Every time I mocked those who ripped into people from the “safety of anonymity,” there were countless numbers of folks there to tell me...Well, Mark, what are you going to do? That’s the internet. Deal with it. Learn to live with it. Embrace it. Better yet, kwitcherbelyacin.
Yeah? Fu>k that!
As far as I’m concerned, the very worst of the anonymous assassins are the ones that go after candidates for elected office. We bemoan the fact that not enough people are willing to make that sacrifice, running for elected office. And we moan in unison when candidates run unopposed. Yet, when people do step forward and run for elected office, up step the anonymous cowards to savage them at nearly every possible turn.
As per my last couple of posts, I’ve had a reader reminding me that ad-hoc anonymous attacks of the most scurrilous nature launched from the safety of anonymity is just the way it is, the way it will be, all because it’s been going on since long before even oral varnishes for wooden teeth were invented. Again, what are you going to do, Mark?
Best I can tell, you should work to expose exactly who it might be who feels they must cling to their anonymity, while ripping into whomever they feel like ripping into at any given time, and for whatever reason. And in this case, expose who it is that played holier than though with not only one, but two candidates on the ballot next Tuesday.
First, "Norton the Blogger" at One Vote Counts gave us some noble sounding claptrap about doing the right thing when he smeared Walter Griffith, a County Controller hopeful. Then, he felt the need to expose what he saw as a convoluted conflict of interest or something on the part of judicial hopeful, Mike Blazick.
Interestingly enough, after Walter’s internet lumps were delivered from the safety of anonymity, somebody said in the readers‘ comments at One Vote Counts that “those who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones,” all the while forgetting that the most recently thrown stones were thrown from the most stealthiest of places…the safety of anonymity.
But then the cloaking device was done in by it’s own creator.
Yeah, Norton the Blogger went and published a picture on his ill-fated blog that he had very, very recently taken at a local eatery, a picture of judicial hopeful Mike Pendolfi and his smart-looking family.
When contacted and asked who had taken that picture, Mr. Pendolfi identified the photographer as none other than Steve Urbanski, a disbarred local attorney currently on probation with the Judiciary Board of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
And immediately after being unknowingly “outed” by Mr. Pendolfi (an innocent bystander in all of this) some of us started posting comments on the One Vote Counts site, comments that were obviously just a little too close for comfort for the author of that blog known for hiding behind his purposely hung curtain of anonymity.
And as a result, said author instantly removed all previous comments posted there, and suspended any further capability for readers to post comments. Yeah, that’s right. No more comments are allowed. All of a sudden, Norton the Blogger isn’t liking comments from the occasional reader (since that’s all he has), especially those of the anonymous variety.
So, what we have here is a temporarily defrocked lawyer, a former law partner of Kingston Mayor Jim Haggerty, playing god with other people’s lives. What we have here is an anonymous coward who’s glass house is as completely fragile as any of those he felt the need to very publicly throw stones at.
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/disciplinaryboard/dboardopinions/32DB2004-Urbanski.pdf
So, assuming that the blog is still there and functional on election day, and assuming that the ability to post comments by readers is at some point restored, at least now you know who to post your comments to.
No, not Norton the Blogger.
Say hello to Steve the Blogger. Or should I say, Steve, the soon-to-be former blogger.
So, would anyone else care to chastise me about how the internet works? Anybody else feel like bringing me up to speed? As I have frequently been known to say on whatever electronic pages I may have been saying it at the time, consider the source. The anonymous source, that is.
Bye
9 comments:
Nice work! That's why he was disbarred, lack of brain function, right?!
Hey, hey, hey.....easy on Ivana there fella!
That's some mighty fine internet detective work there! Some people leave a trail like an elephant through a flea market.
Now, as long as no one discovers that I am really Bishop Martino...
I can deal with slip of judgement far easier than with someone who is so crooked that he gets disbarred. As for Bishop D.B. "Echo" Martino, one post up, at least Walter didn't hand out condoms at a Catholic college or invite a gay speaker. Or have a gay speaker hand out condoms.
I guess you forgot to mention the fact that everything in Norton's story was true, particularly that Walter Griffith was cited for patronizing a prostitute.
With regard to Norton being a pen name, do you also refer to Mark Twain as Samuel, Ann Landers as Esther, George Orwell as Eric, Dr. Suess as Ted, Jack Palance as Walter, Lee Majors as Harvey, Ozzy Osbourne as John, and local dj jeff walker as Rob? It's a freaking pseudonym, dummy. Norton has been blogging under that name for three years, just as local blogger GORT, Zen, and others.
It all goes back to attacking the messenger when the news is bad.
I always refer to John Wayne as "Marion."
So Walter was hitting on a prostie; I might ask just how many years ago was that? Even in the attack mode, we need a statute of limitations (i.e.: one year for a single bang of someone you're not married to; somewhat longer for tossing kids into juvie without representation; even longer for life membership in NAMBLA).
But one hit on a gal 16 years ago is hardly worth the electrons it takes to note that fact on a message board. Nor should anyone compare pen-name Norton to such worthies as you mentioned above. Those people had class.
Yeah Tom, like you even know who any of those people are, or better yet have even read any of their material.
Norton has a hell of a lotta class. Read his stuff. This guy has wit, insight, and a great writing skill that you rarely see on blogs. But I guess it's much easier to call people names than read what they write.
I took the time to read his blogs over the last six months. Read his blog on the Iowa Supreme Court decision on gay marriage. Read his compare and contrast on the campaign pledges of McCain and Obama. Read his in depth research into Joe Quinn's PAC.
We can only hope that Norton will be around for a long, long, time as a blogger, and much more.
This guy has talent, unlike 99% of all the other bloggers on the web.
With regards to Walter Griffith. He's a joke. Here's a man who knows how to complain and bitch and promote his own ego, but doesn't have a clue how to govern. Read his stuff and compare it side to side next to Norton and you'll see Walter is a 15 watt bulb, and Norton is, shall we say, just a bit brighter.
F of N: And your name is? If you are that proud of him, you should be happy to identify yourself.
Post a Comment