This letter to the editor published in today’s Sunday Voice seems kind of silly to me.

City needs law on sex offenders Once again Wilkes-Barre city council has chosen to spit in the face of concerned parents and cast aside Jim McCarthy's plea to impose sex offender residency restrictions in the city. Soon Wilkes-Barre will stand alone as the only area municipality without this type of protection. The objections are asinine and illogical. Protecting or excluding geographic sectors of the city is not the focus of the ordinance. The intent is to limit residency in areas adjacent to schools, playgrounds and childcare facilities. Is this concept really so difficult to comprehend? Council's lack of concern would almost be laughable were the possible consequences not so frightening. Our social climate is changing and requires closer scrutiny as recent incidents in the city indicate. Perhaps a more popular alternative ordinance would keep children at least 1,000 feet away from city council members. Jim XXXXXX Dallas

In all honesty, this proposed law would probably be just about unenforceable. Seriously. With the call load our police officers have as it is, it’s not like they can hang around the schools, playgrounds and whatever else would need to be patrolled.

So, we pass the law and then what? Well, nothing. Well, that is, unless we force all of the convicted child predators to embroider a large, red P on their shirts and coats. Seriously. If some pervert is intently watching the comings and goings at an elementary school, how would we know it? Do we call the police every time an adult male glances in the general direction of a school? “Suspicious activity,” as the crime watchers call it. How would we differentiate between the molesters mulling around and the parents assembled on school grounds in advance of the conclusion of the school day?

Soon Wilkes-Barre will stand alone as the only area municipality without this type of protection.

So? So what? If West Pittston jumped off of a bridge, should Wilkes-Barre quickly follow suit? Remember, West Pittston thinks it can stop minors from smoking, the ultimate feel good ordinance that will never amount to even a smallish hill of refried beans. As if they could. Imbeciles.

I know, I know. The predator laws are…for the children,” so we cannot be allowed to be against their enactment. Funny thing is, from what I see in my own neighborhood, not very many of these absentee parents have a clue where their kids are at all hours of the day, including well after dark. So, if I’m thinking of going the pederast route, the very last thing I need to do is camp out near a school or a playground. There are children wandering around all over the place. Maybe we should pass legislation that addresses all of that.

Oh, wait. I forgot. We do have curfews in place, but they are not enforced. It’s weird how that always happens, heyna? You know, pass a new law with much fanfare and then forget about it. Isn’t there a law banning skateboarding on Public Square? Yeah, that one worked out well, didn’t it? There’s a law banning kids from the fountain, but nobody pays it much mind including me. There’s a law against cruising the downtown in cars. Although, the scattershot enforcement of said law has always been very selective. Teenagers got snagged repeatedly. But not the “Johns” looking for prostitutes, or the scumbags looking to score some dope. Maybe we should ban vehicular traffic altogether from the downtown and see how that one works out.

Lately we’ve had white guys raping women, and black men raping girls and a Hispanic guy who enjoys exposing his penis to King’s College girls down near North Street. It’s almost as of we need a law about all of that. How about an ordinance that would keep men at least 1,000 feet away from women. That ought to work. Penis-free zones, so to speak. Yeah, if you’re caught with a penis within 1,000 feet of a female, you’ll be imprisoned in a nearby county until you change your voter registration and become a card-carrying member of the Luzerne County Republican Party. The local republicans are obviously a neutered bunch, so it makes perfect sense to me.

And if that outfit gets any more emasculated than it currently is, perhaps we should pass a law banning them. Doesn’t matter much. Who would even notice they had gone missing?

Although, before the banning of foreskins and the like, we ought to have the city solicitor find out if that falls under the jurisdiction of the Fedrule Govmint, as we wouldn’t want to face hefty legal bills after NAMBLA sues the city. Whatever.

Do whatever y’all want. Ban this, that and everything and then let me know how it all works out. As for myself, I like simplicity. And I have a painfully simple way of seeing to it that your kids don’t get used like a plastic fu>k doll one day.

Supervise them.

Felons? Wilkes-Barre needs the convicted felons to vote?

Jeez. I didn’t drink THAT much, did I?

Linda Stets made an appearance on Corbett a couple of days ago. Although, I have to admit being confused as to what her intent was. She was going on and on about how difficult it is for convicted felons to vote, and she offered lots of useful advice so as to make it easier for them to vote. Got me, man. I assume she’s courting the votes of convicted felons. Or some such dubious thing.

Yeah, that’s how we’ll reclaim Wilkes-Barre’s much more glorious past, by registering the felons. Yep, that ought to do the trick. Now I’m seeing some light at the end of the tunnel. What we need is a massive influx of the vision that those who rape, rob, pillage and assault have buried deep within them. Yes, the overriding question is, who would the convicted felons vote for?

As for Corbett, he huffs and puffs and spits all over his microphone while compelling us to march on city hall, the courthouse and the state capital with pitchforks and torches in hand as part of his unquenchable thirst for better government. You know the deal. They’re all no damned good. We’ve got to ask the tough questions. We must demand transparency. We want answers and we want them now.

And for those who were elected and refuse to be bullied by this microphone-toting thug, ala Tom Leighton, well, for them there is nothing but Corbett’s constant sniping, derision and less than accurate speculating about his performance as well as his motives.

But when a possible successor to the local throne appears on the show, the great Corbett reaches into his well-worn bag of tricks and produces the world’s largest softball. And then he soft-tosses the thing underhand as if he’s coaching a Challenger division Little League game. Ready? Ready? Here it comes, so swing level.

And here’s the problem with the kid gloves handling of those who would be king. If it’s fair to pose the tough questions to those currently in charge of this whole shebang, is it not fair, even mandatory that those who would replace them be asked the tough questions also? Skate parks? Ping pong in the old firehouse? More trees? The felon vote?

If the challenger is promising more firemen, firehouses and much safer streets, would it not behoove the great one to ask her how she’ll manage all of that without a return to the disastrous deficit spending days? Is it not the responsibility of the responsible journalist to expose a charlatan, if and when one presents itself? The mayor won’t join in during any of your daily rants, so in direct response you’ll sandbag the voters when a walking, talking unorthodoxy wants the keys to the city?

You’ll do this city that great a disservice?

With hard-hitting “journalists” such as yourself on watch, is it any wonder that our previous play actor of a mayor was entrusted with our future?

Steve, as my daughter likes to say, real chicks play fast pitch! So, when flippantly playing with the lives of Wilkes-Barre’s residents, please try to be more responsible. If the mayor needs to be asked the tough questions, then so do those who seek to replace him. If Tom Leighton or Kathy Kane need to be viewed with a suspicious eye, then so does anyone else who wants to guide my city from here on out. You owe my city some consistency. You owe my city some balance from which to make some crucial decisions. You owe us at least that much.

It’s typical of the great one, though. He talks all rough and tumble, but as evidenced by Chris Carney’s recent appearance on the show, the tough talk ends and a warm, prehensile mouth is presented to the visiting politico. Yeah, the talk of revolution comes to an abrupt halt, and the suddenly adoring radio host gushes like a 12-year-old girl at a Boyz To Men exhibition. Gee Chris, that’s groovy. You’re groovy. Can I stroke your gullwing doors?

Predictably, the rancorous antagonist goes limp like so many that can’t afford imported Viagra. Once again, the blustery radio goon proves that those of us that consider him the undeniable nadir of local talk radio are justified in saying as much.

And he did the exact same thing when he had Scranton Mayor, Chris Doherty, on the WILK blower. And he huffed and puffed about hizzoner, but went down like a punctured dirigible just as soon as Doherty joined him. So I called him out on that by way of electronic pulse, only to receive the following response:

Decorum?

Boy! That’s a new one coming from Corbett.

Decorum? Let’s see here. Isn’t that when you rail against someone not able to defend themselves, but turn around and talk all nice to their face when they can? That’s talk radio etiquette as practiced by blithering Neanderthals given to frequent bouts of thuggish tactics, correct?

You crack ‘em at the knees every chance you get, but suddenly get all civil when they bother to respond to your pitiful rivulets of maledicted mediocrity?

So, if the modus operandi stays as it is, when Tom Leighton finally relents and calls Corbett, he’s going to be offered the warm mouth, too. Right? No more unfair cheap shots? No more unsubstantiated sniping? The self-centered childishness stops? He gets the world’s largest softball, too?

Suddenly, his Corbett-assigned approval rating rises from the 10% figure? Remember, Steve? You have a problem with 90% of what he has done as mayor? Your words. Remember? 90%! That’s the discreditable phlegm you hocked up. That’s the uncalled-for filth you spewed for purely self-centered reasons. The unwarranted attacks meant to motivate the mayor to call.

So, if what you need is to not be considered the local Mona Lisa of journalistic irresponsibility, stop trying to present the Edsels of Wilkes-Barre politics as if they were Roadrunners sporting hemis.

Start spreading those tough questions around a bit more evenly.

Can anyone tell us why the old Blum Brothers building is being remodeled and by whom?

Interesting. I don’t remember reading that the Chamber folks bought it. So who bought it?

V’ger needs to know.

Me gotta go. NFL football in exactly one-half hour.

Life is good again.

‘Til next time.