Thursday, May 22, 2008

How-To Tips From A Lying Dirt Bag


Tip #2: Never lose an opportunity to fabricate a lie out of thin air.
Tip #3: Never ever answer any question with a direct answer.

Example:
Pittsburgh Penguins’ stellar season has earned them a trip to the Stanley Cup finals. The team and Reebok float a plan to hang 40 x 85 ft temporary banners on Downtown skyscrapers to celebrate the championship event. But alas, while the idea is a spectacular one … There’s not enough time to have the banners produced. The team therefore decides to abandon the idea.

The Accusation:
Since the temporary banners are not to code, ask City Council to rescind a sign moratorium they passed to stop construction of the last Downtown (Lamar) sign you illegally approved. Not that these things are remotely related .... They are not. But it is a great opportunity to pull something you want out of thin air. Something you were previously denied.

When Council instead suggests alternative legislation which solves the Penguin banner problem, agree to draft the legislation yourself, knowing you will never do so. When the team cancels the idea because of lack of production time, neglect to tell council. Also neglect to send them the previously agreed-upon resolution that you were never going to send them anyway. You can then lie to the media, blaming council for failure to pass legislation they never received. But most importantly, you can neglect to mention the whole thing was moot since the team had abandoned the idea BEFORE council even got a chance to vote on the legislation you never sent them.

The Proper Dirt-Bag Replies (Listen to audio interview here):
Media:
The city solicitor said you couldn’t [hang the signs] because of the Reebok logo. Is that true? Is it against the law to do it because of the Reebok logo?
Luke: "There were concerns surrounding the Reebok logo."
(Note: Luke knows existing code makes the banners illegal because his own solicitor told him so. Yet he fails to say so. He also fails to tell interviewer Fred Honsberger that the whole issue was moot because the Penguins cancelled the idea BEFORE council’s session.)

Media: Would this have just taken a council resolution, just for these temporary signs?
Luke: "I will only tell you that based on the actions council took a couple of weeks ago by passing a (Lamar sign) moratorium, I was not comfortable as the mayor, unilaterally saying this is something that needs to be done …… We gave council the opportunity to lift the (Lamar sign) moratorium, to build unanimous consensus, which I believe by the way could have been done on Tuesday if all nine council members were on board. But unfortunately while some members are very supportive, and perhaps even the majority of the nine-member body, we couldn’t get all nine to sign on and say this is something they want to do."
(Note: Luke was asked about a draft resolution for the Penguin banners, but he instead answers by referring to a Lamar-inspired sign moratorium, tricking Honsberger into thinking these are one and the same pieces of legislation. He also fails to tell Honsberger that even if all nine members had voted unanimously TUESDAY, approving anything and everything the mayor wanted, the banners would still not fly because the Penguins had cancelled the plan on the previous SATURDAY)

Media: So you’re saying a simple resolution would have resolved this problem very expeditiously?
Luke: "I think it would have been very helpful."
(Note: Helpful to whom and for what? The Penguins and their banners which had already been cancelled by the team? No, helpful to lift the Lamar sign moratorium, which was the impetus for this whole embarrassment in the first place.)

Bonus Points Awarded:
Too many to count. As long as the media takes this kid on his word …. which he as proven time and again is worth absolutely nothing …. Luke will continue to easily rack up the bonus points.

Homework Assignment:
Successfully draft a legal opinion which will allow Luke to receive free Stanley Cup tickets for his entire family and 20 of his closest friends. Free hotel, air fare and meals should also be included. Additionally find some way to prohibit at least four members of council from appealing this opinion, citing conflicts of interest and forfeiture of office as the only sanction.

** Completed homework assignments should be sent to Pittsburgh City Solicitor George Specter c/o the Mayor’s Office.

5 comments:

EdHeath said...

Off Q should be interesting on Friday. At least one person should have the correct information, and all five of them are not terribly fond of the Mayor.

Char said...

Good point. Good idea :)

Anonymous said...

Luke lie? Nahh, couldn't be. You must be teaching a class on lying and lying yourself! Tell me is Luke a former pupil of yours? Because, if so, you taught him very, very well.

/snark.

Anonymous said...

Luke makes me want to puke. The news journalist have no balls.

The Sky is falling,

They are running this city into the ground with Motznik in the loop. Council is the only thing, well four of them, that is holding everything together. I say go 4 go !

Anonymous said...

"So the city has over $1 billion in debt and Dan and Luke want to eliminate the city but make everyone who is stupid enough, poor enough or unfortunate enough to still be living in the city to pay the $1 billion tab"


The city debt is not $1 billion. It is about 780 Million Dollars according to the city's 2007 audit.

The city is also one of the most liquid governments around, with a fund balance of over $130 Million, thanks to the "intervention" under Act 47.

Let's not forget who and how the city was placed in the crapper in 2003.

Mayor Tom "we are growing the city" Murphy.

Aided and abbetted by:

The Allegheny Conference (republicans)and monied real estate people, who buy and sell Mayors, were BIG $upporters of Tom Murphy.

The Allegheny County Labor Council, centered primarily in the building trades, endorsed Murphy. They don't give a sh-t about the city except that they expect it to publicly subsidize every construction project in town no matter how much the long term cost and damage to city residents.

The Allegheny County Democratic Committee, who supported Tom Murphy, (despite the fact that he was killing the very neighborhoods they live in) as long as they, their kid, wife, cousin, friend, brother got a job somewhere doing nothing all day for PWSA, ALCOSAN, city Public Works and so forth.

This very same trio now fully $upports Luke the Fluke and Dan the TAX Man.

Doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome? No, they all expect the outcome to never change at all. As long as they are being taken care of at the expense of the city taxpayer why change anything?


Onorato:
cut his deal with the A-hole Conference. Back the dissolution of the city and we (the A-hole Conference) $upport you for Gov.

Ravenstahl:
same deal with the A-hole Conference, hence his recent "revelation" that eliminating the the city is a good idea after all.

Follow Murphy power retention rules: Give away whatever you must to the Building Trades (thank you Jack Shea) and real estate developers. Hire as many City Dem Committee members and their significant others to keep them on your team for the party endorsement. Who cares if they can contribute anything to the productivity of the workforce.

This is not about political parties. This is about monied interests - republican and democrat alike - maintaining control of the goose that lays their golden eggs.

Oh yeah, some twenty something dolt of a mayor sure makes things a lot easier for the BIG THREE too.