.
Sorry for the two replies – of course it occurred to me right after posting that I should have included the timestamp, as you did.
I think one of the issues going on here is that the 3/16 election is very political. It is not one act that one needs to look at, but rather the history of events that have gone on. Each of these actions is a reaction to previous events. The fact remains is that there are things that have happened that people do not want to talk about and other things that people have talked about quite honestly and others do not want to believe what happened. It becomes a “he said, she said” argument. Everyone gets to vote. Everyone gets to actively listen to the other side. There are major differences between the candidates in terms of how they will vote on the City Council and if that matters to you, you will vote according to your personal value system and how you want to see the city run. There are so many basic infrastructure and budget issues on the table, let alone the macro issues such as climate change. I think another thing that all Newtonians would agree upon is that we want to improve the environment.
@Ben Ginsburg,
Sigh!
I did take a look through this thread and you first posted here – on this very thread – on February 27th. You then continued posting here, in this very same thread – throughout the day (February 28th) how many times? Was it 5, 6, 7? So if that wasn’t you, do you have a doppelgänger who uses your avatar? Because as I review this thread here at Village14 it appears to me that you’ve been quite an active participant here. And there’s even proof – your posts!! No hearsay issues here, lol.
@Ben Ginsburg,
And now I’m posting a second time in a row because you posted your clarification as I was writing my reply to you. Well that certainly does make more sense and I’m glad you’re not claiming that you didn’t post here (when obviously you did).
@Lisa Parlagreco: Again, sorry that it wasn’t clear to you what I meant in my comment to Claire – and sorry I didn’t include the time stamp in my first reply. It was a good idea, thanks for posting. Cheers!
Greg Reibman,
As a former Chair of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce, I am surprised that in your role as President of the Chamber you are continually participating in non-chamber-related political activity. I believe this is a clear violation of federal regulation. You are being paid on Chamber time, while engaging in political activities, posting on social media with at least one village14.com account linked to the Chamber website. Do the business owners/chamber members know that you are using their money to fund your political activities?
The Chamber President should be spending every minute of every day helping Newton businesses survive this pandemic. You should be working to revitalize our local villages. Instead, last week after Nonantum community leaders created a legitimate political action committee to give them a much-needed voice in the political process, you accused them of “McCarthyism”. More recently in a chamber post, you labeled the Nonantum village as in “the sewer”.
Nonantum village businesses do not appreciate the Chamber President attacking their community’s character and economic vitality, even more than the pandemic has, by stating their village is in “the sewer”. Do your comments create an environment of growth and success? I believe your actions are not in line with the Chambers mission, its policy, nor the federal regulations regarding nonprofits participating in political activities.
In addition to possibly risking forfeiting the chamber’s nonprofit status due to your political activities, you are putting all businesses who are members of the chamber at risk of financial repercussions. Since they are funding your political activity, they may find themselves questioned by both State (AG & OCPF) and Federal (IRS) regulators.
The business community deserves more and the people of Nonantum deserve an apology. I hope that you will reflect on the situation and within the hour, issue a public apology. Your apology would go a long way to forgiveness in the hearts of Nonantum.
Sincerely,
Fran Yerardi
Nonantum Business Owner
Well good morning to you too Fran! What a way to wake up.
You must be confusing me with someone else. Nonantum is awesome. I’ve never said Nonatum was “in the sewer” or made any other negative comments about the village, its businesses or its people. The chamber staff and I work daily (and often late into the night too) to support the business and nonprofits there and across the city and region.
As for engaging in non political activities, please be more specific. I don’t endorse or donate to candidates or PACs. I’m not even registered with a political party, even though there are no federal or state laws that prevent any US citizen from doing so. And if posting on social media is a federal crime, that’s news to me but I’m far from the only nonprofit leader who does so.
You’ve made some pretty serious allegations Fran and, honestly, I have no idea where they’re coming from, why you are so angry, or exactly what it is you think I’ve said or done.
@Fran Yerardi – Your comment reminded me of Councilor Norton’s story about someone trying to threaten her day job because they disagreed with her on an unrelated issue.
There’s nothing in Greg’s job description or federal tax regulation that prevents him from criticizing a Political Action Committee that runs questionable ads that he believes reflects badly on the city and on Nonantum. In fact that’s part of his job.
From what I’ve seen over these last 12 months, Greg Reibman and the Chamber may have been the single biggest voice fighting for Nonantum and all of Newton;s businesses through these trying times of the pandemic. Your thinly veiled threats against a guy just doing his job are as bad as the ad that started this all.
The truth. I know of few people who have worked as hard for Newton for the past year as Greg has. He doesn’t deserve this.
What an unhinged comment. I sometimes disagree with Greg, but there’s no question in my mind he’s doing everything he can to support local businesses.
No one, Greg included, needs to be spending “every minute of every day” doing their day job.
Like all of us, he has freedom of speech, to use on his own time and however he wishes.
Fran, you are also wrong on the law in terms of non-profit status for the chamber and also the below
“In addition to possibly risking forfeiting the chamber’s nonprofit status due to your political activities, you are putting all businesses who are members of the chamber at risk of financial repercussions. Since they are funding your political activity, they may find themselves questioned by both State (AG & OCPF) and Federal (IRS) regulators.”
That’s like someone online who isn’t a lawyer talking about RICO. Jeez. The chamber’s nonprofit status has no bearing on this, even if Greg used an official chamber account (which he didn’t) to post. There are safe-harbors for political activity to prevent just this type of worry. I can show you chapter and verse if you like.
As for your quote, that’s just pure nonsense. I mean, it has a bunch of words strung together to be a threat, but it just shows you have no knowledge of any of the regulators you quote. I’m reminded of that famous quote from Billy Madison (the Adam Sandler movie):
“Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
Normally I put up with B.S. posted online, and I’m not typically this blunt on the forum, but nothing in your post is true, and you should apologize for making stuff up. If you’d like me to prove it using the applicable IRS code sections, just reply.
Greg – I trust you didn’t need any coffee this morning to get going!
We have approximately 17 threads on this topic and Fran has somehow managed, pretty late in the game, to come up with the most shocking post yet. There’s something impressive in that, though it doesn’t fix the fact that it is incredibly off-target. The Chamber, under Greg’s leadership, has been one of the most stable voices during the pandemic, providing information and updates that are not only useful for businesses but for any resident (I highly recommend that people subscribe to the email updates). I’m with Jerry — far from needing to apologize to the business community, Greg has been its staunchest supporter and ally. I’m also with Greg – I think you may be confusing him with someone else. Or maybe using him as a “catch all” for people you disagree with.