Friday, May 28, 2010

Steve Corbett Hates the Proposed Home Rule Charter

While trying to drastically increase the pain of my head ache yesterday, I decided to flip on the Steve Corbett show on WILK. In the words of Bush the RINO, Mission Accomplished!!

Good old Stevie has come out and flatly stated he is against the Luzerne County Home Rule changes. As a general rule, that is reason enough to be for it.

You see, as an example, Stevie is one of those unique individuals that actually believes the New York Times is a legitimate newspaper. That what they print is a factual representation of the news. In most people’s opinion, the NY Times is the worst of the ultra-left rags that long ago abandoned printing unvarnished news. That is why I say taking the exact opposite position of Corbett will be the right choice about 90% of the time. His judgement is so far shot out of a cannon, you’d have to be a fool or a nut to agree with him even much of the time.

I’ll set aside that he is a crackpot that relies on inciting his audience just to get ratings. After all, that is his job. I do however, pity the foolish goobers that think he is doing anything good for the community. What he is doing is filling his wallet. It is his job to stir you up enough to call him. Fact is, Stevie is excellent at that. He is great at making a bad headache far worse too!!!


Stephen Albert said...

Corbett is that rare individual that manages to piss absolutely everyone off. I guess that's why he's on the air.

My favorite Corbett nugget? I once heard him rant on for 10 minutes about how a caller was "wasting his time". Yes, he wasted 10 minutes of time complaining about how a caller was wasting his time.

Zen said...

thats our Corbett

Anonymous said...

I think this is a time Corbett is "right". The cluster the Home Study commission complied is DOA. They miss the need to have some GOP and Dems - not fully weighted to one party - we've seen in local as well as national politics what happens when balance is lacking. Secondly, 11 elected officials? I like the number 5 - more is not better. They should also have short terms - 2 years would be fine - that way they are more accountable to the people. I think they should all be elected at the same time - this staggering doesn't work - have them elected every two years - period.