Robert Winters, Bigot

Here's another example of Robert Winters spewing hatred toward Cambridge residents sounding like the stereotypical FBI informant. For many years he expressed his hatred toward persons with disabilities who dared to run for office. Police, FBI agents and informants uniformly express their hatred toward persons accused of crime in news stories. Winters shows animosity toward the US Constitution which promotes the quaint notion, alien to Winters, that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Based upon a news story in the Cambridge Chronicle Winters declares this man to be a "dirt bag" dehumanizing him. Winters is an ordinary Cambridge bigot; just like the lawless FBI agents in Boston who framed four white men for murder; and just like the agents who protected fugitive James Bulger indicted for 19 homicides while working as an FBI informant. Winters openly ridicules and humiliates persons he believes have disabilities. He is the pre-eminent chronicler of Cambridge events for the bigots who share his obscene opinions.

Later Winters added his sentencing guidelines before the man was arraigned and charged no less found guilty. Based on a news story in the always reliable Cambridge Chronicle he "knows" the man is guilty as accused. That is indicative of how the FBI thinks and acts toward civilians.

[Robert Winters has a PhD. from Boston University and is an occasional instructor at Harvard University. It is not known if he is always mistaken for the smartest man in the room.]


Cambridge man arrested after armed robbery at Harvard
By WCVB
WCVB
Posted Nov 13, 2010 @ 05:13 PM
Last update Nov 14, 2010 @ 08:58 AM

http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x1270135794/Man-arrested-after-armed-robbery-at-Harvard

rwinters [comments below story]
November 14, 2010

[First comment]
"Not the first offense for this dirtbag:"

[Later]
"He fired a shot at a police officer. If there's any justice in this world, he should serve at least a decade."

[Citing]
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x802003033/Burglary-suspect-bragged-about-his-car-stealing-exploits

Is This Official FBI Policy Statement?


Winters a math lecturer and political expert (?) who was unable to get elected to the City Council describes Larry Ward's actions as "stumbling?" Are his uninspired observations the official policy position of the Boston FBI or only his personal opinion? Is Ward stupid and incompetent or are only smooth talking Harvard and MIT grads acceptable as Cambridge officials? Citizens vote according to perceptions not reality. PR flacks manipulate citizens who remain clueless due to the failure of journalists who are as clueless about politics, history and logic. Larry Ward campaigned as a sincere citizen wanting to improve the city. How many career politicians even appear to be that?

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=527754

New Councillor Seeks Own Niche
Ward chairs of University Relations committee as those ties are stretched
Published On Sunday, April 19, 2009 11:58 PM
By DANELLA H. DEBEL and SARAH J. HOWLAND
Harvard Crimson Staff Writers

Lawless Cambridge City Council

MAR 27, 2008: Letter to Cambridge MA City Council


Cambridge City Council March 27, 2008
City Hall
795 Mass Avenue
Cambridge MA 02139 Interpreting City Council Rules

Honorable Councilors:

It was delightful to see Vice Mayor and City Councilor Brian Murphy holding the gavel at the March 24, 2008 meeting. Murphy belongs to the new breed of Harvard lawyer in the tradition of Eliot Spitzer, Barack Obama and Deval Patrick.
He is one of many typical Harvard lawyers to exercise public power. Like Obama, Patrick and Spitzer Murphy is an underprivileged member of society. Patrick has two McMansions and rides in a Cadillac at taxpayer expense to help reduce global warming.
Obama is the candidate of change who raised about $175 million to promote his image among the hoped-for voters. He spends the money on jet travel around the country helping to reduce global warming. He hires high priced PR firms with corporate connections e.g., to ATT a broadcaster of pornography. He buys advertising on TV and the internet to raise more money. Obama is reported to be a poor black man. But he earns more than $1 million per year in sales from his books alone. His income with his wife’s is about $1 million more.
There’s nothing wrong with being rich. Pretending to be poor raises the questions. Obama is a close associate of Deval Patrick who masquerades as a civil rights attorney while promoting corporate gambling interests. Patrick used his hoped-for approval of casinos to balance the budget, which he unbalanced upon taking office. Casinos prey on poor uneducated persons.
Eliot Spitzer denied abusing his office for many months. He was under scrutiny by three state agencies for abusing the police powers of the state. When his money transfers and visits with ladies of the night were revealed he resigned in disgrace.
Unlike his fellow city councilors Brian Murphy has the good sense to recuse himself when voting on appropriations for the Cambridge Health Alliance for which his wife works.
But like his fellow councilors he exercises the city council rules in an arbitrary and capricious manner focused on restricting citizen participation. That is a direct violation of the goals of the city council. Goal number 4 (page 3 of goals) states: “Improve and simplify public access to city services and provide more and better opportunities for the public to participate in governing.”
Policy guidelines for this goal states:
∑ Continue to improve and coordinate public information functions.
∑ Increased utilization of new technology both for easier access to services and information, and for encouragement and support of public input.

On March 24, 2008 Murphy chaired the Council meeting while the Mayor was attending a funeral. When I was called for public comment he cited Council Rule number 37, Section 4, which states: “Poster or placards must remain outside the Sullivan Chamber.”
He objected to my sign, which I wore for many months at many council meetings. It says,

OVERTHROW HEALY ROSSI

I never saw that rule enforced over the past ten years I’ve been attending council meetings. Many people including lawyers and citizens bring signs to show the council what they are talking about. The council doesn’t enforce its own rules among the members. I’ve complained about their lack of knowledge of the rules for four years. Twice an order was introduced to teach the council Robert’s Rules and the council’s rules. But they refuse to learn them.
The council does not enforce the following Council rules, by which the meetings are supposed to be run.

Rule 14 regarding conflicts of interest.
Rule 16 regarding reconsideration.
Rule 17 regarding special events.
Rule 23C(1)(a) regarding Public comment.
Rule 37 Section 1 regarding delay and interrupting.
Rule 37 Section 2 regarding private conversations.
Rule 37 Section 3 regarding eating and drinking.
Rule 37 Section 6 regarding remarks.

Like the other typical Harvard lawyers Councilor Murphy selectively enforced the rules on March 24, 2008 for his own benefit and to the detriment of the Council Goals and to the detriment of the few courageous citizens who come to the council meetings to participate in government.
He joins the tradition of previous Harvard affiliates who chaired the council meetings being strict and abusive with the citizens often provoking them, but ignoring the rules regarding the way that the elected officials act arrogantly disregarding the rules. That is the tradition of typical Harvard lawyers.
Murphy is an obedient servant of the homosexual lobby. Was that two of the priests of the lobby at the March 24, 2008 meeting?
The councilors are humorous to watch because they all know how to suspend the rules, which makes it unnecessary to learn any other rules. If a councilor does not know what to do and they often don’t know, the councilors just ask to suspend the rules. Simple.
On the agenda for March 24, 2008 the Mayor who usually runs the meetings for this term, sponsored an order regarding the council rules.

Order #7. That the Government Operations Committee review City Council policy on Public Comment with a view towards making any necessary amendments and report back to the City Council on this matter.
Mayor Simmons


Robert Winters, the Minister of Propaganda for the Cambridge Chapter of the Conformist Party wrote on his blog:

“I'm not sure what the mayor has in mind with this order, but we would all benefit from changes that limit the role of the narcissists that now dominate public comment at City Council meetings. There's an old phrase we used to hear a lot around Cambridge: "The bad drive out the good." When nut cases (do I really have to name them) turn the opening of every City Council meeting into a circus side show, this benefits no one and does nothing to promote democracy. Of course you don't really have to refer this to a committee for a solution. All it takes is a mayor with a firm hand and a heavy gavel. Enough already!”

Robert is a nice person. His comments on this proposed order are not bad for a chubby cheeked victim of bullies. Would that explain why Robert picks on persons with disabilities to ridicule and to humiliate? He believes that persons with disabilities should not participate in government and should not run for office. He accused some people of being narcissists. But he comments on everything on his blog and his blog is named for himself. He projects onto others his own failings.
He resorts to personal attacks on behalf of the Conformist Party to which all nine councilors belong. He attributes disabilities to those he dislikes. And uses allegations of disability to justify restrictions on their participation in civic affairs, contrary to City Council goals, and the discrimination laws. He shares the unlawful policies of the Conformist Party regarding persons with disabilities. What a guy.
He must have been abused severely by those high school bullies. This is the kind of person that Harvard and Brandeis hire as a part time instructor. He is one person from who Harvard students learn to abuse persons with disabilities.
What is most charming about the delightful Harvard instructor, who masquerades as a professor, is that he works for a police agency, the FBI or one of the many local operations in Cambridge. He abuses that police power uttering hate speech toward persons with disabilities. The Cambridge police enforce bias laws contrary to law – misfeasance. But they permit this poseur to abuse those same powers.
Winters used to come to the council meetings and bloviate on matters in his serious tone. Was it his bad comments that drove away the many persons who used to attend council meetings?
Robert is a city councilor wannabe having run and lost for that august office. He’s also an election commission wannabe. But the Manager refused to appoint him. Be nice to Robert. He is love-deprived, insecure and needs to pick on persons with disabilities to make him feel better about himself.
Call him and tell him how great he is and that you share his concern about vulnerable persons exercising their Constitutional rights. They are not worthy like academic super star Robert.

Money and Politics

Money and Politics

[This letter was published in the Cambridge Chronicle on Thursday November 1, 2007.]

'Lame-stream media' doesn’t understand campaign $$
Tue Oct 30, 2007, 03:44 PM EDT

Cambridge - It is business as usual in Cambridge, as in other elections. And they wonder why few people vote. Not only do campaign contributors get access to the public officials, they also get their names in the newspapers. (Matt Dunning, “As war chests swell, City Council candidates fight for a seat,” Cambridge Chronicle, Oct. 25). At the national level the lame-stream media reports how much money each candidate raised. Does that help to distinguish between the candidates to find out what they think and what kind of human being they are? The more money the better person?

The Cambridge Chronicle celebrates Robert Winters as a “political watchdog.” But Winters is a contributor of money to some candidates. Does the Chronicle believe that Winters is objective while giving money to some candidates? Is it usual for watchdogs to make campaign contributions? Also quoted is John Moot, another contributor of money to politicians. Do campaign contributions bring access to the media as well as to politicians?

Winters openly expresses his animosity toward persons with disabilities and persons with disabilities who run for office. He ridicules vulnerable persons while revealing that incumbents have an advantage. Well, duh. I never thought of that. Does ignoring Winters’ bigotry indicate that the Chronicle writers share the negative bias toward person with disabilities? It is not as if the issue was not brought to attention of the editors. I wrote to them and spoke with them several times. (Matt Dunning, the author of the article, did not respond to my e-mail.) Still they condone denying persons with disabilities access to their basic rights and privileges enjoyed by others.

Drew Faust is celebrated as the first woman president of Harvard; Nikki Tsongas as the only woman member of the Mass. congressional delegation; Deval Patrick as the first person of color governor of Mass. But the Chronicle only knows that they are unable to find any campaign information about the first person with a disability to run for City Council, Kathy Podgers. Does this indicate that the Chronicle writers have bigoted attitudes toward persons with disabilities?

ROY BERCAW
ENOUGH ROOM
PO Box 400297

Watchdogs Give Money?

Watchdogs Give Money?

[This letter was published in the Cambridge Chronicle on Thursday November 1, 2007.]

It is business as usual in Cambridge as in other elections. And they wonder
why few people vote. Not only do campaign contributors get access to the public
officials they also get their names in the newspapers. (Matt Dunning, "As war
chests swell, City Council candidates fight for a seat," Cambridge Chronicle,
Oct 25, 2007) At the national level the lame-stream media reports how much much
money each candidate raised. Does that help to distinguish between the
candidates to
find out what they think and what kind of human being they are? The more money
the better person?
The Cambridge Chronicle celebrates Robert Winters as a "political
watchdog." But Winters is a contributor of money to some candidates. Does the
Chronicle believe that Winters is objective while giving money to some
candidates? Is it usual for watchdogs to make campaign contributions? Also
quoted is John Moot,
another contributor of money to politicians. Do campaign contributions bring
access to the media as well as to politicians?
Winters openly expresses his animosity toward persons with disabilities and
persons with disabilities who run for office. He ridicules vulnerable persons
while revealing that incumbents have an advantage. Well Duh! I never thought of
that! Does ignoring Winters' bigotry indicate that the Chronicle writers share
the negative bias toward person with disabilities? It is not as if the issue was
not brought to attention of the editors. I wrote to them and spoke with them
several times. (Matt Dunning the author of the article did not respond to my
email.) Still they condone denying persons with disabilities access to their
basic rights and privileges enjoyed by others.
Drew Faust is celebrated as the First Woman President of Harvard; Nikki
Tsongas as the only woman member of the Mass Congressional delegation; Deval
Patrick as the First Person of Color Governor of MA. But the Chronicle only
knows that they unable to find any campaign information about the First Person
With a disability to run for City Council Kathy Podgers. Does this indicate that
the Chronicle writers have bigoted attitudes toward persons with disabilities?

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

As war chests swell, City Council candidates fight for a seat
By Matt Dunning/Chronicle Staff
Thu Oct 25, 2007, 11:52 AM EDT
Cambridge - As the weeks leading up to the City Council election wind down,
evidence of the impending showdown between the 15 candidates is beginning to
pile up.

In pockets of the city, placards and signs adorn laws, fences and building
facades. Residents have started receiving automated phone calls from candidates
trying to gather all the potential votes time will allow. Hanging pamphlets
dangle from doorknobs, while leaflets begin to crowd mailboxes.

Piles of a different sort have been expanding in the candidates� war chests.
Since Jan. 1, the 15 active candidates � excluding state Senator and City
Councilor Anthony Galluccio � have raised a combined $238,064 in the race for
City Council. Galluccio, who is still technically on the ballot for the Council
election Nov. 6, raised about half of that amount on his own � about $115,721 �
but has said he would not continue to serve on the Council past his current
term.

Of the 15 candidates actively pursuing a seat on the Council, incumbent
Henrietta Davis raised the most money for her campaign, raking in $38,575,
including contributions from Cambridge Neighborhoods Association Chairman John
Moot, Central Square Business Association President Carl Barron and even her own
research assistant, Penny Peters.

Tim Toomey wasn�t far behind Davis in money raised. Toomey collected $35,886 in
10 months of fundraising, including sizeable donations from the ABCC
Investigators Association, a Boston Police patrolmen�s association and Boston
Fire Fighters Local 718.

Among the challengers, Edward Sullivan topped the pack at $24,730 raised since
January, with contributions coming from former City Councilor Bill Walsh � who
spent time in jail for bank fraud in the 1990s � as well as Fire Chief John
Gelinas and erstwhile state Senate candidate Timothy Flaherty. Sam Seidel, an
urban planner, collected donations from former state Sen. Jarrett Barrios and
political watchdog Robert Winters, among others, and found himself nipping at
Sullivan�s heals in the challengers� pool with $21,296.

Perhaps the most famous name to appear on anyone�s donor list was that of former
Cantabrigian and New York Knicks player Patrick Ewing, who gave $500 to the
campaign efforts of Kevin Moore.

No campaign finance information could be found for candidates Kathy Podgers and
Gregg Moree.

Seidel, who was defeated in the 2005 election, said he felt as though his
experience in his first election might give him an edge this year.

�Each election season has its own dynamic,� Seidel said. �In 2005, I was brand
new to the voters of Cambridge, so there was a lot of learning all the way
around.�

Seidel also noted that there were no vacant seats on the Council prior to the
2005 election. This year, with Galluccio promising to leave the Council behind,
Seidel said 2007 may be the best opportunity he�ll have to make run at the
Council.

�That makes this effort feel different than the last,� Seidel said. �I never
want to count anything before it hatches, but somebody is going to fill that
vacancy, and we have a very clear goal in front of us.�

Though the final two weeks before the election are sure to be tense for the 15
candidates, Winters said he was hard-pressed to recall a quieter buildup to
Election Day in recent memory.

�This is a very quiet election season,� Winters said. �I�m kind of bewildered by
it. Barring any major crisis that sends everybody into a panic, this will be a
very sleepy election.�

Sleepy elections, Winters said, are usually good news for incumbent candidates.

�Incumbency is huge,� Winters said. �It�s a very hard thing to get past. The
people I consider to be really safe are Tim Toomey and David Maher.�

�Of course, that�s the last thing either one of those guys want to hear,� he
added.

Indeed, the philosophy in Cambridge when running for City Council is �run
scared,� which is to say candidates would be loathe to tell voters they feel the
least bit confident they�ll pull enough number-one votes to win.

�No candidate wants voters to think he or she is safe,� Winters said. �That way,
they don�t assume their first choice for the Council will get elected, and they
don�t wander off to support another candidate.�

Running scared is exactly what Councilor incumbent Marjorie Decker said she�s
doing this election year. With other progressive candidates such as Craig
Kelley, Jonathan Janik and Sam Seidel in the mix, Decker said she makes it clear
to each voter she meets that she�ll need every one of their votes to win her
fifth consecutive term on the Council.

�I tell each and everyone of my constituents, �Don�t assume that I have the
voter base to get elected,�� Decker said. �The only way I get re-elected is with
the [requisite] 10 percent of No. 1 votes.�

Another incumbent Winters said might need to adapt the �running scared� mantra
is Brian Murphy. Murphy has a long history of service to the city, but may lack
the flash to win out over a challenger like Seidel, Winters said.

�Brian Murphy is as competent as they come, but he�s not a screamer, and he�s
not trying to make headlines,� Winters said. �He�s a person who�s potentially
vulnerable because of that.�

Murphy�s campaign treasurer, Daniel Schlozman, said he agreed that running
scared was a good idea for any candidate, particularly incumbents.

�It�s unlikely [Cambridge] will see a high voter turnout this year,� Schlozman
said. �I wouldn�t be shocked if an incumbent or two loses.�

One candidate hoping to be the beneficiary of some of those wandering votes is
Mid-Cambridge resident Larry Ward. Without the advantage of much name
recognition in the political arena, Ward said he felt good about his prospects
heading into the final weeks before the election.

�I love my chances,� Ward said. �Any time you have a vacancy, it creates hope.
Incumbency is a tough thing to overcome, but I think people in Cambridge are
really ready for a change.�

Cambridge MA Ignores Person with Disabilities

Cambridge MA Ignores Person with Disabilities

IMHO journalists share with politicians the marginalization of persons with
disabilities (PWD). Local and national journalists ignore my inquiries while
continuing to insult and to ridicule PWD.
The Chronicle is co-sponsor of some of the candidate forms. Isn't it
curious how all candidates support affordable housing, the environment and
Education? Yet each forum asks the same lame questions. Is that news? I heard no
questions about discrimination toward PWD. Only Kathy Podgers mentioned a disability issue. At the School Comm disability is an education and health care issue with no focus on discrimination, which is thought of as not getting treatment.
The Cambridge Human Rights Commission, the Police Review Board and the ACLU
omitted PWD from their forums on discrimination. The Chronicle did not report
that.
After the two candidate forums on Oct 10, 2007 at CRLS Lesley Phillips who
is Chair of the Progressive Democrats, a ward chair for the Cambridge Democratic
Party, a member of the new Gay and Lesbian Commission, and a leading campaigner
for Al Gore openly insulted me. She is aware of negative stereotyping, having
experienced much herself.
Robert Winters (a love object of Phillips), celebrated as the "premier
observer" of Cambridge politics stated in print that he does not believe that
PWD should run for office. He openly ridicules on his web pages a few local
residents. He is not vilified. He is celebrated while having those views. Would
that be tolerated if he said the same things about persons of color, women etc?
Why was that not reported in the Chronicle?
Journalists are aware of bias toward women, homosexuals and persons of
color. But there is little interest in unlawful bias toward PWD. Liberal bloggers on
Blue Man Group ignore this issue as well. They are as biased as the rest of the
area. Let me guess, it just didn't enter their mind?

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Name Calling Wins

Name Calling Wins

Same sex marriage is a question of law. The state court decision used to "legalize" it is flawed. The state constitution clearly states that matters regarding marriage are to be left to the Governor and to the legislature. The State Supreme Court has no jurisdiction. Quoting a math professor on this issue is like quoting me on economics. Robert Winter's feelings on this issue are meaningless. (CLIFFORD M MARKS, "Romney files lawsuit after legislators recessed before vote on issue," Harvard Crimson, November 26, 2006)
Are there no law professors at Harvard who are concerned about the lawlessness of the state government? Why not repeat that Harvard's Senator, Jarrett Barrios, called the Governor a "fraud," because he filed the suit. Now there's a rational argument. Calling the Governor names is why the same sex marriage decision should be enforced and protected from those inconvenient constitutional provisions.
--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

Romney files lawsuit after legislators recessed before vote on issue
Published On 11/26/2006 10:21:35 PM
By CLIFFORD M MARKS
The Harvard Crimson Contributing Writer

Outgoing Massachusetts Governor W. Mitt Romney announced last week that he would file a lawsuit with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in an attempt to put an amendment banning gay marriage to a statewide referendum. The state constitution requires that a quarter of the legislature’s 200 members approve an amendment in two consecutive sessions before it can be put to a popular vote, the final hurdle before becoming law.
However, because the measure would most likely have the support of 50 legislators, opponents have recessed the legislative session before the amendment could be voted on so as to prevent it from getting on the ballot. The motion to recess early, which needed the backing of a majority of legislators to pass, received 109 votes, including those of Cambridge’s three legislators.
The move came as no surprise to Robert Winters, editor of the Cambridge Civic Journal and an instructor at the Extension School. “I think they’re all lobbied extensively by certain people around town and the pressure they feel tends to come from the people who are very satisfied by going into recess the way they did.” If the amendment clears the legislature and receives the approval of a majority of state voters, Massachusetts would lose its status as the only state in the country to allow gay couples to marry.
Romney has said he hopes to get a ruling from the SJC that will either force the legislature to vote on the amendment or place the amendment on the ballot if the current legislative session expires on Jan. 2 without a vote on the amendment. Activitsts on both sides of the gay-marriage debate are now turning their attention to the SJC with little indication as to how it will act on Romney’s request.
“It’s anybody’s guess,” Winters said of the outcome. “I think anybody who claims to know how it’s going to be adjudicated is just blowing steam.” http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=515976