Thanks Lus, I've never been "officially" full of sh-it! Thanks formy new moniker.

Lots of people throughout history were thought to be full of sh-it until eyes were opened. I'll take the abuse for now. I never thought my new mission here would be easy, coming in.

Again Lus, that's been tried by many. Pay to play is NOT illegal.
As far as your looks? I'd give my collection of Pradas to look like you. The kids think your hot too.

************************************************

How about suck and %&%* to get a job......is that LEGAL

Just the facts Art. Nothing else.

Shari if you have come here to save our souls then you might as well just give up now ... If I thought siding with the DD cult would put me on the fast track to heaven and the Devil said come on over ... I would choose the Devil ... but thank you so much dear for trying ... it really means the world to me.

Now if you don't understand what this place is about that's ok ... I kind of like you ... so you keep posting ... have fun trying to save our souls ... but when you find out that you are dancing with the devil ... maybe it will be us that you turn to to save your soul.

And one last comment to you ... "Hello Pot ... this is kettle!" You just may qualify for the hypocrite of the day ... we are not an Anti Doherty site ... we are not a pro Doherty site ... we are a site that lets people know the other side of issues brought up on DD ...

I will say that the DD'ers and even the Doomers are not always wrong ... But dear Shari ... even a Blind Squirrel finds a nut every now and then. I think you need to realize where you have landed ...

PILCHESKY DECEIT!

Here is an email exchange between Joe Pilchesky and myself I had these up on Chumster ... but never got around to putting it up over here ... so here you go Shari.


From: CounterPoint1963@aol.com
Sent: Oct 21, 2006 9:59 AM
To: jpilchesky@earthlink.com
Cc: letters@timesshamrock.com
Subject: Freedom of Speech only applies to you I guess

Dear Mr. Pilchesky,

I am writing to you today because you have banned me from the Scranton
Political Times Forum. Not only have you simply banned my posting you have banned
me from reading anything on your forum.

I thought you stated that you believed in freedom of speech ... well I guess
it's only your freedoms that you believe in because in my opinion you have
stomped all over my right to the freedom of speech. Unless the people agree with
you, You ban them! What a truly boring world you are looking to live in. I
have many friends in this life and we don't always agree and sometimes through
discussion I am compelled to admit to being wrong at times. You however
don't want healthy debate ... you want it to be your way or the highway ... like I
stated earlier what a truly boring world you are looking to live in.

I was posting under the name NewVoice .... I do not believe that I threatened
you or anyone else nor have I ever used vulgar language for that matter ...
if that were the case I could understand being banned. I simply had a
different opinion than that of you and some of the other posters. I also have a
freedom to speak my mind ... I now know that it is you opinion that I do not ...
but I am now making this request because I have received calls myself telling me
of the last post that you wrote to New Voice and I no longer have the
privilege of seeing it for myself so I request that you please send me a copy of your
last post to New Voice ... I will find another outlet to let the people know
exactly what your site is all about now ... maybe it will be called
PilcheskyDeceit.com. And no that is in no way a threat ... it's just simply to let
other people know that you do not have the respect of freedom of speech of others
as is your claim ... only your own ... you claim that the Scranton Times is
not fair ... well you are no better than you claim they are. At least when I
write a letter to the editor they print it ... and they do not write back using
vulgar language and threats.

I hope I never have the hate in me that you display for others ... and I hope
that one day you truly do find happiness in something other than the pain you
create with your site. Something's in life are private matters, not the
business of you or I to be involved in even if the person is in a political
position or not. I would like to know exactly what it was about my last post that
made you so angry.

I thank you for letting me post as much as you did and wish that we could
continue, however you will never be fair to those who do not hate as you do.

Sincerely,
NewVoice
CounterPoint1963@aol.com




Subject: Re: Freedom of Speech only applies to you I guess
Date: 10/24/2006 9:57:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: jpilchesky@earthlink.net
Reply To:
To: CounterPoint1963@aol.com

Where did you get the opinion that you posted anything that made my angry. Not at all. People who don't comply with the purpose of the board get banned all the time. You're probably number 150. You know what you posted that got you to the exit door. Your issue is with your own view that public people don't have to be held to any moral standard. The answer was in McTiernan's response by resigning. Apparently, he agreed with the public outrage. Just because some politicians like Sherwood decide to try to 'weather the storm', that's not a barometer to guide the public in accepting immoral conduct as the rule and not the exception. You're pissed. If I were McTiernan's family member or friend, I would be, too. But, be pissed at him, as well as feel bad for him and his family. He knew the consequences. I have a wife, a very good one at that. Perhaps you do, too. What do we risk when we contemplate infidelity, besides disease or making some one-night stand pregnant? Or, get set up for blackmail. It's betrayal of the worst sort. If you can screw over a woman to whom you made a pledge and vow before God, you can screw anyone over. It's public interest to know if one does. We like debate here, it keeps things lively. You stopped debating and went on the attack on someone who likely never did a thing to you. You know it. If you can keep yourself focused on the purpose of the board, I'll unban you. Fair enough?



So you see Shari ... you can post if you agree ... but if you dare to disagree ... he considers it straying from the purpose of the board ... now dear you have strayed from our purpose ... but we don't really care and we will put up with you wanting to save us ... as I have told you ... and posters from your site before ... we find you all very amusing ... still trying to get us to believe ... all 7 of us ... god we must be 7 pretty important people to get so much attention from all of our neighbors over across the hall.

Again many thanks for caring and for your compliments earlier ... I am still blushing!

sharilewis wrote:

---

He's a condescending caveman.

---

So is somebody going to go to bed with somebody or what?

"Am I handcuffed here to just kick the sh-it out of Joe?" The sign on the door gave you some other impression?

Lus...very well put.

Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.

Well maybe we can discuss this.

sharilewis wrote:

---

Again Lus, that's been tried by many. Pay to play is NOT illegal.

---

First I want to make sure I understand the concept of "pay to play" as you mean it. I understand it to mean that someone "pays" by supporting a candidate or a sitting official with money, votes, and verbal cheerleading, in exchange for that the person will be allowed to "play" by recieving favors in the form of work, contracts, and the like, is that correct?
Second I want to repeat your word 'Pay to Play" is not illegal. ( I find is very distastful btw)

sharilewis wrote:

---

.....I have many friends on the inside of city government,including inside Doherty's regime who feed me info.

---

Third I want to hear how your "friends" managed to get their jobs "on the inside of city government,including inside Doherty's regime" without engaging in the very "pay to play" activity you seem to find to be a problem with this Admin. I hope you are going to tell me that those 'friends" are the few truly "gifted" individuals in the city who actually got their jobs by their stellarresumes and on true merit alone.


Oh and for therecord as you have already established that "pay to play" is not illegal we should neversee the word "criminal" or "corrupt" as it pertains to this particular issue.

---

sharilewis wrote:

---

Third I want to hear how your "friends" managed to get their jobs "on the inside of city government,They were already there.

---

---

Sure, because past mayors NEVER hired cronies for city jobs . Cronyism was invented by Chris Doherty, in cooperation with the IRA...er, I mean "ICN," Louie DeNaples, and the UofS-Scranton Times socio-industrial complex, in an effort to fend off the black menace, right??

sharilewis wrote:

---

Hey you're quoting Anti! You have him down pat! Bill, did I say anything about how people got their jobs? What's your point? I'm talking about Doherty's performance. Did he invent anything? No. Did he enhance all that is wrong now and in prior administrations? Absolutely. Has he caused more financial damage to this town than probably the last three mayors combined? That fairly accurate.

---

Oh I get it!! Pay to play while not illegal, is corrupt and distasteful ONLY if it reaches a certain point. Doherty reached that point. I see! When your friends were getting their jobs it hadn't reach your threshold of too much yet. Oh!! Silly me!!I thought you didnt like pay to play at all but you just dont like it when it isnt benefiting your friends. Got it! Yikes.

-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 11:45, 2007-06-07

IHavehadenoughofhaters wrote:

---

Oh I get it!! Pay to play while not illegal, is corrupt and distasteful ONLY if it reaches a certain point. Doherty reached that point. I see! When your friends were getting their jobs it hadn't reach your threshold of too much yet. Oh!! Silly me!!I thought you didnt like pay to play at all but you just dont like it when it isnt benefiting your friends. Got it! Yikes.

-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 11:45, 2007-06-07

---

You hit the nail on the head. If the unions were still getting sweetheart deals, even if it broke the backs of the taxpayers, these clowns wouldn't be squawking one bit. They'd even campaign for Doherty if that was the case.

For the people, my arse.

Amen, It is all about the Unions not getting what they want. I have said before, Pill is most liklygetting financed or at least a ton of help from union leaders. I bet enough digging would uncover any type of misappropriations with union dues. If you can read into their agendas then you are a sucker.

tim wrote:

---

if you CAN'T read into..... My typing is rough, i've got pickle fingers.

---

me too!! I thoughtI was the only one welcome to the club :)

IHavehadenoughofhaters wrote:

---

You know it Bill! Oh and Sharri I never said I wasn't a smartass. Ok, but if you are second guessing yourself, I'll confirm that you are. Damn, and all I thought I had to worry about was Paul!Maybe you can enlighten us on some of the ways you fought before?Working polling places, doing mailers, talking to friends andneighbors, you know the normal stuff. Unfortunate that sometimes, I couldn't bring myself to support either candidate in a particular race, where both were bad.Did you by chance out any of your friends who played the game and got their jobs? I try not to associate myself with people who only worry about themselves. I detest self-centered people, you know like the king of self-centeredness: Chris Doherty.

---