Bill, Agree on your first point. Agree on the second point - however, I was not referring to the liberty movement outside of the GOP (Libertarian Party) but rather the one inside the Republican Party (The Campaign for Liberty, The Ron Paul Revolution, The Republican Liberty Caucus, Freedomworks, and so on.) If you get some time, check out the link below of the transcript for Ron Paul's farewell address to Congress. I think his words are pretty inspiring and set forward an agenda for the liberty movement after he has retired from Public Office in January. Especially enjoyable was when he calls Congress a bunch of "psychopathic authoritarians". http://www.campaignforliberty.org/national-blog/transcript-of-farewell-address/

Also - Please, let's stop talking about Mitt Romney. As I said before, he wlas a poor choice for a nominee. In a year when a supposed fiscal conservative should have done well against an economically embattled incumbent, Mitt still lost by 3.5 million popular votes and 126 Electoral votes. He lost because he was out of touch with the majority of voters and did not project strong, decisive leadership. The GOP has to take an introspective look at how they will recover and win over women, Hispanics, and socially tolerant Independents / moderate Democrats. I believe the liberty movement can accomplish those goals.

Dan, I understand what you are saying. I have three responses. 1. I was spot-on with my predictions. The GOP failed to appreciate the value of the liberty movement's message and got torched. Now they are grumbling that maybe they should have listened to the rising, energetic, grassroots, libertarian wing of the Party because it just happens to appeal to civil liberties, individual rights, the fiscally responsible and the socially tolerant - basically, the ability to connect with every segment of the population that the GOP needs gains in to become relevant at the Presidential level again. 2. Over the last four Presidential Elections, the GOP has won two and lost two. The Republican won by a split decision in 2000, won by 16 electoral votes in 2004, got smoked in 2008 and again in 2012. Not exactly a strong track record to carry into 2016 (as well as the 2014 mid-term elections) so they need to reevaluate where they want the Party to go and who should be leading them into the future. 3. The Democratic Party is going to be gunning hard to take back the House in 2014 and give President Obama the ability to move legislation through Congress unabated. The Democrats picked-up seats in the Senate and in the House - so the momentum is with them. It is now entirely incumbent on the GOP to get something done or risk losing it all in just two short years.

Dan, I believe in the liberty message and when Congressman Ron Paul did not become the GOP's nominee, I gave my support to the only Liberty candidate on the ballot - because they are nearly identical in their ideals, principles and message. Gary Johnson said it himself, if he thought Ron Paul was going to be the GOP's nominee he would not have stayed in the race. The message is liberty. That is why I support him today, because he is the only liberty candidate on the ballot. I have met the man, know his plan and agree with his positions. One of which is what you and Bill talk about in your comments above - HOW TO HELP THE PEOPLE ON FIXED INCOMES WHO ARE SUFFERING. Both Democrats and Republicans ignore the most serious reason why our prices are rising and families on fixed incomes are hurting - The devaluing of the U.S. Dollar. Has Mitt Romney or Barack Obama talked about the plummeting value of the Dollar under the policies of the Federal Reserve? Not that I have seen. Obama supports Ben Bernanke's plans and Mitt Romney talks about replacing him but, neither face this problem directly. Every time the Fed issues new money, creates new debt, lowers interest rates artificially, buys up more failed mortgages and loans hundreds of billions it doesn't have, it lowers the value of the U.S. Dollar. Each dollar has an equivalent specific amount that represents a portion of total economic output and, like any commodity, when you increase the supply too high and too quickly, the value goes down. The Fed has pumped trillions of new dollars into the marketplace, each time devaluing our currency further. So it takes more dollars, valued less, to pay for the same amount of goods and services as it did before. Notice when they talk about energy prices, how both candidates can argue the same point but not understand the fault at the heart of the issue. Yes, the U.S. has less refineries but its domestic production is up. Consumer demand was down but the prices went up - why? Because Oil, world-wide, is traded in U.S. currency. Reduce the value of each dollar and it now takes more dollars to pay for the same amount of oil. Thus, that price increase on resources gets passed along to consumers. This is a major factor in the rising cost of living. Obama and Romney talk about fixing the economy by spending more or by not cutting much at all, yet they ignore the plummeting value of our currency, which makes the situation worse. This is a principle of economic liberty and how our Government is violating our economic rights. It is also one of the many reasons why I do not think either of the two candidates have a clue on how to fix our economy because it all starts with the value of the dollar. So I disagree Dan. As I see it, the principle is the right thing to do. Strengthen the currency, reduce the debt, expand economic liberty, cut deficit spending and people who are suffering will receive relief.

Yes, I dislike Obama's progressive statism agenda more than Romney's progressive rhetoric. As for your comment: "Voting third party would be foolish when the intended result for Republicans is to eject Obama from office." I thought the intended result for Republicans was to get Americans back to work, to grow the economy, to reduce the size and interference of Government, to cut spending, to cut taxes, to eliminate the debt, to keep the Nation safe, to increase domestic energy availability and reduce foreign energy dependence, to stabilize social security, to resolve immigration concerns, to create competition in the healthcare system to help lower costs, to protect our Constitutional rights and defend our freedoms. Where is the depth of solutions, insightful ideas, innovative thinking, a detailed vision that inspires Americans to elect Romney our next leader on these issues, as someone who will drive our economic recovery and take our Nation back to prosperity? He doesn't seem to want to commit and show firm principles, he just presents himself as the Anti-Obama candidate. His record doesn't match his rhetoric, and that greatly concerns me. It's as if we have very, very few differences between Obama and Romney on too many important issues. And there in lies the problem for the GOP. Republicans criticize Democrats of blindly voting straight down the ticket, when in fact, it is Republicans who vote straight down the party line 85% of the time as opposed to the Democrat's 60% of the time. They have to start holding the rhetoric of those in office, and those running for office, up to their records and separate the fact from the fiction.

Dan, Thank you for the compliments. I respect your opinions too. In desperate times, when the Country is suffering, men and women of principle should lie to themselves and unite behind someone they don't believe in so they can vote against someone else they also don't believe in? How exactly does that fix our problems and, if I did that, would I still be able to consider myself a man of principle? Republicans had the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House for more than half of this past decade and during that time they racked up trillions in deficit spending and debt. The Democrats had it all for two years and they too raised the debt by trillions more. Over the last two years, Democrats and Republicans have shared power in Washington and the debt still continues to climb by trillions. And all the while WE - ALL OF US - are getting crushed by the costs of war, joblessness, rising prices, falling values, and are left with a bleaker future. Every election we are told, by both sides, how their opponent is the worst person walking on two legs and that THIS election is the most crucial electoral decision ever...until the next election rolls along. So I ask you, when exactly will it be a good time to vote for a third party candidate you believe in at the rate our two-party system is damaging this nation - when we have hit rock-bottom bankruptcy? I am entirely unwilling to give either Romney or Obama my vote. I am siding with the individual who inspires me, who shares my values, my principles and my beliefs. I am voting for the man whose plan I can see actually working to bring this Nation out of the dull-drums and back to prosperity, and that candidate is Gary Johnson.

Bill - You wrote: "The reason is simple big money controls who runs for the office. That is a fact. It has been this way since the Tammany Hall days of the mid 1800's. As for Romney being a chameleon, check the records of others who ran for the office and you'll find they all break their campaign promises once elected." So, If I understand your points correctly: * A vote for either of the two-party candidates is a vote for a Tammany Hall style, Big Money chosen liar? * I should vote for Romney because he is the better of the two Big Money Chosen Liars? Did I miss something, cause I think you meant to say something else.

No problem with me, I'm not voting for Romney or Obama.

(Broken Record Moment) - The Metro Police Department is being created to protect George Norcross' investments in and around Cooper Hospital. - All taxpayers in Camden County will be paying the bill for the Metro/Countywide Force within three years. - Every municipality in Camden County will be pressured and intimidated into joining the County Police Force. - Governor Christie has sold out Camden and Gloucester Counties (on a whole host of serious issues) to Norcross. - The only way to loosen Norcross' grip on our region is by electing Freeholder Board candidates not affiliated with his machine. The only candidates that oppose this plan are the Republicans.

Kudos where kudos are due! I am very pleased to see our Mayor and Council have moved forward with the amendmant to our City Charter to allow for at-large City Council elections. Though it may not be exactly the change that some have wanted, I believe it is a positive step forward and will eventually increase the number of residents willing to run for municipal office.

Reader, You should expect specific answers from Lisa, Anthony, and Dave because they are your City Council candidates. I am not a candidate for City Council - not sure if you were aware of this. Last year when I was a candidate for State Assembly I wrote a series of Q & A's and I started off each answer with a "yes" or "no" response. I am just the City Party's Chairman this year and I want our candidates to express themselves freely, while I too share my own perspectives. I have not asked, and will never force, our candidates to regurgitate what I or Party leadership thinks . I believe that this extremely valuable inter-party political freedom is exactly what Gloucester City politics needs; because it yields free thinkers, not "Yes-Men". I am sure you are just as tired of the "bobble-head" group mentality as I am and we would be no better than the elected officials in office right now if I gave our candidates scripts to read or answered questions for them. Now Dan, in two years when I run for Mayor, you better hold me to the same standard, brother, because I will expect no less. Your friend in liberty, Wil Levins

I do not believe the City Administrator is being utilized to his maximum capability. I believe he has a difficult job, made even more so from a City Government that binds his hands by redirecting his attention frequently. We pay the man a handsome sum to perform his duties - they should let him do his job. In full disclosure, I have not attended a MAC meeting in quite sometime. I know everyone on that committee and they are good, hard working, Gloucester-loving folk. I stopped going because I got the impression that decisions were being made prior to the committee's insights being deliberated or public discussion being developed.

Reader, I am obviously in favor of fishing from the pier. Remember, I'm the guy who's always spouting off about "liberty this" and "rights that". As I have said in prior posts, the pier should have been put out to the market place and allowed to receive offers and development plans from private firms WITHOUT A SPECIFIC AGENDA. I say without an agenda (like a restaurant) so as to solicit a variety of varying ideas and perspectives. Why limit the flow of free ideas? Maybe what was thought to be the best idea at the time could be short changing even better opportunities. As to a plan. I'll share with you some of my personal points that I think are crucial to our community's future success. 1. VASTLY IMPROVED COMMUNICATION FROM CITY GOVERNMENT- There are only two news sources in this City that will provide a fair and abundant outlet for the sharing of public information, communication, and discourse: The Gloucester City News and CNBnews.net - USE THEM REGULARLY and CONSISTENTLY (not just during the weeks preceding an election!) 2. DEVELOPMENT OF A MASTER PLAN: The whole point of a Master Plan is to set the direction, scope, objectives, and goals for our community's future. What is the vision for Gloucester City over the next ten years or more? It cannot come from just a handful of like-minded people in Government but instead must be forged from broader community consensus to facilitate maximum public support and buy-in. All groups must be represented: businesses, the School system, public works, fire, police, administration, local organizations, and most importantly, RESIDENTS. 3. BUDGET, EXPENSES AND PERSONNEL: A complete INDEPENDENT audit of every City department, program, and expenditure should be performed to discern the best allocation of resources for maximum municipal efficiency. (Added Note: The City Solicitor must go. I am still not sure if he performs badly in his duties because of incompetence, lack of preparation, or simple arrogance. Regardless, he is a detriment to our community and advises the City's Government poorly. His inabilities have cost this community a great deal in money and lost opportunities.) 4. MARKET OUR COMMUNITY - Vigorous Promotion of Gloucester City's available land and resources to the marketplace at large. What has our Community Outreach Specialist (or whatever the title is) done to dynamically promote Gloucester City? How about (what's left of) the UEZ? What outlets, trade publications, corporations, websites, or advertising arenas has our City Government promoted our community's benefits to in reaching the free market? (The methods in which Meadowbrook Mews was advertised and promoted bare credence to these concerns.) 5. LESS PUBLIC DIRECTION, MORE PRIVATE INVESTMENT: City Government must stop trying to play real-estate developer and instead should sell publicly held properties to promote vacant lot infill, commercial/residential development, and get the costs/risks involved, as well as the property maintenance, off the public's responsibility. 6. SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE: A review of the law enforcement and community outreach programs, and practices, being utilized currently to devise new or enhanced methods of resolving quality of life issues - especially on the northwest side of the City - by working with our First Responders and community organizations. (I cannot stress this enough: as the Northwest quadrant of the City goes, so eventually will go the rest of our community.)

If the pier were truly a tribute to "Freedom", wouldn't we all have the freedom to fish from it? Let's be honest, "Freedom Pier" and the "Northwind" have just been devices to exercise a nautically enthusiastic hobby. Our City Government has bought into one man's vision and has spent a boatload (ha! - pun) of public money toward making his vision of the area around the Old Coast Guard Base into a reality. The "Northwind" and "Freedom Pier" exist (in its current facade) because Bob Bevan wanted it this way. He has the Mayor's ear, and apparently, the City Government's compass. It goes to reason that Bob helped get Bill James, Jay Brophy and Nick Marchese elected back in 2006 and this is one of the two ways, that I know of, they are rewarding his counsel, advice, efforts...ect. It seems the City's plan (not a Master Plan) is a "Field of Dreams" sequence...as in: If you sail it - I mean - build it, they will come.

I respect the Mayor and Council for trying hard to make Gloucester City a better place to live - I realize it is a thankless job - however, some of their most prominent public projects, like Freedom Pier, Chatham Square/Gloucester Terrace, and Southport - have consumed huge amounts of public tax money for this small community and still remain uncompleted years later. I agree that these public projects are nice in concept, as they should add to the social and economic value of our community. The problem, as it has been debated numerous times over the years on CNB, is the consideration of planning and projecting the "cause and effect" or "risk vs. reward" associated with each of our public projects. I am not trying to play Monday Morning Quarterback - as I have stated many of these things on the record before - but I believe it would have made more sense to wait for a restaurant deal to be in the actual construction stages before making aesthetic enhancements to the pier. Spending a whole lot of public funds to enhance the pier in advance of a deal seemed premature, wasteful, and as seen, hard to protect. Security, construction costs, architectural design, landscape planning, pedestrian access, regional promotion, traffic access, and many more topics could have all been done in conjunction with the new restaurateurs to provide an overall comprehensive plan for Freedom Pier's eventual completion - which would have yielded lower costs and less headaches to the taxpayer and City Government. I also do not believe this project needed to be done in order to lure a business to that site, as a good entrepreneur or developer would see Freedom Pier for the same potential we all have seen in it for years. I've belabored the importance of increased communication with the public and less Government direction on private sector actions for a reason...doing so would save money, shift costs and risks to private firms, as well as bring new ideas and valuable perspectives to the table that benefit the entire community. I realize change isn't easy but, it sure as hell is expensive.