Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania
 [Register]
Northeastern Pennsylvania Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pocono area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Would you vote for Chris Doherty for mayor if the election were held today?
Yes 17 33.33%
No 34 66.67%
Voters: 51. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-23-2007, 04:55 PM
 
1,251 posts, read 3,313,546 times
Reputation: 432

Advertisements

It's about caring about what goes on around me. I don't care about your family. I'm sorry, but I really don't. I don't expect you to care about mine, either. If you get dust on your house, or water in your basement, I'm going to look at it as "better you than me". That's just how it is. I'm not as philanthropic as you are, I suppose.

Am I pleased with the city? Yeah, for the most part, otherwise I wouldn't be here. Is it perfect? Hardly, and I never implied that I thought it was.

I'm generally OK with what's going on around here. Honestly. You're really not doing much to change my thoughts, because, like I said, I really don't care what you think. You do not effect me, even indirectly, so rant away. Make all the difference you think you can. Take yourself as seriously as you think you need to be. I'm just gonna sit here, live my life, enjoy my family, and roll with it. If I'm unhappy with something, I'll deal with it. Maybe I'll get results, maybe I won't. My life's too short to worry about you, a stranger across town, do, or anyone else but my family. If voting for Gatelli, or Fanucci, or Courtright, or Joe Schmo from Idaho pisses someone off, bonus points for me.


Preach on. I'll keep on being entertained by you, Patilla, Council as a whole, and a lot of other people.

I'll also laugh heartily when the Janet Evans machine implodes on itself because she's a fraud.

 
Old 08-23-2007, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,101,492 times
Reputation: 1893
Just part of the problem and not part of the solution, thats great. I care about my family and the city we live in, outside of my neighborhood, I care but I want my son to be raised to care about what goes around him and to change the wrongs he sees because thats what good caring people do. You must be a great example to follow, do you drive by a accident instead of helping someone who is hurt? If your neighbors house was on fire would you wet yours down first or go and see if they need help or even got out ok. Again you have brought nothing to the table, you like your digs and smart ass comments about Janet and scranton politics but when it comes down to it, your f%^king clueless as to how to change anything but yes you do like to add your two cents and stupid comments but have not once in any of these threads brought anything of any substance to the table to debate. The funny thing you have been asked time and time again to just debate the issues and yet you can't, you like to interject your stupid remarks but you are unable to really discuss anything with any of us, thats sad. Thats typical scranton.
 
Old 08-23-2007, 07:53 PM
 
1,251 posts, read 3,313,546 times
Reputation: 432
What problem did I cause? I didn't vote for a single person sitting on council or in the mayors chair. What in this town is my fault?

What I want out of the town is obviously vastly different than what you want out of it. Maybe I have lower expectations. Maybe yours are unreasonably high. Maybe I'm easily satisfied. Maybe you're never satisfied.

It's farcical the way you have me and my motives entirely figured out from some posts on a message board. Whatever gets you off. Like I said, you don't matter in my world. You're nothing more than entertainment for me. You and your constant tantrums just make me shake my head in disbelief that there are people with such senses of entitlement around. I've honestly never held people in such contempt as I do the "regular" council speakers who think they represent "the people." That's truly very funny to me. And more than a little pathetic.

Cheers.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 05:18 AM
 
Location: Sheeptown, USA
3,236 posts, read 6,661,422 times
Reputation: 907
You're a great armchair quarterback CHS89. You make comments just for the sake of making them. You really add nothing. If we say something is black, you have to say it's white just to disagree. So what you're saying is you care only about yourself and your problems. You wouldn't help someone out if they needed it even if you could provide that help because it doesn't affect you? That not a great way to live life. But then again your life is yours and you choose to live it the way you want. I will be satisfied with this city when some real changes are made. So far from the five years I've been in Scranton, I haven't seen many positive ones that's for sure. As for the regular council speakers, some of them might go over the top sometimes, but most are just pissed off by an administration that does nothing time and time again. Why don't residents who find such greatness in Scranton go down there and speak and talk about how wonderful Scranton is? Maybe you should speak come Sept.11. Now that would be entertainment.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 05:56 AM
 
Location: NE PA
7,931 posts, read 15,827,904 times
Reputation: 4425
Quote:
Originally Posted by weluvpa View Post
. Do you feel that the direction that the city is heading in is a good one? Do you feel that we are in good shape as a city? Do you feel that the neighborhoods are in good shape?
No I do not, although I'm not sure its eactly West Philly, either. But if the neglect continues, it may at some point. I think the main issue is that Doherty has somewhat dismantled the police department...I agree that the police have been getting a royal screwing with having no pay raises for 5 years...and the fact that they have subpar equipment and have to buy their own car is ridiculous. Issues like the one I brought up, drug activity at a Little League field, is a direct result of the lack of police protection. I almost never see a police presence in my neighborhood. As far as where we are heading...with the amount of debt we have...no, I don't think we're heading in a good direction. BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING FROM JANET EVANS THAT SUGGESTS THAT SHE WILL MAKE IT ANY BETTER...ALL I SEE IS SOMEONE WHO HAS POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS ON A WITCHHUNT AGAINST THE MAYOR. At this point, I do feel the neighborhoods are in good shape....much better than similar cities. With the exception of a few neighborhoods (Lower South Side, Lower Hill, Pine Brook), the neighborhoods are not in bad shape.

Quote:
Originally Posted by weluvpa View Post
. give me issue that she voted no on that was good for the city? Give me one person other than JUDY who would be a good candidate and back it up with their track record. Come on guys you keep coming back and forth but you bring nothing!!!!! What little league field are you talking about? Why not get your neighborhood assoc. involved and get it cleaned up? Where is it Pinebrook?.
The little leage field is in West Side. I wasn't asking the city to clean it up, I was asking for more police patrols in that area to deter scumbag druggies from hanging out there.

As far as an issue that Janet voted no on that was good for the city, I echo CHS89...the SMOKING BAN, and don't give me your technicality crap about it being an "illegal" ban. It was good legislation, period. It put Scranton in the 21st century. Janet voted no because she is a dirtbag smoker, and probably a good chunk of her followers are smokers, as smoking rates are higher among the uneducated.





Quote:
Originally Posted by weluvpa View Post
. What the F$^K to they know about municipal budgeting and why was Janet not part of JUdy's plan from the beginning and why did she close the meetings as soon as someone questioned her about saving on the school taxes? .
And what does Janet know about municipal budgeting? Her "budget" that she came up with could have been done by a middle schooler. She erased some of Doherty's appointments from the budget and called it her own. Oooh, really takes an MBA to put that together. And like I said, nobody who is a Janet-worshipper should complain about Judy or Judy's family getting jobs with the school district, since the Bleach Blond Queen of the Marlboros herself got a teaching job while she was a sitting school board member, and I believe her son is now teaching in the district as well.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 06:11 AM
 
Location: Sheeptown, USA
3,236 posts, read 6,661,422 times
Reputation: 907
go phillies, I'm all for getting scumbag druggies off the street and away from children also. Also, you live in West Side also. They haven't done anything to make the park on Jackson Street and Bromley any nicer. They got rid of the skateboard park, which I think is a good thing, but now it's an empty lot. I know that was a little off topic, but I just wanted to get your thoughts on that. I do think that Doherty is screwing over the cops and firemen so we do have a lesser presence of each in this city. Great mayor. He puts money into a fantasy downtown, yet can't pay hardworking public service people. Where are his motives?

As I said before about the smoking ban, I'm not a smoker and hate that habit with a passion, but the legislation was simply illegal on the local level. Everyone knew it. No matter how bad we wanted it, we just couldn't do it as a second class city. The council majority voted for it to take the spotlight off all the spending and the budget. I'm all for a legal smoking ban when it becomes state wide. Janet Evans was just following the law and did not want the city to see legal action against it.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 07:16 AM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,101,492 times
Reputation: 1893
Lets not forget that Sherri Fanucci is one of your "scumbag smokers" and Courtright smokes cigars, so where does that leave your comment? As far as the appointments she removed, she removed the dept. of public safety, a dept which PEL saw we had no need for under the Connors admin. but the mayor not only appointed a Director but also a deputy director and two secretaries in complete violation of the recovery plan that he himself had voted in by referendum. I might be able to agree with a director but not the other 3, thats a waste of money that could be better spent in other areas. Thats what is called budgeting, you eliminate what you can and try to cut our expeditures. Judy feels that we need to raise our revenue but with no cuts, a 5% salary cut for the admin does not cut it. Janet also wanted to decrease the raises that the mayor felt his appointees deserved. HR director got a $20,000 a year raise and so did the director of OECD. $20,000 A YEAR INCREASE, where in the world do you get that kind of raise per year in a city this size? Not to mention that collectively those two depts have received over $1,500,000 in consultants to help them do their jobs. We could have hired a qualified person to do the job for maybe $35,000 a year and saved the money on the consultants, saving the city $1,550,000, but no lets hire our friends kids and give them HUGE RAISES even know they are not even close to being qualified to do the jobs. The mayor has spent to date over $10,000,000 on new hires and consultants to help their unqualified asses do the jobs, Judy thinks that it is ok, Janet wants it cut down, I ask you whats so unreasonable about that? The smoking ban did not put us anywhere, Janet voted no and what happened? Do you think that 5-0 vote would of made it stick regardless of what the courts and state say? Whether she voted for or agaunst it, it was illegal and she knew it, why attach your name to something that you knowingly acknowledge is illegal. I want a ban as much as you but I want one that levels the playing field for local business's and that is the state wide ban. When it comes I will embrace it, until then it was illegal. Whats the matter with your neighborhood assoc. over there, can't they keep some sort of a presence in the park to keep the junkies out? Why not start a neighborhood watch program and get your neighbors involved and do it yourselves? The police dept. is spread so thin thats its not even funny and the really are over taxed so take it on yourself, help the police out, help the city out and get proactive. Hell if its that bad I'll help you organize it and get the ball rolling.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 07:20 AM
 
1,251 posts, read 3,313,546 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers 2008 View Post
Janet Evans was just following the law and did not want the city to see legal action against it.
She didn't want to see legal action against the city, yet in a December 9 e-mail, she hoped that small businesses would band together and sue the city over it. Well, what is it? Out of one face, she claims the city could "ill afford" more legal action, while out of her other face, she was hoping for exactly that. Rationalize that for us.

Whether it was legal or not, the smoking ban was good for the city. The law as it is written now is a poor one, it's going to be changed sooner than later. That doesn't mean the law right now is right, or that what Scranton did was necessarily wrong. The city tried to do the right thing for the greater good. One councilwoman hoped for the worst for everyone.

That's not the kind of woman I want leading my city.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 07:50 AM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,101,492 times
Reputation: 1893
I'll agree with you she did say that but it was inresponse to her comrades passing a ILLEGAL ban, no matter how many times they write it or rewrite it, its illegal for a second class city like SCranton to supersed(sp?) a state law, thats why it was shot down in Eire, Allegheny(sp?) county and Pittsburgh. Come on its illegal period and no matter how good you think the legal dept in Scranton is they have no authroity to write and pass that type of legislation, ILLEGAL IS ILLEGAL all it did was make us look stupid since all they did was cut and paste from Erie, it was wrong. I would love a state ban, hell when I lived in Utah they had one and it is nice to go to a bar or restaurant and not have to deal with it, but theirs was a state ban, and ours was illegal. Hell I would of liked to see more local business's go after the city, because what they did hurt them and it was ILLEGAL. I hope you get it what I am saying because everything else is moot because it was ILLEGAL.
 
Old 08-24-2007, 07:58 AM
 
1,251 posts, read 3,313,546 times
Reputation: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by weluvpa View Post
ours was illegal.
Illegal does not always mean bad.
Illegal, in this case, and bad are not interchangable.

You asked for a good piece of legislation. I offered the Smoking Ban. Was it illegal? Sure. Should that law be changed? Definately. In the meantime, was it good for the majority of the citizens? In my opinion, ABSOLUTELY!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top