Is what he says Constitutionally protected “free speech, political trash-talking, a bigoted and prejudiced rant or a wild-eyed speech fomenting hatred and discrimination? What's next Kimberly Wear, and John Chiv? We going to experience the consequences of murder-type squads visiting the “certain angry, bitter people” - not unlike you? Councilwoman Linda Atkins the first on your hit list? This is where it all starts, or don't you know?
This guy starts his personal diatribe with a prolonged outburst of bitter, outspoken denunciation, vehemently attacking Linda Atkins and then goes after those that support her and never stops – that is until he says this masterful piece of rotten hypocrisy in conclusion:
“It's time for a few to stop the conservative versus progressive game. Most of us, regardless of our beliefs, want the best for this community. Think how much we could accomplish if we worked together and moved our city forward?”If anyone wants or needs a lesson in RANK HYPOCRISY read what this guy does and compare it to what he says. The only civility demonstrated by the hypocrite is his use of the word, "civil." Everything else, the whole letter is an exercise in fetid character assassination.
More than that, these are the words of paranoia – deludingly accuse others of the very acts you are committing.
He says “Championing for causes – and people you represent – can be done civilly.” The Dictionary defines “civilly” as “politely; courteously.” Do these words define politely and courteously? “Moments after this pleasant conversation, I watched you turn around and 'attack' your fellow council members and others, and it was personal. They are not just my elected representatives, but my family, my friends and me community members.” His next paragraph is his attempt to depict her as mentally ill - “the level of her anger expressed – and the disrespect shown” questions her true character.
It is here that the Kimberly Wear and Dave Kuta went too far when publishing this guy's personal vendetta. If what John Chiv says is true and there's no reason to not believe it is, then when he says matters are “personal” the place to air his soiled underwear is someplace personal. Not in the newspaper. The stench of this crap puts the Times-Standard right where what Glenn Greenwald calls the “watchdog” media.
That tactic is as old as establishments themselves, though it’s now most aggressively enforced by the “watchdog” media. It’s the media, rather than political leaders, which take the lead in serving most of the interests of the political establishment — not just by depicting opponents of the political order as mentally ill but also uncritically disseminating its fear-mongering campaigns."Fear-mongering campaigns." Read the last half of what John Chiv says and you'll see another good example of what Glenn Greenwald is talking about. It's here, publishing these kinds of letters that the paper shows it true agenda - Government for the sake of government. Never for the sake of the people. No responsibility to just present the facts. Just tell everyone how to think, believe and what to do. We get the message.
[Source]
--Joe
Wow, did you even read Chiv's piece?
ReplyDeleteNice to see you "got the message," Rose.
ReplyDelete