My complaint is his selective criticism of those who comment. He has no issue with anonymous commenters who agree with his point of view, but those who disagree are often called cowards. Furthermore, recently he has taken to identifying opposing comments from those that he is criticizing. He recently labeled comments defending Justin Simmons as coming from Justin. It's puzzling to me how he knows who certain anons are, but not others?
An excerpt from this post was presented earlier this evening on Facebook
ADDENDUM: Bernie responded with a post on his blog. Needless to say, he finds no fault with his comment policy. His excuse that he doesn't link here because I host hate is really another hostile misrepresentation by him. He actually doesn't include this blog on his blogroll because I offended him by pointing out that his disclaimers about supporting Morganelli were inadequate. In Bernie's world loyalty is the main theme, in mine it is truthfulness. He's allowing no comments on the post, he simply cannot stand criticism.
Why do I think that if Bernie O'Hare tried to sue somebody in court for 'assaulting his integrity', it would work out just as well for him as it did when he tried to make a case to the Secret Service alleging that I threatened to kill He Who Shall Not Be Named Here At This Blog By Me? I think it is important to note that after talking to some neighbors (all Democrats, of course), the Secret Service, an organization that has always been known to take every tiny little thing very, very seriously, simply packed up and left without even bothering to have a word with me! I think Bernie O'Hare can libel, slander and smear anybody and everybody to his precious little heart's content --- but I also have to think that the same guy who somehow conspired to lose his license to practice law just can not realistically expect to win too many court cases concerning his special brand of 'integrity'.
ReplyDeleteROLF OELER