|
|
Post by pat2345 on May 7, 2012 10:15:32 GMT -5
Honestly, we only have one candidate, who holds a degree higher than a HS diploma. In fact, this candidate holds the following degrees, this election should be a landslide win for Stephen D'Amato.
- Doctor of Pharmacy from Shenandoah University in Virginia
- Masters in Pharmacy Medicine from Hibernia College in Dublin
- B.S. in Pharmacy from St. John's University in Queens
BTW, it doesn't hurt that he has business experience as well from Pfizer, which also far exceeds anything the other two candidates can offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Wendt on May 8, 2012 11:05:55 GMT -5
Mr. D'Amato described himself during the meet the candidates event as having been a "jock" in high school, played football and baseball and another sport. He told me he made Varsity Baseball as a pitcher in 9th grade. In other words, he is certainly multi-faceted and talented, not one-dimensional.
Chris Wendt
|
|
|
|
Post by lilly on May 9, 2012 13:07:50 GMT -5
Stephen D’Amato is definitely the most qualified.
I didn’t know about his degrees. I’m impressed. He seems like a nice, unpretentious guy.
I’m also impressed that given that his family is so young (and it is hard to get out at night when they are) he has found time to be involved sooner vs. later e.g., BAC, Wantagh El PTA, etc. He must be doing that bc he is interested/vested in the education in Wantagh. And obviously, smart enough to make contributions that takes this district into the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by mommymomo on May 10, 2012 11:04:37 GMT -5
I have not seen one sign for anyone other than Greco. I think he will win.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Wendt on May 11, 2012 4:50:12 GMT -5
In response to the following comment by Lilly: “Stephen D’Amato is definitely the most qualified.” Mr. D’Amato possesses solid credentials; he is articulate and impressive to speak with. Stephen will be a great addition to the Board. But for this election I would like to see someone with more hands-on experience with community affairs. Perhaps next year for Steve D’Amato? When deciding to support, endorse, and vote for someone for the Board of Education, the total picture should be considered. The two most important considerations are the needs of the District at this time, and, which candidate will best address those needs if elected. Separately, I will be endorsing another of the three candidates, calling upon my own experience serving on the Board under the leadership of four of Wantagh’s previous Superintendents: Art Venezia, George Besculides, Carl Bonuso, and Lydia Begley (who was promoted to the post shortly after I retired from the Board). I specifically mention Superintendents, the professional educational leaders of any school district, because that is where Wantagh’s greatest and most urgent need lies at this time. The candidate I am endorsing is the best equipped to successfully address our urgent need for the successful transition and “taking root” of our incoming Superintendent, Phil D'Angelo. If you have read the candidates profiles on Patch you may have figured out which candidate I am going to endorse. If not, then please watch this space to learn more. Respectfully, Chris Wendt |
|
|
|
Post by biogirl35 on May 11, 2012 16:15:33 GMT -5
Why does it seem Greco is the only one who is campaigning?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Wendt on May 11, 2012 20:30:25 GMT -5
Biogirl35 noted and asked:
"Why does it seem Greco is the only one who is campaigning?" Another poster noted that lawn signs are an expression of freedom of speech. So is having no lawn sign. Challenging the fealty of one's friends and associates by suggesting they display a lawn sign could easily give people the impression of those signs being both "free" "speech", and, that they constitute "campaigning". However, based on what some people have told me, some of those lawn signs mean nothing of the sort, not this year. Me? I counted all the lawn signs on every house on my own block. That tells me, campaign-wise at least, that three out of twenty four homes with signs (other than for their siding contractor) support the one candidate who visibly appears to be campaigning, while the other 21 homes are exercising their free speech right to not support that candidate. That's 12-1/2% favorable to the campaigning candidate, 87-1/2% unfavorable, as one way of looking at it, at least on my street. But this was a truly excellent question you have asked, and one which should be given a lot of thought by anyone puzzled by this appearance, and we should all be puzzled by it. I have delved into this and learned for myself the answers, which are different depending which candidate was asked. However, I did not delve into this for public consumption of the answers I got and I will not be revealing them, here. Sorry, my right to privacy, so you understand. If you rely on lawn signs to tell you how to vote, then your choice is easy, and your job has been done for you, except for you showing up to vote the way the signs point. Critical thinkers and skeptics of strange appearances have choices other than what the signs want you to do with your vote. Hurry! Tuesday will be fast upon us, and all this apparent campaigning will be over before you know it. My money is on Peter Brasile. You know that, too! I think I am campaigning for my candidate, right? I mean that is my right! Rightfully yours. Chris Wendt |
|
|
|
Post by biogirl35 on May 12, 2012 6:55:26 GMT -5
Chris,
Thank you for your intelligent reply.
|
|
|
|
Post by momma13 on May 12, 2012 11:29:40 GMT -5
It amazes me how many people speak from both sides of his/her mouth. Having degrees doesn't make you supper intelligent. There are many people who are book smart and have no common sense. Being a problem solver is a quality i'm looking for. Along with knowledge of the district, its' needs and what the people want. There are so many people who bash sports and now this candidate is golden because he was a "jock?" You're worried about who has more lawn signs? Wow, scary.
|
|
