Good Luck Pat, i'm sure you will do whats right, and I know you are smart enough to stay away from any evil notions to over throw the government. Remember you are now part of that government and the voters are smart enough to see through any smoke screens trying to blame the Mayor for everything. Work as a team and with the best interest of the citizens of the City of Scranton. You my friend will be Mayor sooner than people think.. Behind you all the way......
__________________
Just when you thought it was safe to open your mind......
Just remember not unlike in your own home... if you are on a fixed income (not raising taxes means none to very little income increases ) you have to control costs and make HARD choices. Be prepard to help them make those choices.
The math here is pretty simple: you can't pay employees more and reduce taxes at the same time. Period. Enough with the "Doherty has millions tied up in consultants" bull****. Does the Doherty Administration over-spend on things like consultants? Hell yes, and it needs to stop. Is that nearly enough to fund increases for uniformed employees? Hell No. Increasing employee salaries creates something of a perpetual annuity: once you start paying them, you incur that cost forever.
Note that I'm not against paying, for example, the police more. In fact I think they deserve more money. I'm just against incredibly stupid notion that somehow it will not cost any money.
Mr Rogan's stripes will become readily apparent when the tough decisions need to be made. Janet Evans has basically bought the vote of unionized employees via promises of "you will get whatever you want"...well guess what: "Whatever you want" comes with a price-tag that city taxpayers will have to pay. If Mr Rogan "mans-up" and truly stands up for taxpayers (by supporting & voting for realistic budgets) then he will certainly have my support. If he doesn't, then he just proves that he's nothing more than the Scranton equivalent of the little toy dogs that Hollywood stars like to carry around...
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
Oh that was a perfect comparison too, Agam, as Missy Jan has about as much depth to her as the ever impressive Miss Paris.....same church different pew. I assume it is the bleach?
-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters on Monday 1st of February 2010 09:57:46 AM
Indeed....and both seem to know how to work the system for their own personal benefit. Of course the sheer scale of the "system working" is different, but in the end doing whatever it takes to promote the personal agenda...be it being paid to attend a party or using a school board directorship to get a full time teaching position...are just different degrees of the same thing.
Kudos to Ms Evans though: while most folks realize that Paris Hilton is shallow and self-serving, Janet Evans has managed to convince some...including at least one lawyer...that she is somehow different. Screw being famous for being famous...faking sincerity is a real talent.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
::: If he doesn't, then he just proves that he's nothing more than the Scranton equivalent of the little toy dogs that Hollywood stars like to carry around... :::
Ag, good point, but you couldn't find a picture of a blonde Phyllis Diller holding a pug or something more descriptive of janet evans? Now she's gonna go around town thinking she's all "hot" and Hilton-ish.
I couldn't find a picture of Phyllis Diller with a puppy, but I figure that...
...I don't want to insult Ms Diller by insinuation ...Ms Evans actually has several puppies, if you include the "Taxpayer" Association (a.k.a. the Anti-Doherty club)
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
