Posted on 10/29/2002 11:00:45 PM PST by Coeur de Lion
Of course, they might be assuming that the knucklehead from San Diego who has never read Huck Finn is typical. Maybe on some scale, like "people in the affirmative-action slots at very PC newspapers and charities," he is, but thank God he's not like any black guy I know.
You have to love the way that a Lois Norder goes axe-murderer vicious at the idea of free speech for anyone that isn't going to parrot her speech. Not knowing her age, I can't figure out whether she lives alone with her incontinent, spoiled cat, or whether that's her inevitable destiny (I have dated a Lois or two... never for long... good luck with the cats, girls, wherever you are).
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
THEM:
"I found your comments to be offensive and racist."
YOU:
1. "Thank you. Your opinion is noted."
2. "Why, yes, I am a racist. In fact, I'm a Grand Dragon in the Ku Klux Klan. Gotta go -- my sheet's ready at the cleaners."
3. "No need to be niggardly with your praise, sir/ma'am."
4. "And you're entitled to that unsupported, personal opinion."
5. "And may God richly bless you, too, sir/ma'am."
6. "Why, yes, I am a racist -- in the sense that I am in favor of the races, all of them."
7. "The only race I acknowledge is the human race."
8. "And I found your statement to be obfuscatory and interminable."
9. "¿Qu'est-que c'est, Monsieur/Madame? Je ne comprends pas. Est-que vous voudrier boire quelque chose?"
and of course the classic
10. "Yeah? well, who cares what you think, you [Yankee, etc,] fag?"
Seriously: the best response might simply be to say: "Sir/Ma'am, if you call me a racist again in public you'll be hearing from my lawyer." Nothing gives one more reason to pause than the threat of legal action...
A well-orchestrated smear campaign carefully developed by an anti-McTeer faction.
The race-baiters on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram passed this mudball around like the Lakers on a full court press.
Some words of acknowledgement for successfully planting a cyanide pill in Bob McTeer's dossier--and messing up Harry Stein's good name along the way--can be addressed to:
that dispenser of PC poison--The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
Lois Norder lnorder@star-telegram.com
I'll second that. He was railroaded, and it's even worse because he wasn't the real target. It would have been bad enough if Stein had had his name dragged through the mud, but it's even worse that he's been used as a pawn to trash someone else.
The best thing to do would be to write a letter to the editor of the paper, or if they refuse, write a column for another competing local paper. Anything to get your side of the story out is important. If Stein could have preempted the journalist by getting his column into a competing paper on the same day it would have been a devastating riposte.
Actually, I got the impression that the "offended" audience member didn't actually misunderstand Stein's position, I think he staged his little public snit *specifically* for the purpose of giving his liberal cronies in the press something to run with.
It didn't matter if the charges were correct or not, or even rational or not. The very fact that "some audience members were offended" *becomes* the news story, and removes any need for the smear articles to document any actual (alleged) improprieties in the speech itself (or the invitation to speak). In fact, the "news" articles don't even have to get within three miles of what was actually said in the speech -- the "shocked" reaction itself is the real focus of the articles, and taints everyone in the vicinity.
I think there are a lot of liberals running around who understand full well that the well-timed accusation itself is their most potent weapon -- no matter how unfounded it is.
When you're looking to cover a shark feeding frenzy, the easiest way is to bring your own bucket of blood to pour into the water.
It's like a manipulative woman who, within earshot of her drunk boyfriend/husband, proclaims loudly at a man who has mildly displeased her, "HOW DARE YOU GRAB ME THERE!" While the poor schmuck is trying to figure out what in the heck she's talking about, he gets a chair smashed over his head.
This wasn't PC news coverage about an audience member who was honestly offended -- Stein was set up.
For about a year, I served Denton County, Texas, as its top administrator, reporting to County Judge Kirk Wilson. My deputy director of administration sent a press release regarding some property allegedly stolen by a former county clerk to an incorrect fax number for Charles Siderius, a print reporter for the Denton Record-Chronicle (tell them to print a correction), who claimed that the mistransmission was intentional. I interrogated my deputy but declined to agree, believing it was an honest mistake on his part.
Not satisfied, Siderius decided to get even. The next day, he initiated what became a nine-month-long harassment of our office, making daily requests for copies of all documents entering or leaving our office, even handwritten notes and telephone messages. I was not opposed to complying with the requests, but they became expensive for the taxpayer and burdensome on my small staff, who had to spend time collecting the information and worry that if one item for some reason was not located Siderius then could write a negative news article about it.
A few months later, I uncovered and successfully countered Siderius’ fabricated and false claim, printed in the Denton Record-Chronicle, that the county government was preparing to renovate a Confederate monument and his lame and transparent attempt to incite the public passions of the African-American community, which two actions earned him a stinging rebuke from the Associated Press, to which organization’s thousands of subscribers the erroneous information had been conveyed. Shortly afterwards, in initial attempts to exact revenge, Siderius attempted to trick me into drinking alcohol on county time and into slandering his employer in public.
Then Siderius intensified the open-records requests to the point that my office asked for permission from the Denton County Commissioners Court to seek an attorney-general opinion, requesting whether or not a reporter could under the law make such a broad request on a regular basis. The county commissioners agreed, and the opinion was sought. Unfortunately, Attorney General John Cornyn, probably not wanting to upset editorial boards statewide before running for the U.S. Senate, opined that such broad requests did indeed fall under the parameters of the Texas Open Records Act.
Then, I discovered that my secretary, Lari Irby, had been stealing taxpayer money since her first day of employment by tampering with government documents (padding her timesheet), a misdemeanor or felony depending upon the amount stolen, which has never been determined. She alleged that my boss, County Judge Kirk Wilson, had conspired and encouraged her to commit those crimes, which I believe and which allegation was corroborated by Wilson’s declining to concur with my management decision to fire her and defending her to the point of irrationality.
Not willing to work for a man I no longer respected and who tolerated and allegedly participated in the stealing of taxpayer money within his own office, I decided to resign my job after my one-year anniversary passed less than a week later.
As a parting shot, Siderius wrote another “get,” this time about allegations that I had shredded government documents and failed to produce records requested under the Texas Open Records Act. Regarding the first allegation, violating basic standards of ethical journalism, Siderius used only one source, who mysteriously failed to make any comments for direct or indirect attribution and who failed to produce one single "shred" of evidence.
Regarding the second allegation, Siderius had no source at all and instead made a libelous criminal accusation about me since, according to his own editor, Jim Flansburg, Siderius believed that I was being set up to make it appear that I had not produced correspondence yet failed to include in his article about a dozen crucial facts that vindicated me, including evidence that suggested that I had been set up by my secretary and my boss in a vendetta as retaliation for my having discovered and refused to become complicit in their alleged scheme to steal taxpayer money!
Reading untruthful criminal accusations about me and knowing that thousands of other persons were reading it as well was a very frustrating feeling. And finding out almost two years later, after the statute of limitations for libel had expired, that this newspaper knowingly and intentionally withheld so much information that exonerated me turned frustration into absolute contempt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.