We must ask "WHY?"

We must ask "WHY?"

WHY?

WHY?

Saturday, August 28, 2010

Inexperienced Chili Taster





INEXPERIENCED CHILI TASTER

Notes From An Inexperienced Chili Tester Named FRANK, who was visiting Texas from the East Coast:
"Recently, I was honored to be selected as a judge at a chili cook-off. The original person called in sick at the last moment and I happened to be standing there at the judge's table asking directions to the beer wagon, when the call came.

I was assured by the other two judges (Native Texans) that the chili wouldn't be all that spicy, and besides, they told me I could have free beer during the tasting, So I accepted."

Here are the scorecards from the event:
__________________________________________________________

CHILI # 1 MIKE'S MANIAC MOBSTER MONSTER CHILI
JUDGE ONE: A little too heavy on tomato. Amusing kick.
JUDGE TWO: Nice, smooth tomato flavor. Very mild.
FRANK: Holy sh*t, what the hell is this stuff? You could remove dried paint from your driveway. Took me two beers to put the flames out. I hope that's the worst one. These Texans are crazy.

__________________________________________________________

CHILI # 2 ARTHUR'S AFTERBURNER CHILI
JUDGE ONE: Smokey, with a hint of pork. Slight Jalapeno tang.
JUDGE TWO: Exciting BBQ flavor, needs more peppers to be taken seriously.
FRANK: Keep this out of the reach of children! I'm not sure what I am supposed to taste besides pain. I had to wave off two people who wanted to give me the Heimlich maneuver. They had to rush in more beer when they saw the look on my face.

__________________________________________________________

CHILI # 3 FRED'S FAMOUS BURN DOWN THE BARN CHILI
JUDGE ONE: Excellent firehouse chili! Great kick. Needs more beans.
JUDGE TWO: A beanless chili, a bit salty, good use of peppers.
FRANK: Call the EPA, I've located a uranium spill. My nose feels like have been snorting Drano. Everyone knows the routine by now, get me more beer before I ignite. Barmaid pounded me on the back; now my backbone is in the front part of my chest. I'm getting sh*t-faced from all the beer.

________________________________________________________

CHILI # 4 BUBBA'S BLACK MAGIC
JUDGE ONE: Black bean chili with almost no spice. Disappointing.
JUDGE TWO: Hint of lime in the black beans. Good side dish for fish or other mild foods, not much of a chili.
FRANK: I felt something scraping across my tongue, but was unable to taste it, is it possible to burnout taste buds? Sally, the barmaid, was standing behind me with fresh refills; that 300 lb. bi*ch is starting to look HOT just like this nuclear waste I'm eating. Is chili an aphrodisiac?

_______________________________________________________

CHILI # 5 LINDA'S LEGAL LIP REMOVER
JUDGE ONE: Meaty, strong chili. Cayenne peppers freshly ground, adding considerable kick. Very Impressive.
JUDGE TWO: Chili using shredded beef, could use more tomato. Must admit the cayenne peppers make a strong statement.
FRANK: My ears are ringing, sweat is pouring off my forehead and I can no longer focus my eyes. I farted and four people behind me needed paramedics. The contestant seemed offended when I told her that her chili had given me brain damage. Sally saved my tongue from bleeding by pouring beer directly on it from a pitcher. I wonder if I'm burning my lips off? It really pisses me off that the other judges asked me to stop screaming! Screw those rednecks!

________________________________________________________

CHILI # 6 VERA'S VERY VEGETARIAN VARIETY
JUDGE ONE: Thin yet bold vegetarian variety chili. Good balance of spice and peppers.
JUDGE TWO: The best yet. Aggressive use of peppers, onions, and garlic. Superb.
FRANK: My intestines are now a straight pipe filled with gaseous, sulfuric flames. I sh*t myself when I farted and I'm worried it will eat through the chair. No one seems inclined to stand behind me except Sally. Can't feel my lips anymore. I need to wipe my ass with a snow cone!

___________________________________________________

CHILI # 7 SUSAN'S SCREAMING SENSATION CHILI
JUDGE ONE: A mediocre chili with too much reliance on canned peppers.
JUDGE TWO: Ho Hum, tastes as if the chef literally threw in a can of chili peppers at the last moment. I should take note that I am worried about Judge Number 3, He appears to be in a bit of distress as he is cursing uncontrollably.
FRANK: You could put a grenade in my mouth, pull the pin, and I wouldn't feel a damn thing. I've lost sight in one eye, and the world sounds like it is made of rushing water. My shirt is covered with chili which slid unnoticed out of my mouth. My pants are full of lava-like sh*t to match my damn shirt. At least during the autopsy they'll know what killed me. I've decided to stop breathing, it's too painful. Screw it, I'm not getting any oxygen anyway. If I need air, I'll just inhale it in through the 4-inch hole in my stomach

Monday, August 23, 2010

Subject: Disorder in court

Had this sent to me a few years ago

Subject: Disorder in court....

These are from a book called Disorder in the Court.These are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now published by court reporters - who had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were actually taking place .... Enjoy

Q: What is your birthday?
A: July fifteenth.
Q: What year?
A: Every year.
====
Q: Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people?
A: All my autopsies are performed on dead people.

====
Q: All your responses must be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
A: Oral.
====
Q: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
A: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
Q: And Mr. Dennington was dead at the time?
A: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy.
====
Q: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
====
Q: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
A: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
===
Q: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
A: Yes.
Q: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
A: I forget.
Q: You forget. Can you give us an example of something that you've forgotten?
====
Q: How old is your son, the one living with you?
A: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.
Q: How long has he lived with you?
A: Forty-five years.
====
Q: The youngest son, the twenty-year old, how old is he?
====
Q: Were you present when your picture was taken?
====
Q: She had three children, right?
A: Yes.
Q: How many were boys?
A: None.
Q: Were there any girls?
====
Q: How was your first marriage terminated?
A: By death.
Q: And by whose death was it terminated?
====
Q: Can you describe the individual?
A: He was about medium height and had a beard.
Q: Was this a male, or a female?
====
Q: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
A: No.
Q: Did you check for blood pressure?
A: No.
Q: Did you check for breathing?
A: No.
Q: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
A: No.
Q: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
A: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
Q: But could the patient have still been alive, never the less?
A: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere.

Friday, August 20, 2010

If you want some truths about FD overtime Read this

If you want some truths about FD overtime Read this
I highlighted the parts of interest, but this is the whole article


FDNY: Hiring freeze could create overtime cost crisis: A federal judge put a hiring freeze in place, saying an entrance test was not racially unbiased
By Janon Fisher
The New York Post

NEW YORK — Overtime costs could spiral out of control if a federal judge does not approve a new class of firefighters this year, an assistant FDNY commissioner testified yesterday.

Delays in hiring a new class of firefighters until a new racially unbiased entrance test is approved could cost the city $119.5 million over the next two years, Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Rush told a judge yesterday.

The city has called for the hiring of 300 new probationary firefighters by September to curb the spiraling overtime costs, but Brooklyn federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis put the brakes on the hiring, calling the current Fire Academy test biased against blacks and Hispanics.

As a result of a federal racial-discrimination lawsuit filed by the Vulcan Society, a black-firefighters group, Garaufis has ruled that the city must create a new test not racially slanted.

Vulcan Society lawyer Anjana Samant said: "If the city needs to hire, we're not going to stand in their way. All we're saying is if you're going to do it, do it right. Do it in a way that is not discriminatory."

City officials argue that there is no time and they must hire quickly to keep OT costs in check, Rush told the court at a special hearing in federal court.

Officials have also noted that there was a 30 percent uptick in black and Hispanic representation on the most recent exam.

"The cost of a probie firefighter is far less than paying overtime," the assistant commissioner said.

He estimated that if the city waited until 2012 to administer a new test, it would be 1,200 firefighters short and paying more than $50 million a year in overtime.

Public safety could also suffer, according to FDNY Chief of Operations Robert Sweeney, who also testified yesterday.

"In two years, we will have a safety issue. [Firefighters] will work with additional stress, there will be sloppiness and fatigue, and it's a safety issue for the firefighters if we are 1,200 men down."

But Sweeney said that in the short term, the department could still function with the reduced personnel.

"This year, it should have no impact on response time," he said.

The courtroom was packed with potential probationary firefighters who have already taken the test and made it into the top 300 but are waiting to see whether they will be allowed into the academy this year or be forced to take a new test.

"I had all the disadvantages that the Vulcan Society says they are trying to help," said David Cargin, 28, who is black. "I'm stuck in limbo."

Garaufis did not decide yesterday whether the city would be allowed to open an academy class before the end of the year, but passed the decision to the special master appointed to the case, former federal prosecutor Mary Jo White.

"It's a balancing act — the city's need for firefighters and the court's obligation to fulfill civil-rights concerns," Garaufis said.

Many of the 40-plus Fire Academy candidates who sat through the entire day's proceeding expressed frustration.

"You have a lot of men and women of all races and creeds just waiting. We all studied and worked hard to become firemen, and this is a shame," said Sean McCauley, 23, of Staten Island, who added that he expected to be in the next class.




Just to point this out again "The cost of a probie firefighter is far less than paying overtime"

Dan Emplit WBFD

Last nights council meeting





Well, last night was one for the books. Bob Kadluboski was 'asked to leave, and escorted out'. While he was leaving, singing “Good night, good night, and pleasant dreams to you,”, Kathy Kane called out “That’s why people don’t complain about you, You intimidate people.” Really. This from a person who cornered a WB fire dept. captain to complain about a certain blog (Yep this one). Isn't that a type of intimidation? Trying to get me to stop by bringing pressure on those I work with? Hypocrisy abounds.
Oh, the city attorney finally got back to me. At the council meeting, makes you wonder how long I would have had to wait if I hadn't gone. To remind you, I was told on July 27 that I would be Emailed a copy of the citys' home rule charter around noon the next day. 21 days later I was handed A PAGE AND A HALF not the whole thing I was promised. He had no intention of giving me this because it was sent to be printed at 05:51 PM on Aug 19. Yeah, this administration is playing the same games the McGroarty admin did. Lots of promises but no substance.

On a different note, Several members of council went on and on about how much work they do. I got Smith St. paved!!! Great, there are around 6 houses on Smith St. It's about 60 ft long. Don't hurt yourself with the back pats for doing PART of your jobs. Of note last night a council member finally spoke up. "Mayor, Get the Fire Dept. contract settled." He neither supported nor condemned either side. By the way Mr. Merritt that stinging sensation on the back of your neck was the daggers the mayor was staring at you. But finally a council member DID his job. He stood up and put his foot down. Thank you Mr. Merritt for publicly doing something we (the public) can respect.

After I spoke, the mayor threatened to "Get rid of the Ambulances, take those drivers (the city ambulances are driven by firefighter EMTs) and take an extra guy. There. There's your Engine 3."
There are many problems with this.
First off, It is NOT my Engine 3, It is OUR (the publics) Engine 3.

Second, This is just rearranging chairs on the Titanic. 12 men is 12 men. They could each drive an engine to the fire scene and they are still just 12 men. Remember the city's own study said 17 per shift. National standards 16.

Third, This means that the Mayor will have to hire 8 more Paramedics to keep the Ambulances in service (Unless this is a ploy to give the contract to disgraced ex-judge Conahan's Medic unit, will it be another No-Bid contract?), Why not just hire 8 More Firefighters and alleviate some of the problem?

Third, This will not save any money, It will cost money because the Paramedics have a contract with the city, unless he plans to violate it like he did Bob Kadluboski's contract (City Wide Towing). That only cost us $225,000 plus.

Fourth, This is NOT about Engine 3. It is about public safety and the MASSIVE lawsuits the mayor is exposing us to by ignoring the Lloyds studys' finding. The study the city commissioned, payed for and is now ignoring. 17 per shift not the mayors 12

Finally, By looking at ways to increase manning (without the mayor admitting he was wrong) the city has admitted that the decision to cut public safety was a bad one?

Dan Emplit WBFD

Thursday, August 19, 2010

New Council Speach, Boy it was not pretty there





Every day, 24 hours a day, Firefighters are there to risk their lives for the citizens of and visitors to Wilkes-Barre. We put our Health on the line facing fires, physical assault, AIDS, flus, unexploded ordinance, Hepatitis, and God knows what else. Is it to much to ask the city to not make this even more life threatening? To give us what we need to go home to OUR families? It's not right, but we shouldn't be shocked by this finance-based attitude.

The mayor keeps quoting response times, The response time from either station will not vary according to differences in staffing. It will take the same time for an engine and/or a truck to get from Point A to Point B, whether there are two people or eight people on board. Staffing has no effect at all on distance related response time. What staffing reductions will affect is the overall safety of the city and its citizens. 12 men can only do so much, and that is not as much as the 17 the cities study stated is the minimum.

Another question here is what is the average age of our firefighters still present. Age affects everyone in any job. A desk job, like the mayor and council has, can't compare to the physical demands a job like firefighting has. If the average age is around 35 or so, and all are in good physical shape, then we can do most of their assignments. However, when that average is around 45, the difficulty level for those assignments increases, and so does the time required to do them, and time is the enemy. The average for our dept is over 46 and no new firefighters have been hired in 8 years.
Also three people cannot correctly or safely accomplish tasks that require four people to perform. Likewise, four people cannot do what six can do. All firefighting actions must be performed by the proper number of people if they are to be done safely and efficiently. Staff reduction will only compromise citizens' and firefighters' safety.

I implore you to keep our citizens safe -- keep our responders safe -- re-instate minimum staffing before someone gets seriously burned. We are each just one person and we can only do one thing at a time. If the mayor continues to rely on the 12 persons per shift vs 17 think of how difficult it is for you to do more then one thing at a time and realize the difficulty of multitasking while facing great personal danger.

Obviously a class in firefighting basics is needed, administrators in Charleston, SC skipped that class, causing the dept to lose nine (9) great men in the historic "Sofa Warehouse Fire" on June 18, 2007

The Seattle, WA mayor was thinking about FD cuts until June 12. 5 dead, a 22 year old woman and four children ages 13,7,6, and 5. The Mayor and council are no longer considering cuts. You know this, I told you. Responsible government would learn from their mistake.

The 1995 Study by Stephen Lloyd Associates (commissioned BY THE CITY) said 17 men/shift is the minimum, A second study was conducted in March 2002 by the International Association of Firefighters claimed 22+/ shift was the minimum. Two separate studies that say the mayors cutbacks are putting lives at risk. Doesn't it seem obvious that WHEN someone dies because of these life threatening cutbacks that the city will be facing another legal action? and won't that cost the city MILLIONS?! And we, the tax payers, will have to foot the bill. That is not even mentioning the money spent on the citys' legal fees. Doesn't sound to Fiscally responsible to me.

It won't be long before local lawyers will catch on, and for every working fire that causes damage, injury or death, you'll be spending the majority of the day responding to lawsuits, providing depositions and appearing in court. Costing the city MUCH more in money, let alone lives of innocents.

You have raised taxes, raised fees, garbage bag fees up, diminished safety & EMS. And if we say anything you threaten the people with volunteers. All while leaving neighborhoods neglected. These are not the actions of someone with the publics best interests in heart.

I firmly believe that if I wasn't VOCALLY opposing the mayor we would've been cut even further, south station would've been sold (probably to disgraced ex-judge Conahans' Medic 8 or LAG Towing), and the city would be in even worse shape safety wise.

Politicians like to blame Fire departments. They can't cut Police, especially now, without committing political suicide (or putting in near useless cameras) and DPW can only be cut so far (remember the problems with snow removal last year). They won't cut city hall, those are 'their people'. So that means they demonize and cut the Fire Dept.

Normally I read multiple quotes from the mayor, today I only have one, It's tells us a lot about him. Oct 5, 2004 "It's a shame the firefighters have the time to go door to door." (WNEP) What a cheap political shoot, We can do anything we want in our free time. You know this, so this has absolutely no truth to what you implied. An obvious lie to demonize the dept.
(I only got this far before Mr Barret stopped me. Time was up. Bad frog in my throat had me faltering.)
Remember the Cities own study claimed 17/shift was the MINIMUM, not the mayors 12! He's putting our loved ones at risk while spending our money on his pet projects and to violate peoples CONSTITUTIONAL rights. Ask Denise Carey.

The city council is a legislative body.
"A legislature is a type of deliberative assembly with the power to pass, amend, and repeal laws."
As a citizen, I call on the council to pass a law that stops the mayor from unilaterally doing something that opens the city up to massive lawsuits or needlessly risking lives.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Why Seconds Count




This is why a 10 to 11 minute response time for the second engine is unacceptable.
We are paying for top notch coverage and the mayor is paying for pet projects.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Thursdays council meeting




Well, once more I am prepping to speak to our deaf council. I have my speech done and my legal advise Incorporated into it. I know that I am wasting my breath talking to them but maybe enough people will hear that some GOOD change will happen. Since mayor 'I believe in violating constitutional rights' would not speak last time and was absent in June (rumored to have been on vacation, can't blame him for that), I'm wondering if he will speak Thursday or if he will be there.
Now I would ask any one pro or con to show up at this meeting. The small numbers at them give the council and mayor the idea that they can do anything and that we the public do not care or will meekly accept whatever they do. If you want change you need to be heard.
Edmund Burke said, "when bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
Let us 'associate' and teach politicians that we will NOT fall.
Almost everyone claims to want a change, If we want it to be for the better we MUST start somewhere, I say the Wilkes-Barre City Council meeting Thursday. If we let them know we are interested then they will stop the double secret meetings, like the one that I wrote about previously. They will have to start doing the jobs they were elected to do. By the way, they are there to serve US, not the other way around. Make them tell us, in straight terms, not political babble and double speak, where they stand on the topics that WE find important.
Another quote from Edmund Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
It is time to do.

Enough 'till I post my speech Thursday

Dan Emplit WBFD

Monday, August 16, 2010




Yesterday, while on my twice daily electronic search for news, intel, and/or rumors, I went to my usual first stop 'Circumlocution for Dummies' by Mark Cour. And there was an article about my site.
Mark used to host 'Wilkes-Barre online' before moving to his present site
http://mcour.blogspot.com/. For years before McGroarty was ousted as mayor, I read his site daily, only stopping around '04 when I went on the market for a new house. With the search for a house, Moving, and a few other things taking up my time, I didn't get to following his site again until late '09. This is my fault, while I don't agree with Mark on a lot of things, I do truly enjoy his reminiscing about the Valleys history.
I've been referenced on his blog before and appreciate the link to what has got to be the first real 'independent electronic news' site the valley has. Alot of what I have been doing I owe to him, from the idea to the inspiration to the location of the blog.
Thank you Mark.

Dan Emplit WBFD

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Still being ignored by the city attorney

On july 29 I was at the double secret council meeting, and not to tell a story that is only two posts down, I was promised an e-mailed copy of the cities home rule charter. A document that is supposed to accessable to the public. It is now OVER 2 weeks later and despite phone calls to remind our cities lawyer, Yes you guessed it, I STILL haven't recieved it. This is yet another parallel with the McGroarty administration. All promises and no substance. I don't care what side of the arguement you are on, this is wrong. As a citizen and as a tax payer, I have EVERY right to this and many other documents and in a speedy manner. But much like when McGroarty was mayor we get ignored.
We should not have to ask MULTIPLE times for the cities home rule charter. It should be available.
We should not have to beg for the cities REAL budget (not the fiction online). It should be available.
We should not have to wait weeks to get everyones salaries. It should be available.
This is nothing more than a delaying tactic, hopeing that the person asking loses interest and gives up.
Really pissed right now and if the 'powers that be' thought that I was annoying before, Well now I really am going to start digging. And I want to find out who we can report them to if this keeps up.


Dan Emplit WBFD

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Opinion: What Does 14th Amendment of Constitution Say About Birthright Citizenship?

Opinion: What Does 14th Amendment of Constitution Say About Birthright Citizenship?


Opinion: Citizen by Birth? Check the Constitution


Special to AOL News (Aug. 13) -- The Pew Hispanic Center released a study about illegal immigrants and their children on Wednesday that is sure to have talking heads and pundits racing to the airwaves to spew their pet constitutional views about the so-called "birthright amendment" to the Constitution. But while there may be a lot of heat, there probably won't be much light on the issue.

The Pew study found that 340,000 of the 4.3 million babies born in the U.S. in 2008 were children of illegal immigrants, and that of the 5.1 million children of undocumented immigrants, 4 million were born inside the U.S.

The emerging debate is over the first clause of the 14th Amendment that says "All persons born in the United States" are citizens of the United States.

Inevitably, however, the debates degenerate into personal opinions about whether it is good or bad policy to automatically award U.S. citizenship to anyone who is born in the U.S.

Proponents claim that it rightfully and humanely offers the benefits and economic advantages of U.S. citizenship to the child of a parent anywhere in the world who manages to break into the U.S. and have a child.

Opponents claim that such a policy is unfair to the teeming millions patiently seeking legal entry, and encourages law breaking and illegal immigration on a massive scale, unconscionably leading to thousands to agonizing deaths in the deserts of Arizona and California.

But the real question is: What does the Constitution actually say about birthright citizenship?

The pundits who claim such a constitutional right often conveniently ignore the second clause of the 14th Amendment which clearly modifies the first by limiting birth citizenship to those whose parents are already "subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S."

Indeed in 1866, Sen. Lyman Trumbull, the author of this modifying clause (in both the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act), anticipated precisely the kind of far-fetched constitutional claims now being made for birthright citizenship.

Accordingly, he stated for the congressional record that the modifying clause was meant to pertain only to parents who were "not subject to any foreign power." (In this regard, one might note that Mexico does not relinquish jurisdiction over its nationals just because they give birth to children in foreign countries.)

Trumbull's co-author, Michigan Sen. Jacob Howard, was even more specific, stating clearly and unambiguously that the automatic citizenship provision would "not include persons born in the U.S. who were foreigners, aliens ..."

In retrospect, it is surprising that either Trumbull or Howard even felt it necessary to make such a common-sense clarification, inasmuch as it surely must have been obvious to all that the 14th Amendment wasn't intended to bestow automatic citizenship to the children of tourists, foreign ministers assigned temporarily to the U.S., or to the children of mothers in invading armies. (It may be recalled that the Japanese invaded and occupied territory in Alaska during World War II, and the British occupied Washington, D.C., during the War of 1812.)

If in fact the pundits claiming constitutional status for anchor babies were correct that a child born in the U.S. automatically becomes a citizen, it would follow that if a German woman traveling nonstop by air from Germany to Japan gave birth to a child while the plane was 30,000 feet over the U.S -- which is considered U.S. territory -- her child would become a U.S. citizen whether it wanted to be or not, even when the mother never set foot on U.S. soil.

It's worth noting, too, that not a single country in the civilized world (including all of Europe) grants birthright citizenship.

There may be excellent public policy reasons, both humane and economic, why U.S. citizenship should be either granted to, or foisted upon (as the case may be), innocent foreign nationals and tourists who visit the U.S., either legally or illegally.

But the U.S. Constitution is not one of them.

Robert Hardaway is professor of law at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and the author of 17 published books on law and public policy.

Saturday, August 7, 2010




On July 29th, I went to the councils Double secret meeting (the one about going back to at-large elections vs district ones). While at it I asked if they were opening up the ordinance in the charter, then they should open their FULL time benefits and retirement (for a part time job). City attorney William E. Vinsko, Jr told me that the citys home rule charter would not allow this and he would e-mail me a copy by noon the next day. It is now Aug 7th and still not e-mail. I called on Wednesday and again left my email and a quick message. Obviously I am being ignored even though this is one of the city documents that we, the citizens, are supposed to have easy access to. I'm not surprised. When this started back in March another Firefighter asked for the salaries for every employee of the city. Again public information that should be easily available. He was told it would take a week. What did he get? The total amount that was paid to all the cities employees. One number, not the salaries of everyone he asked for, Oh is that what you wanted, It'll take a week. Does this sound like a government that we should trust?



The Fountain
$75,000 dollars for repairing the fountain. Well after GIVING the ice rink a free (we the citizens paid for it) Zamboni, that cost around $80,000, there is no more money.
I guess after selling the Old River Road Bakery, for 8 cents on the dollar (the equivalent of selling a gallon of gas for under 24 cents a gallon), to a campaign contributor there isn't enough money for the fountain.
Maybe it was because the city had to pay Denise Carey $67,000 when Mayor 'I Believe (in higher taxes)' Leighton violated her CONSTITUTIONAL Rights.
Maybe it was the $220,000 in legal fees Denise Careys lawyer is seeking from the city.
Maybe it's the $225,000 the city had to pay Bob Kadluboski (of City-Wide Towing) after violating his contract with the city.
Maybe it was the money that was spent on the city attorneys to fight the wrong fights
Maybe it was the MILLIONS spent on an ice rink that the public 'can use SOMETIMES'
Maybe it was the MILLIONS spent on the Big Brother Camera system that work occasionally
Maybe it was the sidewalks downtown that didn't need to be replaced near as much as some of the ones away from downtown
Maybe it was the cost over runs on the intermodel center
Maybe it was the cost over runs on the Coal street 'get outta the city faster' project
Maybe it was the $17 million for the riverside project that has no parking and no bathrooms

Maybe it's time for a mayor that places the citizens safety before his pet projects

Remember the Cities own study claimed 17/shift was the MINIMUM, not the mayors 12! He's putting our loved ones at risk so he can fund HIS projects!!

Dan Emplit WBFD

Friday, August 6, 2010

Darth Schwarzenegger




Gotta watch this and listen real close!
This is F@#$*%$ GREAT, Hurt myself laughing!!

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Kathy Kane and unions




Our councilwoman Kathy Kane has fired another shot across the Fire & Police Depts Bow. Evidently she thinks we are the problem, not the rampant 'NO-BID' contracts or the multiple lawsuits for 'violating Constitutional rights' in attempting to stifle opposition or for improperly terminating contracts to give them to campaign contributors or the massive lawyer fees for fighting already lost fights.

Specifically mentioned was Act 111. For those who do not know Act 111 gives away the right to strike and replaces it with 'binding arbitration'. This is because we are ESSENTIAL LIFE SAVING SERVICES and lives can not be put in danger over contract or monetary disputes.

"That has to be a real important issue," Kane said. "We do have economic problems, and they (unions) cannot be making excessive demands." So what 'excessive demands are being made? And isn't she a retired school teacher? Isn't the teachers union the most powerful union in Pa?

When the mayor was elected he asked all the city unions to help the city financially in their contracts. The fire union did (concessions = approx 3.5 million dollars over 7 years). Mayor Leighton said "By making (these) substantial concessions, the firefighters' union has agreed to become partners with the city in its revitalization plan" The Fire Fighters Union did more than their part, Saving the city far more money than any of the other city unions. And you end up getting punished for it.

Politicians like to blame Fire departments. They can't cut Police especially now without committing political suicide (or putting in useless cameras) and DPW can only be cut so far (remember the problems with snow removal last year). So that means they demonize the FD. I mean what do we do? Here's a quick list:
1 structure fire
Fight fire
Size up
ventilate fire
Search & Rescue
Rapid intervention Team
Water Supply
Protect Exposures
Overhaul
Investigate
2 Emergency Medical
3 light scene
4 clean up scene
5 sweep up debris
6 flooding indoors
7 flooding outdoors
8 assist incapacitated
9 secure wires downed
10 road subside
11 cave ins
12 structure collapse
13 wash down bio materials & fluids
14 save animals
15 remove wild animals
16 unexploded ordinance
17 wetting down debris
18 Check the Welfare of
19 assist lock outs
20 searches
21 unknown Investigations
22 suicide/attempted suicides
23 brush fires
24 hazardous materials
25 vehicle accidents/extrication
26 Child locked in vehicle
27 River Rescues
28 Rope rescues
29 Vehicle fires
30 possible terror attacks
31 Tours
32 Public relations
ANY situation you can think of that is life/property threatening or assists the public

The Seattle, WA mayor was thinking about FD cuts until June 12. 5 dead, a 22 year old woman and four children ages 13,7,6, and 5. The Mayor and council are no longer considering cuts. Our mayor and council know this, I told them, but they do't care enough to even comment on it.

Remember the Cities own study claimed 17/shift was the MINIMUM, not the mayors 12! He's putting our loved ones at risk while spending our money on his pet projects and to violate peoples CONSTITUTIONAL rights