First it was "herbal extracts" and now it's "bath salts" not only making the news on a regular basis, but prompting many a discussion on WILK radio. After a lengthy back-and-forth on a recent edition of the Sue Henry show, I came to the following conclusions:
1. A large segment of the population favors the legalization of all drugs, including the aforementioned newcomers to the never ending party.
2. Very many of our fellow citizens think that prostitution should be legalized.
3. Recently, it has also come to light that these still legal products driving the recent news and conversation should also be legalized.
4. With WILK as my polling data, most seem to be against the selling of our state-owned liquor stores, with the rationale being that privatizing the sale of these products would provide easier access to minors. As in, we need to maintain strict control.
Okay, so despite the fact that I visit my favorite prostitute twice a week, despite the fact that I like to unwind in my den with some marijuana laced with synthetic angel dust, never mind that I drink like a fish when I'm coming down from yet another high and make no mistake...the excessive drinking and whoring and drugging and smoking is no big deal, but I better not catch my friggin' kid drinking beers over at Timmy's house!
Boy, oh boy.
What sorts of role models are we?
According to the Lu Lac Political Letter, we've got some sleazy phone polling going on. Yep, apparently some underhanded, dirty politics is going on here in Wilkes-Barre. I'm shocked. Saddened. Horrified. Driven to tears, I am.
And long before we next vote, I'm sure we'll hear that some dirty trickster is out there stealing yard signs under the cover of darkness. Or somebody threw a non-organic egg at a candidate's house. Or some such equally useless twaddle.
Issues, people! Issues!
I'd bet that our pretend president--Baroke Oblahblah freaking hates this group...
Seriously, if I'm prosperous, doesn't that mean somebody less prosperous, "less fortunate," got screwed over somehow?
Just like I said, this new agenda-driven site---Stop Corruption Now!-- publishes inaccuracies and half-truths. The new post, "Mayor and City Council Sell Out Parsons," would be laughable if it weren't so completely lame. A real knee-slapper, I tell you.
Here's the scoop...
The City sold the old firehouse in Parsons without knowing that the Parsons Little League was utilizing storage space on the firehouse property. When the City caught wind of this, a meeting was held on March 3rd with the president of the league, and the city is going to provide a brand new storage shed as well as new dugouts at no cost to the league. And all done by volunteer union labor, no less.
Two questions. What's the sudden concern with the Parsons section? And, are we supporting a mayoral candidate from that neck of the woods without stating as much? Thin, man. Pretty frickin' thin.
2 more years and a taxpayer-provided retirement, huh? Stopped much corruption lately?
Not!!! to both.
Buh-bye
3 comments:
This blog is the same guy who was recently disbared for taking money from single woman and senior citizens and not doing the legal work for them. He mislead them and now he is doing his best to mislead the residents of the city.
Mark, ask him one question for me please. In the all of the years he was the administrator, how much money did they put into the firehouses Leightion was forced to closed? Surprisingly, he forgot to mention that Leighton not only built a new firehouse in Parsons, he outfitted it with a new engine and ambulence.
There are some benefits from fiscal discipline. Mr Hayward left the administration with $11 million in unpaid bills.
Finally, do not let him give you grief for not posting his answer. He did not post mine either on his site.
Joe
Charlotte clearly does not have a background to run this city. So you have to hope she would surround herself with character people with good backgrounds in government to compensate for her lack of experience.
Instead, she picks the guy who single-handedly let the city's computer system crash after being warned. As a result, the city lost thousands of electronic police records.
Have him explain, as a former lawyer, how it was legal for the city to sell a sliver of land to itself for $800,000 when he was the administrator?
Seems like the limited caseload for Mr Hayward has him posting now in response to my questions. Why did he fail to answer them? How can you be advising Ms Raup on public safety? Tell us how much money you invested into the fire department during your 8 year tenure at City Hall? Were you there as the police department went from 90 members to 65? Who can we point the finger on that one Jimmy?
Are you going to threaten the media outlets who exposed your legal troubles?
Mark, sorry for using your forum to answer a coward. I do not give my full name because I know who he is associated with, and while not impressed, the are scary.
Post a Comment