Zombie attack – Rosemary Woods returns to life, edits Greenwich debate tape

Republicans are making noise about a missing two minute segment from the tape of the recent Selectman’s debate in which the Democrat candidate, Lin Lavery, referred to Wilbur Peck and Armstrong Court as ghettos. Big whoop. Lavery explained, plausibly enough, that she used to term to describe the isolated nature of those projects and to urge a fuller integration of the residents into the general community.

While I disagree strongly with Lavery’s proposal to achieve this integration by erecting low income housing on the playing fields of the Riverside and Old Greenwich schools, and her idea that the Riverside Yacht Club would donate the land it presently uses for tennis courts for the same purpose is just plain crazy, her use of the term ghetto is entirely appropriate. The word, the dictionary tells me, comes from a Venetian dialect and refers to the island, with a foundry on it, where Jews were confined long ago. If a place is isolated and discriminatory, ghetto is an appropriate term, as in “pink collar ghetto”, or “Cos Cob”.

I’m far more interested in learning what, if any, specific plans the candidates have for controlling spending – what about Lash’s idea of abolishing the position of Tax Collector, for instance – what do they think about that? – or how about Tesei’s proposal to charge fifty bucks for wheel chair rides on the Island Beach ferry? There’s something to discuss – Lavery’s perfectly apt choice of words is not.


Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “Zombie attack – Rosemary Woods returns to life, edits Greenwich debate tape

  1. CvK

    Since ghettos are designated areas for legally segregated undesirable groups of society, the term should not apply to the fine Housing Authority facilities in Greenwich. Housing Authority residents ( not clients, tenants, or subsidized rent recipients) are not selected with any discriminating standards, and include a representative cross section of the population.

    Of course, the one thing all Housing Authority residents have in common is that they are “financially challenged”, poor,or “working poor”.
    Since this segment of our population is segregated out and housed in legally structured housing complexes, it could be claimed that Greenwich is discriminating against the Poor, detests their living among the good people, and has put them in Greenwich Ghettos or GG’s.

  2. Anonymous

    In today’s Greenwich Time Lavery states her belief that at least one demographic group is better off kept sequestered among its own kind in ghettos…oh! I mean projects:

    “The model that was used for affordable housing in the ’50s was to build projects,” Lavery said Monday. “This model isn’t the best vision for today. It’s really not the Greenwich way of doing things and will not work for maintaining community character. The only exception could be that seniors like to be together and we can best provide services when seniors live together.”

    Yes, already rounded up and corralled for the convenience of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel’s death panel.

    (That woman just can’t seem to keep her foot out of her mouth.)

  3. dogwalker

    Interesting. Here, as elsewhere on the net, all the comments are about the remark . . . nothing about the tape being erased!