File this one in the senseless list department. Note that I'm not limiting myself to the just the living.
5 CONSERVATIVES I ADMIRE
In general I admire conservatives who promote ideas...not just ideals. I like thinkers, people that use logic and reasoning to make a point.
Jack Kemp
Proof that race relations don't have to be a just a Democratic issue. The man walked the talk.
Newt Gingrich
I love to listen to former him speak...very eloquently uses logic to promote a fiscally conservative agenda. (Note...he falls flat when he starts talking about moral issues, as he has more than a little baggage).
William F. Buckley
Genius. His writing just flows. Read what he had to say about legalizing drugs.
Congressman Paul Ryan
Representative from Wisconsin. I love his ideas on taxation. He also has a knack for civil debate. If he is the future of the GOP, then things are looking up.
Congressman Ron Paul
I genuinely think that many of his positions make him seem nuttier than a fruitcake, but I admire the his brains, passion and ability to call it like he sees it. This is why he is unelectable by any national party.
5 CONSERVATIVES I LOATHE
In my opinion, conservatives fail when they hop on the "moral high horse" department .
Pat Robertson
Scary, simply scary. He in essence says "I'm right because God says so".
Rush Limbaugh
Draft Dodging + Drug Addiction = H Y P O C R I T E
Michael Steele
He had some potential, but then he jumped the shark over the whole Limbaugh apology thing.
Rick Santorum
A man who gunned for NWS & NOAA because he wanted to promote State College based Accuweather. Arrogant and smug. He was to the 2000's what Dan Quayle was to the late 80's. Promoted bogus WMDs from Iraq on the Senator floor. Holier than thou. Somehow believes that he is qualified to be President.
Sarah Palin
Counts among her "qualifications" being mayor of Wasilla, Alaska...a town about the same size as Dunmore, PA. That puts her on par with Nibs Loughney. Was governor of a state that has about the same population of Northeastern Pennsylvania. Does this mean that Corey O'Brien should be running for Vice President next time around instead of Congress? Paraded her family out for countless campaign and other events, but then quit as governor in part because of the attention it drew to her family. Republicans can do far better than this.
Parting shot...my two least favorite liberals:
Jesse Jackson
This one may not be very popular, but so be it. I'm not sure what Jesse Jackson has done since the death of Dr King, other than promote Jesse Jackson. It's my personal opinion that he engages in shameless race-baiting and relies on emotion instead of logic to make points. Note that I'm tempted to include the Al Sharpton on the list, but I actually think Sharpton has three things going for him: he never ducks a fight (the man will debate anyone), he got Don Imus off the air temporarily & I'm not entirely sure he takes himself that seriously.
Ralph Nader
I personally think that Ralph Nader runs for national office simply because he likes the attention. "Unsafe At Any Speed" was a landmark book, but I really can't point to anything else that he has done that didn't involve self-promotion.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Health Care Vote
Well it appears that there may in fact be a vote (or votes) on health care reform this week, and I for one am glad. It's no so much glad over the specifics being discussed, but glad that:
a) Something is being done
b) That the "noise" will stop
The last major effort at health care reform, as proposed by the Clinton Administration, was defeated back in 1994 (or thereabouts). Congress was not in favor of that particular package and decided, in it's infinite wisdom, health care really didn't need to be reformed, so they did nothing. And nothing. In the meantime, my cost for mostly employer provided health care has done up something like 12% per year, or roughly 4 times the rate of inflation.
Four times the rate of inflation, and I'm a healthy person. Oh, and I am lucky to even have coverage.
Fast forward to today's debate, and you have calls for Congress to "start all over". Seriously folks, do we actually think that the Republicans, who will vote en mass against any reform, really want to start all over, or do we think they simply want this to stop and never rear it's ugly head again? After all, one or both houses of Congress have been in Republican hands now for the majority of the time since 1994 and yet there has not been a single, meaningful piece of health care reform passed by Congress in these past 16 years. They should be ashamed of themselves.
I'm sorry that this rant sounds overly partisan, but when I pay detailed attention to Republican proposals for health care reform, I see only one thing that stands out: Tort Reform. Mind you that's a great idea & it needs to be done, but the estimates I've seen indicate that even the most aggressive forms of Tort Reform will yield savings in about the 5% range. That's a far cry from the 12% it has gone up (at least for me) year over year. Tort reform is, I think, something the GOP latches onto simply because lawyers make easy targets. Like I said though, it doesn't do an awful lot to fix the underlying problems of the system.
Critics are going to claim that pending health care reform amounts to a "government take over of 16% of the economy", but these same critics don't like to mention that government, via Medicare and Medicaid, are already acting as payee for a substantial portion of health care expenditures in this country. Funny, but I don't see a loud cry from Republicans for a rollback of Medicare & it's "government takeover" of health care. Why? Because Medicare has one big thing going for it: It's widely popular with senior citizens who like to vote. It's also a program that, from what I gather, is run in a fairly efficient manner.
So yes, I'm very much interested in listening to any critic of current proposals who also mans/womans up & calls for the elimination of Medicare and its replacement with a private sector payee system. To me that at least seems intellectually honest.
In the end, I always try and look past emotional responses and towards facts and ideas. What I hear from heath care critics are a lot of name calling...
...socialism
...government take-over
...budget buster
...and not a lot of facts. Many of these calls, from groups with names like "Americans Who Love Puppies, Apple Pie and Are Against Socialism in Health Care" call for current proposals to be voted down and for the process to start all over again. Come on, we know that's not true. Many of these groups are simply fronts for the Aetna's & CIGNA's of this world who are afraid that current proposals will put their red-lining and 14% ROEs on the line. Start again? They hope this never starts again. Consider the source.
Look, as I think I noted above, I'm not thrilled with everything I read in the current proposals before Congress, however something needs to happen. At this stage I will take a flawed solution to no solution.
a) Something is being done
b) That the "noise" will stop
The last major effort at health care reform, as proposed by the Clinton Administration, was defeated back in 1994 (or thereabouts). Congress was not in favor of that particular package and decided, in it's infinite wisdom, health care really didn't need to be reformed, so they did nothing. And nothing. In the meantime, my cost for mostly employer provided health care has done up something like 12% per year, or roughly 4 times the rate of inflation.
Four times the rate of inflation, and I'm a healthy person. Oh, and I am lucky to even have coverage.
Fast forward to today's debate, and you have calls for Congress to "start all over". Seriously folks, do we actually think that the Republicans, who will vote en mass against any reform, really want to start all over, or do we think they simply want this to stop and never rear it's ugly head again? After all, one or both houses of Congress have been in Republican hands now for the majority of the time since 1994 and yet there has not been a single, meaningful piece of health care reform passed by Congress in these past 16 years. They should be ashamed of themselves.
I'm sorry that this rant sounds overly partisan, but when I pay detailed attention to Republican proposals for health care reform, I see only one thing that stands out: Tort Reform. Mind you that's a great idea & it needs to be done, but the estimates I've seen indicate that even the most aggressive forms of Tort Reform will yield savings in about the 5% range. That's a far cry from the 12% it has gone up (at least for me) year over year. Tort reform is, I think, something the GOP latches onto simply because lawyers make easy targets. Like I said though, it doesn't do an awful lot to fix the underlying problems of the system.
Critics are going to claim that pending health care reform amounts to a "government take over of 16% of the economy", but these same critics don't like to mention that government, via Medicare and Medicaid, are already acting as payee for a substantial portion of health care expenditures in this country. Funny, but I don't see a loud cry from Republicans for a rollback of Medicare & it's "government takeover" of health care. Why? Because Medicare has one big thing going for it: It's widely popular with senior citizens who like to vote. It's also a program that, from what I gather, is run in a fairly efficient manner.
So yes, I'm very much interested in listening to any critic of current proposals who also mans/womans up & calls for the elimination of Medicare and its replacement with a private sector payee system. To me that at least seems intellectually honest.
In the end, I always try and look past emotional responses and towards facts and ideas. What I hear from heath care critics are a lot of name calling...
...socialism
...government take-over
...budget buster
...and not a lot of facts. Many of these calls, from groups with names like "Americans Who Love Puppies, Apple Pie and Are Against Socialism in Health Care" call for current proposals to be voted down and for the process to start all over again. Come on, we know that's not true. Many of these groups are simply fronts for the Aetna's & CIGNA's of this world who are afraid that current proposals will put their red-lining and 14% ROEs on the line. Start again? They hope this never starts again. Consider the source.
Look, as I think I noted above, I'm not thrilled with everything I read in the current proposals before Congress, however something needs to happen. At this stage I will take a flawed solution to no solution.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Road Apples, #59
Domesticity 101...Well another evening has come and gone and I still haven't mopped my kitchen floor. Hmmmm, I'm sensing a pattern here. At least this time I have a quasi-excuse, other than "sloth".
Best Excuse for Not Mopping Kitchen Floor...My youngest brother Joe is back in the hospital, after having a fainting spell. This comes on the heels of a similar episode in February, which came on the heels of a stroke & heart surgery last year. Poor guy. He seemed fine when I took my mother up to see him in emergency room, but 43 year old men just don't up and faint all the time for no good reason, so they are going to try and explore why this might be happening some more.
Blogger Bad Habits...I have this horrible habit of writing lengthy replies to posts on other blogs, which then saps all of my blogging energy away, leaving nothing but "why didn't I mop the kitchen floor" material left in my head. It's like crack though in that sometimes I just can't help myself. Can they treat this sort of thing with Methadone? Good thing I don't live in Dunmore.
Speaking of Bloggers...I received my invitation to the Blogger get together and responded with an affirmative "maybe". The place is in Wilkes-Barre (sorry, some Scranton humor there...it's actually in Pittston, but growing up, everything past the airport was considered "Wilkes-Barre" anyway), and according to Gort's description it's pretty nice. Working against me here is the fact that I have the social skills of the Unibomer, well outside of professional situations I suppose. Still, the premise does sound interesting and being a virtual hermit does kind of suck sometimes. Oh, and it makes for a damn good excuse to not mop the kitchen floor.
Pictures...I raided my mother's store of pictures and have whole pile to scan. Included in the lot are a few of my father and my sister Michelle. I'm hoping to get to that stuff sometime this week, and maybe I'll post a few to Facebook.
Time Killers...In between engaging in reading the latest from the Wall Street Journal, Business Week and my Harvard Business Review summaries, I like to play video games. I am especially fond of the game type known as the "first person shooter", and I have multiple games for all three of the systems I own...PlayStation 2, XBox and XBox360. I'm currently playing "Wofenstein" on XBox360, but it's very frustrating getting through the various levels, so to relieve the frustration I'm also playing Killzone on PS2 for about the 1000th time. It's a flawed existence, but it's the only one I've got.
Best Excuse for Not Mopping Kitchen Floor...My youngest brother Joe is back in the hospital, after having a fainting spell. This comes on the heels of a similar episode in February, which came on the heels of a stroke & heart surgery last year. Poor guy. He seemed fine when I took my mother up to see him in emergency room, but 43 year old men just don't up and faint all the time for no good reason, so they are going to try and explore why this might be happening some more.
Blogger Bad Habits...I have this horrible habit of writing lengthy replies to posts on other blogs, which then saps all of my blogging energy away, leaving nothing but "why didn't I mop the kitchen floor" material left in my head. It's like crack though in that sometimes I just can't help myself. Can they treat this sort of thing with Methadone? Good thing I don't live in Dunmore.
Speaking of Bloggers...I received my invitation to the Blogger get together and responded with an affirmative "maybe". The place is in Wilkes-Barre (sorry, some Scranton humor there...it's actually in Pittston, but growing up, everything past the airport was considered "Wilkes-Barre" anyway), and according to Gort's description it's pretty nice. Working against me here is the fact that I have the social skills of the Unibomer, well outside of professional situations I suppose. Still, the premise does sound interesting and being a virtual hermit does kind of suck sometimes. Oh, and it makes for a damn good excuse to not mop the kitchen floor.
Pictures...I raided my mother's store of pictures and have whole pile to scan. Included in the lot are a few of my father and my sister Michelle. I'm hoping to get to that stuff sometime this week, and maybe I'll post a few to Facebook.
Time Killers...In between engaging in reading the latest from the Wall Street Journal, Business Week and my Harvard Business Review summaries, I like to play video games. I am especially fond of the game type known as the "first person shooter", and I have multiple games for all three of the systems I own...PlayStation 2, XBox and XBox360. I'm currently playing "Wofenstein" on XBox360, but it's very frustrating getting through the various levels, so to relieve the frustration I'm also playing Killzone on PS2 for about the 1000th time. It's a flawed existence, but it's the only one I've got.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
WILK Points
I've had this point to make about WILK tucked in the back of my head for a while now, but for some reason I just didn't feel the need to let it out. However since it's a Saturday morning and, in theory, I am not in my usual rush to do things (this morning will be consumed by maybe hitting the gym and then grocery shopping), I thought I might as well get it out. Oh, and I had this other point to make as well. Rather pointed. Perhaps I had better get to the point. Ever see Harry Nilsson's The Point?
First Point: As was noted by many others (including Circumlocution for Dummies, HERE), the writer of the "WILK Watcher" blog decided to give up on his/her quest. That's too bad because blogs about the media can be pretty interesting. Of course they require the ability to actually watch/listen to the media in question, but that's par for the course. Now I'm not going to take cheap shots at WILK (see Second Point), but I do think they do deserve some watching and/or scrutiny. Sure it's all opinion stuff, but people forget that what they do is ENTERTAINMENT FIRST, NEWS SECOND. Forget what Steve Corbett says about being a "news guy"...it's all about being controversial in order to get rating in order to make money. Viva la free enterprise & good for them, but listeners need to keep this in mind.
Second Point: A month or so ago I was in the gym and for some insane reason I had the Sue Henry Show playing through my mp3 device. I know, she doesn't exactly get your blood flowing, but I wanted to hear something in the background so she got the nod. Anyway, she was making some point about the media in general and radio specifically, which concluded by a statement that went something like "...the Opie & Anthony and Howard Stern types don't represent my profession...". My initial reaction was one of "ah, okay"; that reaction turned into one of those head shaking ironic moments when, during the next commercial break (and I swear this is true...) there was a commercial on WILK for a "male enhancement product". Somehow in the back of my pea-brained mind I am thinking that there isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference between Howard Stern talking about lesbians and a commercial for stiffy pills. Oh, but Sue didn't talk about the product, so I guess she gets to say on her moral high-horse. Check please.
One final point...
For the record I am not a fan of Opie & Anthony, although one of them does a spot-on impersonation of Don Imus that is hilarious.
First Point: As was noted by many others (including Circumlocution for Dummies, HERE), the writer of the "WILK Watcher" blog decided to give up on his/her quest. That's too bad because blogs about the media can be pretty interesting. Of course they require the ability to actually watch/listen to the media in question, but that's par for the course. Now I'm not going to take cheap shots at WILK (see Second Point), but I do think they do deserve some watching and/or scrutiny. Sure it's all opinion stuff, but people forget that what they do is ENTERTAINMENT FIRST, NEWS SECOND. Forget what Steve Corbett says about being a "news guy"...it's all about being controversial in order to get rating in order to make money. Viva la free enterprise & good for them, but listeners need to keep this in mind.
Second Point: A month or so ago I was in the gym and for some insane reason I had the Sue Henry Show playing through my mp3 device. I know, she doesn't exactly get your blood flowing, but I wanted to hear something in the background so she got the nod. Anyway, she was making some point about the media in general and radio specifically, which concluded by a statement that went something like "...the Opie & Anthony and Howard Stern types don't represent my profession...". My initial reaction was one of "ah, okay"; that reaction turned into one of those head shaking ironic moments when, during the next commercial break (and I swear this is true...) there was a commercial on WILK for a "male enhancement product". Somehow in the back of my pea-brained mind I am thinking that there isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference between Howard Stern talking about lesbians and a commercial for stiffy pills. Oh, but Sue didn't talk about the product, so I guess she gets to say on her moral high-horse. Check please.
One final point...
For the record I am not a fan of Opie & Anthony, although one of them does a spot-on impersonation of Don Imus that is hilarious.
Friday, March 12, 2010
One of Pink Floyd's Greatest Hits
I read THIS ARTICLE yesterday and smiled.
Now I'm not an enormous Pink Floyd fan, but I do own a copy of Dark Side of the Moon. None of that matters though when it comes to this story. What really matters is the fact that Pink Floyd is allowed some measure of legal (all be it not necessarily practical) control over their work. It always bothers me when you see profit interests coming between artists and what they do. Roger Waters, David Gilmour & the guys created their own music and they should be the ones who say how it can be distributed. If they believe that their work is intended to be listened to as a entire piece (and not just a collection of songs), then that's their prerogative. Anyone who doesn't like it can simply not listen to Pink Floyd.
Quite the concept though...music as being something more than just a 3-4 minute radio-friendly pop single.
Dark Side of the Moon was released in March of 1973, 37 years ago. I wonder if Lady GaGa's latest work will be talked about in the year 2047?
Somehow I think not.
Now I'm not an enormous Pink Floyd fan, but I do own a copy of Dark Side of the Moon. None of that matters though when it comes to this story. What really matters is the fact that Pink Floyd is allowed some measure of legal (all be it not necessarily practical) control over their work. It always bothers me when you see profit interests coming between artists and what they do. Roger Waters, David Gilmour & the guys created their own music and they should be the ones who say how it can be distributed. If they believe that their work is intended to be listened to as a entire piece (and not just a collection of songs), then that's their prerogative. Anyone who doesn't like it can simply not listen to Pink Floyd.
Quite the concept though...music as being something more than just a 3-4 minute radio-friendly pop single.
Dark Side of the Moon was released in March of 1973, 37 years ago. I wonder if Lady GaGa's latest work will be talked about in the year 2047?
Somehow I think not.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Follow-Up Comment, Council Speaker Blog
NEPArtisan was kind enough to link to my post this morning, and his posting generated a few engaging comments. Since I did take a few minutes to add a comment of my own to his posting, I thought I'd paste that comment here, as it makes an additional point or two that I think is relevant to the discussion.
*************************
*************************
Tom,
Thanks for the mention.
In response to some of the comments, I want to note that I DO think that criticizing public officials is a matter of city business, provided of course that the officials work for or impact the city. Rambling on about Roe v. Wade, A-Roid’s steroid problems, “the Holy Father” or my friendship with “Attorney Kowalski” are not. For me though, that’s not the central issue; rather what I am adamantly opposed to is the gang-rule mentality that exits in council chambers; it’s this group intimidation, as evidenced by cat-calls, hissing, booing, following speakers out into the hallway that I believe actually hinders the expression of speech by the public. EVERYONE should have the right to address council without fear of intimidation. The speech of a member of the Taxpayer’s Association is no more deserving of respect than the speech of a supporter of the mayor.
As for the issue of cameras, let’s be honest: some people speak before council simply because they want to be on TV every Tuesday night. I know that…you know that…”Canoe” knows that…Janet Evans knows that…Ozzie Quinn knows that…we all know it, so let’s stop collectively beating around the bush. Besides, when last I checked, while there is a right to free speech THERE IS NO RIGHT to be on television. It’s time to end the local celebrity status of some regular speakers because the environment they create does far more harm than good.
Lastly, I occasionally teach a class at work on public speaking & presentation skills, and over the years I’ve actually had people leave the class in tears simply because it’s so stressful (well that or looking at me was stressful…). I know that it’s very difficult for some to speak in front of a group, it’s harder to do that and be audio recorded at the same time and it’s even more difficult if you are going to be on video. Yet someone with a public speaking fear/discomfort has just as much of a right to address council as Ozzie Quinn does. Since THERE IS NO RIGHT TO BE ON TV (yet there is clear value in recording/broadcasting the meetings) and since some find it intimidating, why not make addressing council easier by eliminating having a camera trained on the podium? Not only is that logical, but it has another benefit: namely that we can see how council members react to speakers comments.
In Scranton Council Chambers "Decorum" Is What They Do To Apples
PREFACE
Among local residents, few shows outside of "The Office" have the same following as the televised proceedings of Scranton's City Council meetings. How popular has this become? One (in)famous regular council speaker has several YouTube videos posted that collectively have amassed in total well over a quarter of a million hits. Not bad for a "boring government meeting". By the way, I've actually watched similar meetings from other cities (such as Dubuque, Iowa), and I've never seen any that had Scranton's level of drama.Anyway, I'm no journalist but I do think there is story to be told about what happens in the audience during council meetings. After all something creates this atmosphere, and it's not necessarily something being said from the dais. What to do?
Well as fate would have it, in my travels I actually met someone who has attended Scranton City Council meetings for many, many years. This individual has been kind enough to respond to my written questions about what it's like it sit in the audience during these sessions. Before proceeding to the actual interview, a few disclaimers are in order:
- At their request, I will call this person Lucille.
- I can testify to the fact that they actually have attended council meetings for many, many years.
- The answers listed below are exactly as written by the interviewee, with one exception - I have edited out the names of individuals Lucille referenced. Why? Two reasons...I don't want to giver these individuals any more publicity than they already seek & referencing them by name would almost oblige me to allow a response on their part. Anyone can comment on this posting, but I'm under no obligation to provide "equal time".
- The point of view expressed in the answers is that of Lucille, not me. I'll add my editorial comments at the end of this blog entry.
*****************************************************
INTERVIEW
Q: How long have you been attending council meetings?
I don't attend meetings any more. Unless I have a specific issue that needs to be addressed. I used to attend meetings City Council and School Board on a regular basis.
Q: Why have you attended council meetings?
I had and still have a great interest in city government. I have spoken on occasion, when the issue was important enough for me to speak out on.
Q: Why have you attended council meetings?
I had and still have a great interest in city government. I have spoken on occasion, when the issue was important enough for me to speak out on.
Q: Did you attend council meetings before they were televised?
Yes, that is when I attended on a regular basis. After the cameras came in I rarely attend.
Q: How has the "citizen's participation" portion of council meetings changed over the years?
Well years ago you may have seen one or two people who were disrespectful, namely Joe [edited by SGA] and Jack, can't remember his name, he wore an oxygen mask. Those two were out for a fight on a weekly basis and would say some truly awful things.
And now today we can see that there may be one or two people with legitimate problems, that come to the podium and are polite. That is how it has changed over the years.
Q: How does the audience typically react when someone speaks positively about Mayor Doherty or a member of his administration?
Q: How does the audience typically react when someone speaks positively about Mayor Doherty or a member of his administration?
In my limited experience at attending council meeting while Mr. Doherty has been our Mayor I find that if you speak positive about Mayor Doherty you are heckled while you speak, when you are finished and you are walking away from the podium you hear the comments: "Who does she think she is coming into our meeting". They turn and glare at you throughout the remainder of the time that they are there. It is quite an uncomfortable feeling.
Q: How does the audience typically react when someone speaks positively about Council President Janet Evans or one of her supporters?
They clap, they ohhh and ahhh, it's very strange the way they seem to almost worship her. You would really have to be there to understand that one.
Q: How does the audience typically react when someone speaks positively about Council President Janet Evans or one of her supporters?
They clap, they ohhh and ahhh, it's very strange the way they seem to almost worship her. You would really have to be there to understand that one.
Q: Have you ever felt intimidated during a council meeting? If yes, why?
Intimidated no, I am not a person who is easily intimidate, however I was made to feel quite uncomfortable and quite unwelcome.
Q: Have you ever over-heard audience members talk about heckling or intimidating speakers?
Oh yes, In early November of 2005 I went to a council meeting, it was right before Mr. Doherty was elected to his second term as Mayor of Scranton. We had a house fire, lost just about everything, The SFD was so comforting and just so efficient, the city officials were all very helpful. I wanted the city to know about it and I went to a meeting to speak to thank those who helped ease our pain that day. When I walked in people turned and looked, then the comments began, "who is she?" , "why is she here?" , "just another Doherty Crony", they had no idea why I was there, and I took the remarks that they were making as a tactic to try and get me to leave. Mrs. [edited by SGA] was at the meeting that night and I will tell you that they really go after her. She walks in and they go crazy, if she goes into the hallway, they follow her. I think what they do to her borders on that fine line of being criminal behavior.
Q: Do audience members typically stay for the entire length of council meetings?
No they do not. They speak their mind and then they leave. You have a few that are truly interested but for the most part they come in speak, and leave immediately after.
Q: If you had the authority, what three changes would you make to council meetings to improve decorum?
1. I would require any and all questions that you wished to be addressed at the meeting to be submitted in writing a week prior to the meeting. I would also require agenda items be submitted 2 weeks prior, and given out a week prior then the public would be able to formulate any questions. This would be helpful in providing answers to the questions that the public poses to council.
2. I would stop the political posturing, the bashing of the Scranton Times and any thing that was a School District issue from being talked about at the podium Another words if it is not City business it is not necessary to say it at the Podium. There is nothing council can do about the Scranton Times nor do they have any authority with the School District. So it would be best to keep the meetings strictly to city business. The personal bashing should not be tolerated and has nothing to do with city business so it should also be stopped immediately.
3. I would remove the cameras. People like [edited by SGA] and [edited by SGA] are using the podium to become local celebrities.[edited by SGA] uses the Podium to talk about Miss Rosie and the fact that she has grounded him from the Tauras club. What does that have to do with City business? When the cameras came in the door decorum went out the door!
*****************************************************
CLOSING -- My Thoughts
I have attended about two or three council meetings in my life, and what limited exposure I had to the experience validates much of what Lucille references above. Simply put, citizen's participation in these meetings has taken on an almost "club-like" atmosphere, where only those with membership cards are welcome.
What's worse is the fact that absolutely nothing will be done about decorum at council meetings. Why? Because the circus-like atmosphere that has been created and is allowed to flourish serves the purposes of some elected officials, most notably Council President Evans. That's a shame, because the meetings don't "belong" to any person or group (including the Taxpayer's Association I might add), no matter how much they claim their dominion. It also ultimately diminishes the credibility and effectiveness of Mrs Evans, as it paints her as being someone who is more interested in grandstanding and crowd incitement than good governance. She may not like it, but as a public official, Mrs Evans has an obligation to hear all of the voices of city residents, not just whose who will giver her verbal "high fives". As a professional educator of (young) adults, I know that Mrs Evans is more than capable of maintaining order and civility within a group; she just needs to exercise those skills in council chambers.
Now what would I do? At a minimum, I'd make one change: Going forward, council chamber cameras should only point towards members of council, not towards speakers. That would serve two purposes:
1) Those individuals who were are intimidated by the prospect of seeing themselves on TV would be more likely to speak.
2) There would be less incentive for some to cultivate their budding "celebrity" status.
Once that was accomplished, I would also strongly encourage Mrs Evans to keep speakers focused on city business and I would have anyone making inappropriate comments removed from the podium. While residents do have a right to speak before council, no resident has a right to intimidate anyone else.
One final suggestion: Many of the "club members" belong to the Taxpayer's Association. The officers of that organization have a vested interest in maintaining meeting civility because a lack of it truly paints a negative picture of their organization. If they want to be taken seriously, then they need to have members that act seriously at council meetings, both when they themselves speak and just as importantly, when others (even others who they disagree with) speak as well.
As noted in the title, "decorum" is not something you will currently find during Scranton Council meetings, unless of course you have some apples. Let's hope that eventually changes.
With apologies for the bad pun, but hell, I think it's rather cute.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Love and Death
I just read Gort's latest posting and this immediately came to mind...
...and if that doesn't work for you, how about this then?
...and if that doesn't work for you, how about this then?
Road Apples, #58
In the "Duh" Department...Representative Yudichak is proposing a bill that would require state legislators to actually provide receipts for their expense reimbursement. Scranton Times article link HERE. Basically this means that at least some legislators are starting to realize that the gravy train has left the station and will not be coming back. The shame of it all! These folks may actually have to abide by the same common-sense rules that apply to us plebeians. How will they ever survive?
Self-Regulation...Speaking of receipt-less reimbursement, what do the "kids for cash", "midnight pay raise" and "various sundry financial services sector scandals" all have in common? Well among other things, all point to the abject failure that happens every time we allow any group to engage in self-regulation. It doesn't work because it works against human nature. Maybe one day we will learn...
Layoff...I read that a friend of mine lost a job that they had for over twenty years. That's sad stuff. When I started with my current employer years and years ago, a man by the name of Augie Urgola (yes, that is his real name) told me something simple but pretty profound: one of the things that companies do is employ people. His point was, simply put, that the job of a business isn't jut to make money, but to perform this socially redeeming thing called providing employment. Many companies forget this...certainly mine does, especially when you hear that certain executives are in India evaluating off-shoring opportunities. Let's hope that tree bears no fruit.
Shirts...While not profound or noteworthy I am never the less going to note that today I am actually wearing a short-sleeve shirt. Ah, the glory that is Spring! I'm not yet at the point where I need to get my warmer weather clothes down from the attic, but that could be a week or so away.
Big Purchases...stress me out. Growing up in very modest circumstances, I am always worried about money, despite the fact that I am relatively successful with my career. How successful? Successful enough that I what I pay federal income tax is equal to what I got as a starting salary out of college (note: that first job paid horribly). Anyway, big purchases always stress me out, and I have a big purchase on the horizon, namely that I need to start looking for another car. Having another daughter starting college next fall, we will need another vehicle, so my plan is to donate my PT Cruiser to my oldest daughter and have her car then go to my middle daughter. This means that I get another vehicle for myself. I'll probably put some kind of analytical tool together to better identify what I'm looking for, but I do have a few things in mind:
...uber reliable
...good on gas
...a sun roof
More to come on this. It will stress me out though.
Self-Regulation...Speaking of receipt-less reimbursement, what do the "kids for cash", "midnight pay raise" and "various sundry financial services sector scandals" all have in common? Well among other things, all point to the abject failure that happens every time we allow any group to engage in self-regulation. It doesn't work because it works against human nature. Maybe one day we will learn...
Layoff...I read that a friend of mine lost a job that they had for over twenty years. That's sad stuff. When I started with my current employer years and years ago, a man by the name of Augie Urgola (yes, that is his real name) told me something simple but pretty profound: one of the things that companies do is employ people. His point was, simply put, that the job of a business isn't jut to make money, but to perform this socially redeeming thing called providing employment. Many companies forget this...certainly mine does, especially when you hear that certain executives are in India evaluating off-shoring opportunities. Let's hope that tree bears no fruit.
Shirts...While not profound or noteworthy I am never the less going to note that today I am actually wearing a short-sleeve shirt. Ah, the glory that is Spring! I'm not yet at the point where I need to get my warmer weather clothes down from the attic, but that could be a week or so away.
Big Purchases...stress me out. Growing up in very modest circumstances, I am always worried about money, despite the fact that I am relatively successful with my career. How successful? Successful enough that I what I pay federal income tax is equal to what I got as a starting salary out of college (note: that first job paid horribly). Anyway, big purchases always stress me out, and I have a big purchase on the horizon, namely that I need to start looking for another car. Having another daughter starting college next fall, we will need another vehicle, so my plan is to donate my PT Cruiser to my oldest daughter and have her car then go to my middle daughter. This means that I get another vehicle for myself. I'll probably put some kind of analytical tool together to better identify what I'm looking for, but I do have a few things in mind:
...uber reliable
...good on gas
...a sun roof
More to come on this. It will stress me out though.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Rain
In theory we will be getting some rain by the end of this week...yes, good ole' fashioned rain. No snow, no sleet, no icy crap falling from the sky. Only rain. Reminds me of a song...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)