Lecture Explores Origins of Mudslinging
This should be the definitive handling of the subject...
It's being held at the John M. Perzel Education & Technology Center ETC.
No kidding.
The lecture is based on “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion: The Presidential Election of 1884.”
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Big Ed & friends going lame is good for us
Big Ed and his three stoogesRendell left quacking
That hurts an equally lame-duck Rendell, who wants the General Assembly to approve his health care and energy proposals, plus millions of dollars in new state borrowing for infrastructure.
Rendell now has lost his three go-to guys: Fumo; former House Speaker John Perzel, R-Philadelphia, who remains in the House but out of leadership; and former House Minority Whip Mike Veon, D-Beaver Falls, defeated in 2006.
Rendell's Big Three -- Fumo, Perzel and Veon -- helped ram through a state income tax increase and other tax hikes, the 2004 casino law (engineered by Fumo) and property tax reduction schemes aimed at placating the voters.
Big Ed was quoted, "WUP-Wup-wup-wup-wup"
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Billy does the Allegheny country
Former President Clinton stumps for wife in Pittsburgh area
Yeah, like that power couple will bring reform anywhere. The game's the same, just the names on the checks change.
Yeah, like that power couple will bring reform anywhere. The game's the same, just the names on the checks change.
Monday, March 10, 2008
The Voter Taketh & The State Giveth Back
Or the state taketh whenever they damned well please.
Pennsylvania takes away voter say on property tax hikes
h/t Tony Phyrillas
Pennsylvania takes away voter say on property tax hikes
h/t Tony Phyrillas
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Did Murtha pressure military to get himself off hook
and how much pressure did Murtha put on the military to keep Haditha Marines on the hook to CYA his own miserable butt?
Murtha granted exemption from explaining
A member of Congress who publicly condemned U.S. Marines fighting the war on terror in Iraq for killing civilians in "cold blood" is being granted an exemption that means he will not have to answer questions about his statements, including his earlier explanation that his information came from the highest levels of the Marine Command.
The exemption has come in a military court proceeding against Marine Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, one of four Marines still facing charges in the battle that erupted when a team of his Marines was attacked by insurgents in the city of Haditha.
Murtha's statements are key to the defense of Chessani, according to officials with The Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Chessani against the charges.
"If you go back [to Murtha's description] there was no [Improvised Explosive Device], there was no firefight, it was like there was a phantom menace," said Brian Rooney, a spokesman for the center, told WND.
"However we have the firefight on video. You can't deny it," Rooney told WND after a recent two-day motions hearing in Chessani's case came to a conclusion.
Read the rest and get your blood boiling.
Murtha granted exemption from explaining
A member of Congress who publicly condemned U.S. Marines fighting the war on terror in Iraq for killing civilians in "cold blood" is being granted an exemption that means he will not have to answer questions about his statements, including his earlier explanation that his information came from the highest levels of the Marine Command.
The exemption has come in a military court proceeding against Marine Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, one of four Marines still facing charges in the battle that erupted when a team of his Marines was attacked by insurgents in the city of Haditha.
Murtha's statements are key to the defense of Chessani, according to officials with The Thomas More Law Center, which is representing Chessani against the charges.
"If you go back [to Murtha's description] there was no [Improvised Explosive Device], there was no firefight, it was like there was a phantom menace," said Brian Rooney, a spokesman for the center, told WND.
"However we have the firefight on video. You can't deny it," Rooney told WND after a recent two-day motions hearing in Chessani's case came to a conclusion.
Read the rest and get your blood boiling.
Monday, March 3, 2008
'Stay' at home payraise
Didn't one of the Gambino's make a lot of money while serving a sentence?
After returning raise, LaGrotta took it back
Former state Rep. Frank LaGrotta revoked repayment of his controversial 2005 pay raise after he lost his 2006 re-election bid, boosting his pension benefit.
Mr. LaGrotta, 49, who is on house arrest after pleading guilty to conflict of interest charges, yesterday confirmed that he stopped repaying the money and sought a refund for what he had already paid.
"After losing the primary in 2006, I decided to stop having the amount of the pay raise deducted from my salary. I also was reimbursed for the months I did pay back. It was perfectly legal, according to House Comptroller Alexis Brown," Mr. LaGrotta said yesterday.
The raise, which was repealed after four months, added $4,414 to Mr. LaGrotta's annual pay, bringing his 2005 total compensation to $77,568.
State law mandates that any raises for lawmakers cannot take effect until the session after they are approved. But in passing the raises, lawmakers created a loophole that allowed many, including Mr. LaGrotta, to receive higher pay immediately.
Like many other House members facing re-election in 2006, Mr. LaGrotta, an Ellwood City Democrat, initiated repayment plans to reimburse the state for the short-lived raise that infuriated constituents and was ultimately repealed. However, when he was defeated anyway in the May 2006 primary, he stopped making payments and eventually, requested and received reimbursement for what he had already paid back.
After returning raise, LaGrotta took it back
Former state Rep. Frank LaGrotta revoked repayment of his controversial 2005 pay raise after he lost his 2006 re-election bid, boosting his pension benefit.
Mr. LaGrotta, 49, who is on house arrest after pleading guilty to conflict of interest charges, yesterday confirmed that he stopped repaying the money and sought a refund for what he had already paid.
"After losing the primary in 2006, I decided to stop having the amount of the pay raise deducted from my salary. I also was reimbursed for the months I did pay back. It was perfectly legal, according to House Comptroller Alexis Brown," Mr. LaGrotta said yesterday.
The raise, which was repealed after four months, added $4,414 to Mr. LaGrotta's annual pay, bringing his 2005 total compensation to $77,568.
State law mandates that any raises for lawmakers cannot take effect until the session after they are approved. But in passing the raises, lawmakers created a loophole that allowed many, including Mr. LaGrotta, to receive higher pay immediately.
Like many other House members facing re-election in 2006, Mr. LaGrotta, an Ellwood City Democrat, initiated repayment plans to reimburse the state for the short-lived raise that infuriated constituents and was ultimately repealed. However, when he was defeated anyway in the May 2006 primary, he stopped making payments and eventually, requested and received reimbursement for what he had already paid back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)