Now I've never met the Mayor's sister, but from what you read in DD, she possesses almost mythical powers. It's actually almost funny when you read the stuff, save the fact that this is a real person who has real feelings.
The above said, maybe Ms MacGregor will send me a few toenail clippings, as I think I read on DD once that if you grind them up and snort them, it cures the common cold .
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
I do not believe Mrs. McGregor possesses mythical powers. I do believe, however, that she is a vindictive individual who has no qualms about using her political connections to bring misery on others for what she perceives as even the slightest offense.
Everybody has real feelings. Mrs. McGregor, however, apparently does not subscribe to this theory, as evidenced by some of her behavior that I have witnessed over the past eighteen months.
Everybody has real feelings. Mrs. McGregor, however, apparently does not subscribe to this theory, as evidenced by some of her behavior that I have witnessed over the past eighteen months.
GC
I would not know this person if I fell over her. However since this subject has been thrown on the table maybe you could elaborate on your comments Glen? I am not sure leaving that accusation hanging out there with no details to back it up is very fair. Since I believe nothing printed at DD you will have to let us know what you mean by your comments as I will not be using any information from the hellhole across the hall to fill in the blanks.
-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 17:59, 2008-09-27
It is my opinion that Mrs. McGregor is unable to separate the political from the personal. When I met her during the primary last year, I thought she was friendly and more genuine than I had originally believed she would be.
After the county personnel shuffle and the tax office fiasco, I now believe that my original negative impression was correct. Very disappointing.
Whether she is a nice person or not a nice person wasn't the point of my post; rather, I was lampooning the almost ridiculous amount of power that is ascribed to this person.
It's my educated opinion that DohertyDeceit thrives on "boogeymen"...arch-villians that super-hero Joe can fight against. Afterall, a Batman movie would be boring if all the Caped Crusader did was catch Quicki-Mart robbers and the occasional jay-walker. So this isn't really about whether or not Ms MacGregor is a nice person; it's about the need of Joe Pilchesky to craft a mythology.
Like most mythologies, there is no doubt some shred of truth to some of what is ascribed to Ms MacGregor; however, like all mythologies, her's has most likely been embellished well beyond reality.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Like most mythologies, there is no doubt some shred of truth to some of what is ascribed to Ms MacGregor; however, like all mythologies, her's has most likely been embellished well beyond reality.
Oh, I agree on that point. But she does have the ear of a mayor and a county commissioner, and she is not exactly a shrinking violet.
I have been away for a few days ... and I have to weigh in on this subject ...
I DO KNOW Virginia McGregor ... she is a very nice person ... but think about this ... when you see someone continuously slamming on you and your family ... day in and day out and slandering your good name ... just how FU@kING nice do you want this woman to be!
I think you all ask a bit much of her!!!
__________________
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.
I'm glad that you can shed some reality into this discussion. As I said, I've never met Ms MacGregor, but I'll take your characaterization of her any day over the mythology that is spread at DD.
As for her not being a "shrinking violet", I don't think that's a negative comment at all. From what my mother tells me, her father never let anyone walk all over him...and he was a fanatic about supporting his family...so if she inherited that then all the better for her.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
paraphrase from Glenn's post above ::: ... has no qualms about using her political connections to bring misery on others for what she perceives as even the slightest offense ... :::
And what political (or apolitical for that matter) figure doesn't use his/her connections? pilcheski uses whatever connections (and mostly rumor and innuendo) he has to grind people face-first into the ground. At least Virginia bases her actions on fact.
She possesses the capability of occasionally rising above petty politics in the pursuit of fairness and courtesy. The congenial person I thought I met during the primary would certainly do so.
Here is the thing to remember ... people can rob you of money ... there will be more money coming your way .... people can rob you of your possessions ... you can replace them ... but when people rob you of your good name ... well there is no amount of money that can buy back your good name ... sure some people won't believe what they hear about you ... but the majority of people would rather believe the bad than the good as evidenced at DD ... so now tell me what does it take to get back your good name .... YOU CAN'T! That is what Joe and the kids across the hall do to people on a daily basis.
I did not have a problem with the Shrinking Violet Statement ... and I will say this ... nobody would think twice about Virginia if she were a man ... but god forbid a woman be a strong woman ... then we paint her with the bitch brush!
Virginia is very nice ... the McGregors are a very generous family ... as are the Dohertys ... you don't like the politics of Chris Doherty ... hell I am a supporter of the Mayors ... but I do not support every decision that he makes ... but don't take away from the FACT that they are good people ... call them lousy politicians if you want ... but why do we constantly drag their good name through the mud, with crap that is made up ... I just don't get that and I never will ... Oh and when I say we ... I don't mean the people on PD ... I mean people in general.
__________________
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.
1. I think there is a level of frustration that, occasionally, can make people more vicious than they would normally be otherwise. Is it right? No. But I can empathize. There are some lines that have been crossed that should not have been.
Diagram that last sentence.
2. As I said, Mrs. McGregor did seem very friendly when I met her. The Dohertys told me they were backing my opponent, were honest about it, and still treated me with respect. Can't get mad at that. However, I think that those with the power sometimes have to be a little more magnanimous than they have been.
3. I do not disagree with everything the mayor has done, and I do not think he is a bad person. I strongly disagree with his fiscal policies. I do not feel that the Scranton budget, with its excessive spending and substantial debt load, can withstand even the slightest financial shock. Government should not have to rely on tax increases as the sole source of rescue for poor planning.
"3. I do not disagree with everything the mayor has done, and I do not think he is a bad person."
Therein lies the problem with DD Glenn: many of the folks there do believe that he is evil, and that's strongly encouraged by the chief cook and bottle washer of DD.
I absolutely agree with your assessment of Scranton's fiscal condition, but I do have one caveat: since I'm not a politician...like Janet Evans...I can be intellectually honest about it. Specifically, unlike Ms Evans, I know that you can't solve Scranton's long-term financial problems without dealing with the high cost of Scranton's municipal labor. I'd be willing to bet every cent on me that unionized labor costs (salaries and benefits) make up more than half of the city's budget. If you want to deal with the fiscal problem in Scranton, you have to deal with that. Bull$hit about balancing the budget by simply repealing management raises is just that...bull$hit.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
I'd be willing to bet every cent on me that unionized labor costs (salaries and benefits) make up more than half of the city's budget. If you want to deal with the fiscal problem in Scranton, you have to deal with that. Bull$hit about balancing the budget by simply repealing management raises is just that...bull$hit.
I will bet it is more like 75%+ and I agree Agam bull$hit
I've been lurking here in the shadows for some time without posting, but I have to ring in on this one.
While I don't know Virginia MacGregor, I do know her brother. I can't say Chris Doherty is evil incarnate, but he is definitely vindictive. With Doherty, in his mindyou are either with him or against him. You cannot disagree with him without becoming his enemy, a trait which I believe will ultimately be his undoing.
The City of Scranton is teetering on the brink of financial catastrophe. In six years in office, this Mayor has increased the budget from 56 million dollars a yearto 83 million....quite a jump. Even if you concede 50% of Scranton's budget is comprised of labor costs, neither the fire nor police unions have had a pay increase since this Mayor took over.How does one explain a nearly 50% increase in a municipality's budget, when more than half the labor force has had a wage freeze?
And since the 50% and 75% number have been tossed about, think about this. Half of a budget of 84 million dollars is 42 million. If you use the accurate figures of 150 firemen and 150 cops,the sum is 300. Base salary for each is approximately 40k. Allowing for a generous 10 grand overtime for each man (Some make noOT, some make more) and another 10 grand each man for benefits (Again, a generous number) you get a total of 60k a person multiplied by 300 people. For those without calculators, that equals 18 million bucks a year. If you're still following along,42 mil minus 18 mil equals 24 mil. The clerical and DPW unions have less workers, and make less money, so theycan't make up more than half the labor costs. Color me ignorant, but 50%of the budget for labor costs is starting to smell funny.
I could expound on the costs of consultants for incompetent workers, the cost of the debt payments, and the costs of a littany of needless spending, but this topicis about the Mayor's sister.
Well Balko ... the first time the Mayor ran I was not a supporter of his ... I supported another candidate ... and I have to say that every time I spoke with the Mayor who was then Councilman Chris Doherty ... he still treated me with respect and dignity ... and he knew that I was a supporter of the "other candidate" ... but here is the thing ... I treated him with respect and dignity ... I didn't run around town slamming him ... I simply thought the other candidate was better qualified ... he lost ... that's quite clear ... and I was able to remain on the "right side" of Chris Doherty ... why do you think that is? Because I didn't run around calling him any and all terrible names I could think of ... when he won the office of Mayor I gave him the respect that should be shown to the Mayor ... it's simple ... in this life you treat people the way you yourself would like to be treated ... if you want to be respected the you respect others ... respect gets respect .... he and his family were quite respectful to me ... and I was in their company quite often as I was very politically active at that time attending many rallies that they were at ...
The second time around I was a supporter of the mayor for the simple reason at that time I thought he was the more qualified candidate running at that time. I do not vote lightly ... it is a huge responsibility ... in my opinion ... I will not vote against someone because they didn't let Joe Pilchesky build a ramp ... at the same time if you are against someone ... put the reasons you are against them ... at DD they make up all this crap ... put it out there for the world to see ... the lack of respect is disgusting ... and then when in the company of the Doherty's and McGregors they expect to be respected by these people ... why ... if it were it were you being slammed on a daily basis ... your brother or sister ... you wife ... your children ... how would you feel? I think you would come out fighting ... and I guess the last thing I want to say in this post is this ... I'll say anything I want about my family ... but don't let me hear someone else talking about them ... especially slamming them on some disgusting ... deceitful web site ... because that's my family ... and I'm gonna come out fighting ... simple!
__________________
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.
And since the 50% and 75% number have been tossed about, think about this. Half of a budget of 84 million dollars is 42 million. If you use the accurate figures of 150 firemen and 150 cops,the sum is 300. Base salary for each is approximately 40k. Allowing for a generous 10 grand overtime for each man (Some make noOT, some make more) and another 10 grand each man for benefits (Again, a generous number) you get a total of 60k a person multiplied by 300 people. For those without calculators, that equals 18 million bucks a year. If you're still following along,42 mil minus 18 mil equals 24 mil. The clerical and DPW unions have less workers, and make less money, so theycan't make up more than half the labor costs. Color me ignorant, but 50%of the budget for labor costs is starting to smell funny.
...very intesting. A few initial thoughts though -
- Base Salary...not every officer earns the base amount. A better number to use would be average salary.
- Benefit Costs...healthcare costs per employee paid by employers alone are estimated to average about $9,000 per person for 2009 (and that's the private sector...public may be higher). Added to that would be costs for other heathcare programs, life insurance and pension obligations (which could themselves be up to 10% per employee). Bottom line...the number quoted above is way low.
- Other Unions...Combined, I think that the Clerical and DPW unions have about 160 or so members.
- Non-Salary/Benefit Costs...Every budget has costs related to headcount but which aren't salary or benefit related. For example, this would include the cost of city provided hardware (computer for each clerical employee, for example).
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Lets not forget to mention that money is paid toward pensions ... which can be quite costly. Are there any retirement incentives that are paid ... and the unions negotiated for benefits for retirees ... there are people out there that are getting their benefits paid for them and their families ... they are no longer active on the payroll yet they are still considered employee expenses ... so that also must be figured into this. That figure does not only reflect active employees it also reflects union negotiated retirement incentives.
__________________
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.
Even if you take the low end of non-management costs as a percentage of the budget, that also leads you to the conclusion that salaried staff is probably an even smaller part of the budget. By taking away management raises, that's how Janet Evans would balance the budget? Now I don't necessarily agree with the raises in the first place, but claiming that somehow you can balance the budget by eliminating those raises, not touching police and firemen, and doing away with consultants is a joke.
Scranton has structural problems with it's finances, problems can't be fixed with the "stick it to Doherty & his cronies" solutions offered by the likes of Janet Evans.
I know, "structural problems" is probably too broad of a term for the typcial konsil loon to grasp. How about this? Scranton's way of doing business worked...when the city had 100,000 residents. It doesn't with a 60,000 resident city.
-- Edited by Agamemnon at 07:23, 2008-10-02
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Well don't you think the same could be said for all of us ... don't piss us off ... I know once you piss me off I can be as mean as a rattlesnake ... and when people are constantly attacking your family ... well hell ... shame on her if she didn't get her back up.
The one thing I know about myself is this ... I get mad at my family and I say anything I want about them ... but I would be totally pissed off if someone else talked about them ... even if I were mad at them at the time ... so I can say what I want ... but don't anyone else think that they have the right to talk about them.
Say what you want about Virgina ... but she is a very good person in my opinion ... and like I ahve stated before ... yes I do know her.
__________________
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.
