Like Steve Corbett always says, "Nobody ever looks at Pilchesky's site."
We're been averaging 2,000,000+ views per month for the last year. Not bad, eh, Steve? Nearly 100% of Steve Corbett's material on local politics comes from this site. He monitors it 24/7, the worthless betrayer of truth and dignity that he is.
I have other interests that need my attention. On May 31, 2013, Dohertydeceit.com's plug will be pulled. It's too hard to keep all these plates spinning and finish the four books I'm writing.
My IT person is building a new site for politically charged content, but it will not include an interactive message board/forum for discussions and posting documents.
To be very, very honest, while there are a few good people in this town, and I mean a few, for the most part the people here are not worth fighting for and I'm not going to continue to do it. They deserve to be raped.
There are Americans, and then there are disturbingly disgraceful Americans, and this area is 95% disturbingly disgraceful Americans, too lazy or too scared to lift a finger to help themselves and only too happy to watch someone else do it for them, and they're too stupid to know when it's time to lift a finger, even if they weren't too lazy or scared. Like sheep with a yellow streak up their backs, they face the only future possible - more and more doom. Politicians, no matter who they are, in cooperation with the evil and unethical media, will continue to rape the people because they let them do it. Why? Because the people here are lazy and stupid and they raise their kids to be lazy and stupid just like them. Why are the people in this area so afraid to stand up for themselves? Just as many men and women of uniform from this area died in various wars as from any other area. Brave enough to die in battle, but not brave enough to stand up to corrupt government?
I will still be watching what is going on and I'll still sue when necessary to right a wrong, and particularly, I'll be looking at election papers. However, I'll do it because I enjoy doing it and not just for the benefit of the pathetic quality of lazy cowards who live here.
Apathy isn't the problem in this part of the world. It's pure ignorance practiced by the lazy cowards who live here and the Chamber of Commerce loves it.
On behalf of the 95%, Joe, here's a going away card. You can go slither off into that sunset now, clown.
-- Edited by Paul on Tuesday 21st of May 2013 09:20:29 AM
"My IT person is building a new site for politically charged content, but it will not include an interactive message board/forum for discussions and posting documents"
Perhaps the little attention wh0re can simply buy herself a notebook and save all the money for his fiancee's addictions and his own hormone treatments. Sue me.
-- Edited by Paul on Tuesday 21st of May 2013 10:52:39 PM
Bill Jackowitz - Ignorant, uninformed city council antagonist should stick to supporting black strippers
A tongue lashing that's well-deserved is hard to argue with if the target deserves the tongue lashing, but these weekly baseless attacks by ex-marine blowhard, Bill Jackowitz, are getting so boring that it's time for council to adopt a new policy that protects the public from idiots like Jackowitz and their repeated annoying rants. That's not free speech, that harassment. He should be arrested for impersonating a normal human being. Not only is he stupid and clueless as he prowls along, but he's of the opinion that council runs the city, instead of the mayor. "Council does nothing, council does nothing", that's all that comes out of his rabid mouth. And if he has a small clue, then he's just another frustrated male looking to beat up on a defenseless woman on public TV. I've been listening to this blowhard for weeks now. He has yet to say one truthful statement that means anything. Why doesn't this fat-assed clown go down to the mayor's office and release his Ray Lyman act there? Because they'd take him away in a straight jacket, that's why. And, because he doesn't have the balls to go where he should go. Council is the legislative branch of the governing body. It does not run the city. If someone could tell that to this obese, unkempt, sloppy, pitiful excuse for a public speaker we'd all appreciate it. Mr. Broken Record is past the point of embarrassing free speech here. Soldiers didn't die for that pathetic level of degrading, incoherent blabbering to make it over the cable. At least if he'd dress well and bath he'd be presentable. A little mouthwash would go a long way, too.
Bill Jackowitz is a strip joint rat who can't stay away from the stage or the ladies who love to take him for a ride until he's broke, then they take him home with them and make him run errands while he's out getting them more cash, a lot more cash, and he gets nothing in exchange, except the chance to do it again the next night.
C'mon, Bill, stick to supporting your black strippers and give the rest of us a break for a while.
What's the matter, Joe? Mad about not being the only ignorant, uninformed, stripper loving antagonist blowhard in town? Is Bill making you wait in line for something?
Because white strippers are so much more reputable. I like Mr. Jackowitz. At least he makes an attempt to attend the meetings and speak his mind. What exactly was his transgression here? I must've missed something.
GC
__________________
He looked Janet directly and the eyes and didn't bother to genuflect or even bow at her. Word on the street is that he called her "toots" a few times while never once uttering the words "Yes, ma'am, you are absolutely right as always, your majesty, and your roots have never looked more natural than they are now. Gee, your hair smells terriffic!"
Pilchesky is just giving his two or three toadies one for the road, it seems.
RE: Bill Jackowitz - Ignorant, uninformed city council antagonist should stick to supporting black strippers
Printer Friendly
Glenn Cashuric wrote:
Because white strippers are so much more reputable. I like Mr. Jackowitz. At least he makes an attempt to attend the meetings and speak his mind. What exactly was his transgression here? I must've missed something.
GC
You have to be kidding? You like him because you both hate the same people. He's created a serious problem for himself. He's unacceptably abusive, insulting and disrespectful without any factual basis for his libelous, untruthful and inflammatory accusations. He's already crossed the line, and I'm talking at and away from the podium. I'm the first to agree that opinions on the conduct or performance of any public official is free speech, but it has to be true when it's repeated over and over by the same speaker. That's the law. It's harassment when it's willfully, deliberately and intentionally done with malice and having no legitimate purpose. Jackowitz isn't walking up to the podium unsure of anything, nor is he mentally deficient or challenged, rather, he's appearing well-prepared after having substantial time to decide what he's going to say and how he's going to say it. He's set himself up. He's going to find himself sued, you mark my words. His tone of voice is aggressively harassing. Appearance by appearance, he's putting nail after nail in his own financial coffin. He's soon to find out that free speech is not free when its the design of a malicious, premeditated plan to attack public officials as he does. See Course of Conduct Doctrine. Who's he going to turn to when he needs $25,000 to defend an action against him for his course of conduct? He's on tape.
I could file a libel suit against him for what he's saying about me, and I fully intend to do so. Even if, and it's a big if, he wins in two or three years, he'll still spend the $25,000 defending himself. And if he loses I'll own whatever he owns. His loose tongue is going to put him in a tight spot. Spindler is another one with a loose tongue at and away from the podium, and he has a nice house.
After five years of certain speakers oozing up to the podium and (a) hurling insults, (b) rolling chairs theatrically up to the dais, (c) claiming constitutional rights that simply do not exist, (d) making accusations and statements of fact with no documentation or backup, and/or (e) blathering on about thirty unrelated topics to use up or pad six minutes of the Janet Evans Variety Show, Mr. Jackowitz finally figured out that public comment can be properly used as an effective weapon if one (in most cases, of course) simply picks a topic or two and asks relevant questions.
From my observation, which I admit is free speech compromised, most speakers already knew the answers, as did the public and council, but they want to repeat it up to six times for good measure. See Les Spindler.
If Mr. Hubbard had simply made some innocent inquiries into Daron Northeast years ago, there would have been no lawsuit.
Why make an inquiry into information you have in hand? Dan's only error was introducing himself as the president of the neighborhood association, which is what go sued and Dan had to negotiate termination of the action to shut the members up. Daron is gone, by the way, courtesy of Dan's input and a dozen lawsuits filed by the locals.
If Mrs. Franus had continued to appear and ask questions about improper use of taxpayer funds for private litigation instead of referring to Mrs. Gatelli as a "tub of goo" (or something like that), there would have been an attorney general investigation already taking place.
It would be nice if true, but the DA, AG and FBI got a copy of the $30,000.00 check paid to Atty. Reihner the day after I got it with a complete package of exhibits to support what was going on and not one return phone call, or a "thanks for the info, but we see nothing wrong."
If Mr. Gervasi would simply state his case about the lack of manpower while inquiring about administration salaries and the abuse of city property, the public would demand the restoration of the cut positions.
Which public? This public?
Mr. Jackowitz has (perhaps unwittingly, but that's how most reforms find their genesis) established a precedent. Instead of accusing somebody publicly of soliciting prostitution while using city-owned property and risking a slander lawsuit, he asked one or two pointed questions that had to be answered. Next week, he can ask them again. The public will catch on.
Bill is always a good speaker. He's direct and well spoken. I hope he gets his questions answered.
He was the speaker I remembered.
As for the rest? Mrs. Schumacher continues to demonstrate her in-depth understanding of city finances, though I wish she would eschew commentary about minutiae like the light show bulbs. Perhaps she too will stumble upon (because in this county, one must "stumble upon" things) the one log holding the dam of fraud and misuse together. These people do not like answering questions. I have discovered that over and over, right up to my recent RTK fiasco with the county, where they failed to keep their story straight over a mere two responses.
Joe Pilchesky needs to look up the word "barratry." It is a crime that deals with unjust and vexatious lawsuits. I'm blown away old Joe hasn't been sued himself for the abusive untrue scandals he's conjured up, not the least of which was the Chris Doherty love child. I guess Doherty figured he didn't want to crawl into the gutter too.....
I guess Chris Doherty figured out a while ago that the worst thing he could possibly do to old Joe Pilchesky was to not so much as even mention his name. For an attention whore like elderly Joe that's even worse than getting sued.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
It should. Jackowitz needs a muzzle and for about $200.00 I'll muzzle him. I'll write it up and get it ready to be filed and served on him. I don't usually have the time to watch council meetings, but I have many friends that do. The next time he's disrespectful to any of council members I'll file it and serve him right at the next council meeting while he's at the podium. That might be a first: "Council speaker served lawsuit while speaking" There's nothing illegal about it. The only place you can't be served with a lawsuit is in a courtroom. That'll be a cool thing to do. He certainly won't be able to say he wasn't served. 70,000 people will see it.
You mean 7. Seven people will see it. And what if he's "disrespectful" to Pat Rogan? What will you do then, douchebag?
He wouldn't serve the papers .... I don't think that he would serve them if he was disrespectful to Bob McGoff either ... wow ... Joe Pilchesky really is turning on his own these days ... he used to love Jackowitz if I am remembering right ... and Joe Pilchesky never cared about the truth ... and he never will ... this is all a show he's putting on. I find him so very uninteresting these days ... people used to read that site and it was the talk of the office ... now you never hear anyone even mention it ... and I am grateful for that ... I never understood how people could blindly follow him and believe every stinking rotten word that he said ... and then said that he could say whatever he wanted because he has the "freedom of Speech" ... anyway it's refreshing to know that people have stopped believing in him.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
