Make your own free website on Tripod.com

6-2-2004 Egg all over your face?


The British and American media detail with evident satisfaction every scrap of information that implicates service people in wrongdoing... If those who show themselves so eager to denounce the American President and the British Prime Minister feel strongly enough on the issue, please will they explain their reason for wishing Saddam Hussein should still be in power.--Famed British war historian John Keegan

Somebody get Kevin Lynn on the blower. He'll set that knuckle-dragger straight.

This one is beautiful. When I read that John Kerry was promising to enforce a worldwide ban on nuclear weapons, I thought, "Yeah, that'll work." That'll work in La-la-land. If we disarm, will everyone, I mean EVERYONE follow suit?

Remember the old Cold War saying "Trust, but verify?" With every fourth Jihadist trying to figure out how to hide a small nuke inside of their ball sacks, is verification even remotely possible? And while we're facing this threat, is trust something we are willing to extend to most nations right now?

Here's what America's most famous Liberatarian, Neal Boortz, had to say about Kerry's latest namby-pamby nuancing posing as thoughtful leadership:

THE POODLE'S PLAN FOR NUKES

Finally, the real agenda of The Poodle is being exposed (by himself, no less,) and everybody needs to listen up. Yesterday, in a speech in West Palm Beach, Florida, sKerry outlined measures he believes would dramatically reduce the possibility that terrorists would attack the United States with nuclear weapons. He called it the greatest threat facing the nation, and on this one single point, he is right.

So, what does Kerry propose? Here's his five-point plan.

*Secure nuclear weapons materials around the world, particularly in the former Soviet Union.
*Ban future existing nuclear material production.
*Reduce existing nuclear stockpiles worldwide.
*Increase interdiction and enforcement.
*Establish a White House coordinator.

How does Kerry handle the fact that this is basically the same program the Bush administration is already pursuing? He just says he can do it quicker, that's about it. Another Kerry "four year" promise.

But wait. I say that this is basically Bush's program ... but there may be one big difference. What's this "Ban future existing nuclear material production" thing? Does that include the United States? Is this a modern-day update to the old nuclear freeze idiocy from 20 years ago. The problem is this: just because the United States stops building nuclear weapons doesn't mean our enemies will. If banning something made it go away, then illegal drugs and illegal weapons would be off the street. Doesn't work. Is the Soufflé calling for some form of unilateral nuclear disarmament? Would North Korea stop making their nuclear weapons if we did? Of course not. Sure....they might say they're going to, but they won't. Clarification needed here.

sKerry also is upset that we're still developing nukes. "As president, I will stop this administration's program to develop a whole new generation of bunker-busting nuclear bombs." And what is his reason? "What kind of message does it send when we're asking other countries not to develop nuclear weapons but developing new ones ourselves." There he goes again...trying to appease other countries. The answer is simple: rogue regimes would use nuclear weapons to blackmail their neighbors. The United States uses nukes to defend itself. Then again, America is always to blame.

This shows just how dangerous John Kerry is when it comes to national security. We're in the middle of a global war on terror...the 4th World War...and he seems to be talking about nuclear disarmament, making us weaker. This certainly appeals to much of the world .. the part of the world that wants to see a weaker America. Does it appeal to you?


I fully realize...

...that not everyone residing in NEPA listens to WILK all day long, but Hey!...nobodys perfect, right? Anyway, if you do listen to WILK on occasion, you already know of our infamous, critically-thinking, local Green Party challenger to Don Sherwood. Take it away "Kurt from Scranton!"

From the Times Leader:

Hazleton-area candidate charged in incident with recruiters

Kurt J. Shotko of the Green Party says he was only trying to talk to Army personnel when police were called.

By KEVIN OWEN KEARNEY

HAZLE TWP. - A Green Party candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives was arrested Tuesday after a verbal altercation with officers at an Army recruiting station, police said.

But the candidate, Kurt J. Shotko, 37, of 506 N. Irving Ave. in Scranton, said he was the one who called state police because he had been "thrown to the ground" by a recruiter at the U.S. Army Recruiting Station on the Airport Beltway.

Police said Shotko walked into the station at 1:15 p.m. and told three recruiters they were cowards. He then asked them, "Why do you recruiters lie to kids?"

He also said U.S. military personnel were killing innocent babies and civilians in Iraq, according to an affidavit of probable cause filed by Trooper David E. Balliet of the state police barracks in Hazleton.

The affidavit states:

The recruiters, Pernell Bowersox, Russell Burnham and Timothy Paul, became "seriously annoyed and alarmed" by Shotko's remarks and conduct and told him numerous times to leave.

Shotko refused and said he wanted to stay to protest the war. He remained in front of the station for about 15 minutes before being arrested by Balliet, police said.

Shotko said he was not causing a disturbance.

"I was sitting in the waiting room reading a book," he said Tuesday night after being released on $5,000 bail. "(The trooper) didn't ask me what I had to say, he just arrested me."

Shotko doesn't dispute some of the claims. He said he called the recruiters cowards after they refused to talk to him because he had been wearing a "No War" pin.

"I went there as a candidate for Congress; I'm not just some guy off the street. I deserve the respect to at least ask a few questions," Shotko said.

Neither the recruiters nor Balliet could be reached for comment Tuesday night.

Shotko was arraigned before District Justice James Tupper in Trucksville on charges of disorderly conduct, criminal trespass and harassment.

As part of the bail agreement, he is ordered not to go within 2,000 feet of the Hazle Township recruiting station.

********

Just for the record, Kurt is from Scranton, not Hazleton.

I love this boorish quote:

"I went there as a candidate for Congress; I'm not just some guy off the street. I deserve the respect to at least ask a few questions."

Respect? Because he filed a petition at the voter service's office? There's our first hint that there's a problem. The guy bashes both Republicans and Democrats 24/7 on WILK, but as soon as he thinks he's a lower level member of the government club, he all but adopts John Kerry's "Do you know who I am?" usual pomposity delivered to any commoner that won't allow him to freeload while out and about. What were those uniformed lying cowards thinking? When Kurt Shotko comes a calling and hurling insults at whomever he deems worthy-he commands respect.

Despite his constant name-calling, his usual bomb-throwing, his conspiracies under every rock, his nasty demeanor, and his mean temperament-I told WILK's Sue Henry that I absolutely love it when Kurt calls her show. Why? Because he is the most well-read clueless f**k you will ever hear, and also he embodies the majority of the Greens and the Rent-a-Mobbers who to a person believe that they and only they have seen the light.

Kurt and his Green ilk know. You do not. I do not. Alternative voices are greatly encouraged provided that they have something to say other than 'This country sucks' seven days a week. Whatever. One of our local Greens has spoken.

Maybe he can get himself elected to the cell block politburo.


Here we go. A letter to the mystical editors of the Voice:

Recycling, trash schedules are confusing; W-B needs a Web site

06/02/2004

Editor:
Why doesn't the city of Wilkes-Barre get a Web site to list the dates for garbage and recycling pick ups? I called City Hall, and the number is either busy or no one answers. Today I called recycling and they didn't answer either.

Not all people get the paper and so it should be in their website. I think the Mayor is doing a poor job when it comes to this situation.

Nikki MXXXXXX
Wilkes-Barre

I don't want to beat up anyone else over garbage removal as I have gleefully done in the past, but these sorts of complaints just won't go away. Perhaps there really is some sort of disconnect going on here. This particular gripe is sort of bogus. Not everyone gets the local papers, but in this case, they do have a computer. It needs to be pointed out that not everyone involved has a computer, so I'm sure they read the papers.

We no longer have a city calendar sporting the extensive laundry lists of curbside pick-ups hanging in our kitchens. But they are published in our two local papers. It might work wonders for Nikki if she'd simply subscribe to one of the two papers, heyna? But if the city had a web site, she wouldn't need to. Maybe the mayor's kids should canvass the city every other weekend and remind every single resident of this city when the trucks will roll past their nearby drug houses? Or how about printing a calendar next year? The perfect scenario would be hauling everything away to the landfill and calling it done. Maybe we all need to be f**king spoon-fed by the city.

What I always wonder about is why wifey can cut that pick-up schedule out of the paper and then never have a single garbage malfunction. Is she that much smarter than the average resident? Or just lucky enough to be married to a guy that can afford a newspaper every f**king day?

Believe it or not, due to the holiday, she did have a question this week regarding our co-mingled. God! I hate that freaking word. Co-mingled. Co-mingled. Mingle this already! And throw it all down the friggin' bank. What a waste of manpower and resources! Co-mingled. Sounds like what happens after three or four couples get drunk beyond belief and then settle in for a spirited game of strip poker. You'd swear I'd been there, huh? Any-mucking-way, this week, wifey had a question, she dialed 208-4240, and all of the stifling tension was suddenly lifted from her weary recycling shoulders.

You don't suppose we could post the trash schedule on a few well-placed billboards, do ya'? How about renting the sides of a few LCTA busses? Maybe there's grant money available for having it tattooed on each of our foreheads. The sh*t some people obsess over.

I've done it before and I'll give it another whirl now. I officially volunteer to build the official city web site. We don't need flash intros to post a few glossies and a trash schedule, so I could have it up and running faster than your average resident could fire off a letter to the Citizen's Voice. That ain't no sh*t.

That'd be just my luck though. Yet another thing that wifey would never understand why I ever got involved in.


I'm happy to see that the forum page seems to be slowing down. I took issue with some of the comments posted by some of our hose dudes, but it was somewhat distressing to have our fire department hacking each other's nuts in public. Then again, who knows? Maybe it's not a bad thing that others know what they're thinking.

I ran across this line from the latest post today and I'm not sure that I agree with it:

Just remember half the Fire Department got aboard for Tom Leighton when he decide to run for Mayor and now you have egg all over your face speak up to him also!!!!

I don't think the "Hose Dudes for Leighton" should be criticized at all for supporting Tom Leighton over Tommy McAct 47. I've been banging that Act 47 drum for years now, and until early last year-very many of you out there in e-mail land told me I was wrong. With what we now know, how could anyone be busted on for trying to avert the inevitable financial storm that Act 47 would have been for all involved had our previous mayor won a third term?

We all know that the hose dudes made some serious concessions to the city before the latest troubling changes were made, but there are firemen employed by this city that will tell you that the recent changes are not the mayor's fault. We can all go and cut, copy and paste something from Tom Leighton's previous comments and use them as some sort of proof that he's not doing what he said he would, but if I remember correctly, he told us all along the campaign trail that he WOULD NOT be afraid to make the tough financial decisions.

The last time I had a few moments alone with him, he told me, "We can not run out of money. I will not run out of money."

The way I see it, he's doing exactly what he was elected by us to do. Namely, to get our frightening finances in order and then move this city forward.

I'm not asking anyone to agree or disagree with that position and I'm sure many would find it arguable. I just don't believe that anyone in our fire department has anything even remotely resembling egg on their faces. Yes, they ended up making some serious concessions. Yes, they are now short two fire engines. I guess what they need to ask themselves after only five short months under the new administration is, "Did I do the right thing by supporting Leighton?"

Consider the alternatives.

CYA