Politics from the Palouse to Puget Sound

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh?

If you have an online subscription to the Moscow-Pullman Daily News, you need to get over there RIGHT NOW and check out the comments to Chris Lupke's heel-clicking, dress-swishing, drama queen temper tantrum letter to the editor about me published today. There are some real gut-busters like:

As an observer, I have watched PARD keep the issues focused and not personalized. No matter the outcome for a Walmart in Pullman, they have used their rights and liberties and a democratic judicial system with grace.
And this:

I've never heard Lupke espouse that he speaks for the whole community - in fact, his arguments, whether I agree with them or not, have been well balanced and presented without name calling and labeling. I respect that more than those who would make assumptions about others' moral authority because they have their own reasons for not wanting another walmart in the area.
Apparently this anonymous buffoon didn't read Lupke's last letter where he stated:

Most Pullmanites have little appetite for such a superfluous addition to the retail landscape, and many recognize Wal-Mart's real and well-documented harms to communities like ours.
And let's not forget PARD's infamous may 23, 2005 press release:

The volume of signatures collected clearly shows that PARD has won the battle of public opinion.
*LOL* Please say they're intentionally trying to be funny with all this revisionist history!!

Then the man who when referring to Wal-Mart in an interview said "They're ass——s," checks in with this gem:

surprise, suprise. When you cut me, I bleed too (and I guess so do you). I would probably be more devastated by cogent arguments against me than by calls that I am "run out of town" or that I should "pack up and ship out." (As few as those that are.) But I've endured that kind of what I consider ad hominem for far too long and felt it was finally necessary to let people know I don't think it's right -- or effective for that matter.
Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!! Boy, they just don't make "grassroots activists" like they used to. And calling somebody an "asshole" is pretty "cogent" I would say, even for a PhD. Almost as cogent as saying Wal-Mart would destroy the public school system and that Target was just about to build in Pullman two years ago.

Then there's this classic of all time from Lupke:

Finally, I have heard second hand that there are further attacks on me lately. I don't go that website very often and usually only to look for information not easily gotten anywhere else. I haven't been back for some time and not lately at all. Folks out there paying attention to this issue: do not necessarily believe what you read in the cyber world! Just because someone says something is true it is not necessarily true. Things can be more complicated than they seem. Silly photoshop techniques are an obvious example.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! "Some time and not lately all" is 4 days, Chris? (Or maybe its five now over in Taiwan across the dateline.) I'll make sure everybody knows EVERY time you visit now, all through the wonders of "Photoshop" *LOL*, along with all the other "avowed Wal-Mart haters" out there.

My friends, this is what is known as:

IN YOUR HEAD

*LOL* Thanks for all the tremendous laughter and satisfaction, Chris. I guess some part of me will miss that when this is all over, although not the part of me that pays taxes and cares about the disadvantaged in the community.

The laughs keep on coming!

December 7, 2007, 9:13 pm Proponent of Civility says:

Gee, Ms Torkelson, I'm so sorry your feelings have been hurt. At least no one has libeled your character -- which seems to be the operational mode of the Forbicites.

December 8, 2007, 3:28 pm Proponent of Civility says:

Forbicite: fabricated word to indicate "followers of Forbes".
-cites is not in the dictionary as a suffix and has no independent definition that I am aware of.

December 11, 2007, 8:34 pm Proponent of Civility says:

As one who has also been subjected to the vitriolic libel of Mr. Forbes, and chosen not to sink to his level of public discourse


December 11, 2007, 10:39 pm Proponent of Civility says:

PARD is a cross-section of your neighborhood.

*ROTFLMAO*

Technorati Tags:

3 comments:

Mr. C. said...

Check the time stamp of all those anonymous comments.

A bit suspicious, I'd say.

April E. Coggins said...

Chris Lupke is quoted in the June 23, 2006 Lewiston Morning Tribune: Lupke said the proposed location is adjacent to access points for the junior high school, an elementary school, an assisted living community and the town hospital.
"For those reasons this traffic issue isn't a matter of luxury," he said. "It could be a matter of life and death."

That pretty much let's us know where the dead kids accusation originated.

It's easy to appear above the fray when attacking anonymously.

Tom Forbes said...

Dale,

These are all issues that I intend to discuss with Nathan Alford on Monday when we have lunch.

There is absolutely no legitimacy to the comments on the Daily News website . One person could conceivably be making all the posts, as you have suggested, in some schizophrenic frenzy of commenting. It's not free speech. It's a free-for-all. It would be one thing for a blog, but this is a legitimate newspaper that the whole community turns to for news. It's bad enough we have to stomach Vera White's gossip fest once a week.

And of course, there is the issue of anonymous comments. Why must you provide a name, address, and phone number to submit a letter to the editor and yet be allowed to post anything you want to write with no identification and no restraint on the website? It's completely irresponsible. I have said before that this is just a gimmick to boost the Daily News' faltering subscription rate. But there are plenty of places online to anonymously sling mud already. Why do we need the Daily News site for that?

I know some people, including on this blog, have made the case for anonymity in order to disclose important information that might potentially embarrass the commenter. But seriously. Has anyone around here blown the whistle on the Corvair or big tobacco in comments on the DN website? No. Anonymity is used almost exclusively to launch vicious attacks on me or the members of Christ Church and New Saint Andrews. I'm sorry. It's cowardly and it's immoral and I'm totally against it. If you can't muster the courage to say something publicly, then it's not worth saying at all.