What I’ve read is the original article, and the comments on it made by YOU and others.
So, the original article, and your posts, and those of other people aren’t factually true?
What about that doesn’t make sense?
You do understand that it’s a standard phrase used in reputable media, right?
It is not the exact same thing because, for one thing, you’ve added in a degree of separation. Delauter-Shreve-Rodgers is not the same thing as fachverwirrt-friend-friend-Peter Morris. I would expect my friend to know much more about my personality quirks than a friend of a friend. Further, it is the job of a political reporter to report on government matters, while it is not, as far as I know, your job to report on my personality quirks.
Also, you should look up “analogy”.
And no, I don’t have any evidence. Which is why I have only ever presented it as a possibility in contrast to your assertion that she simply made things up as absolute apparent fact.
I will, however note that in weighing the two possibilities: one, that Shreve and Gardner both mentioned Delauter’s involvement, so she mentioned him as well and; two, that no one mentioned Delauter, so she decided she’d just throw his name in the article for some reason, one of those strikes me as a teensy bit more likely.
“Her prior behavior?” Looking at some of the other articles about this guy, he comes across as petulant and childish. He seems to be quick to anger, so I don’t give his opinion much credit.
The article was about staff and parking concerns. Kirby was one such member with concerns. If you aren’t going to name officials, then what’s the point of the story? It helps to flesh out the article.
It never had a direct quote from him.
Real specific.
Why do you believe The Unmentionable One that the reporter “twisted and lied”?
What did TUO say that was “twisted and lied” about?
If she did “twist and lie”, why didn’t KDirtbag set the record straight rather than engage in the antics he’s been vilified for?
On the contrary, it is exactly the same. My friend of a friend actually IS Shreve. I don’t know Shreve all that well, by my friend does. And Shreve has told me some verry interesting things about you.
Since we are trusting things we heard from Shreve, you won’t mind if I share them with the group, right?
Well, after reading all the comments here, and the articles in question, I think I might actually be moving toward Peter Morris’s position.
If we look at just one statement in her original article:
[QUOTE=Original Article]
Councilman Kirby Delauter, who is also a former commissioner, has joined Shreve in concern over parking for elected officials. Gardner has reserved three parking spots at Winchester Hall for council members, since the part-time officials will rarely all turn up simultaneously.
[/QUOTE]
This is pretty clearly a statement of fact put forward by the reporter, namely, the fact that Kirby Delauter has joined Shreve in concern over parking for elected officials. HAS Kirby Delauter joined Shreve in concern? How does the reporter know that? Maybe she asked Kirby Delauter? Nope, both the reporter and Delauter agree that he never talked to her.
Maybe she heard from other people that Delauter has joined Shreve in concern over parking for elected officials? If that was the case, isn’t it good, or maybe required, reporting to attribute facts garnered to a source?
Maybe she just made it up? Why she would make something like this up for a trivial story is the only thing that holds me back from fully agreeing with Peter Morris.
Do you understand that anything Kirby says is not evidence?
You said she made things up. We asked you how you know. You quoted Kirby. This is not evidence.
If it were then no criminal would ever have to go to trial. We’d just ask them if they did it and when they said no, we’d say case dismissed.
Now can you see how silly that is?
I’ll make a bargain, if I’ll answer IF you promise to answer a few questions as well. Deal?
Who is the friend, and what does he have to do with anything?
Are you a reporter who is under pressure from her publisher and editor to get a story done with as much detail as possible?
Are these interesting things as scandalous as Delauter’s opinion on parking? Because if your untrue thing is “fachverwirrt lives in New Jersey” I’ll be happy to correct you rather than get all bothered, which is about how controversial this particular item is.
I say again, at no point has Delauter indicated that anything she said in the article in question is untrue, despite your assertion to the contrary.
Seriously, somebody says something untrue about you. What do you say? “That isn’t true.”? Or “don’t use my name. And stop calling me.”?
Do YOU understand that other people are using KIrby as a cite, and I’m just turning their own cites against them?
You know what I asked. I’m supposed to agree to answer questions without knowing what you’re going to ask? Did you think I’m some kind of psychic or something?
What other people are using Kirby as a cite? And as a cite for what?? What he wrote? I guess what he wrote is a pretty good cite for what he wrote, if that’s what you mean.
If that is the sticking point, then Delauter has to make that clear.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was just some routine action he took as part of his official capacity.
Maybe it’s sloppy reporting. Maybe she included those references and the editors either felt they were superfluous, or it was obvious from context who provided the information. Maybe that’s sloppy editing. I don’t know.
But the idea that she randomly threw Delauter’s name into the article without it being mentioned in connection to the issue is too bizarre to countenance. Especially given that Delauter hasn’t complained about the factual content of the article.
Oh I definitely agree that his reaction was WAY over-the-top, and I’m glad he apologized. But I would say she is at least guilty of sloppy reporting.
It’s a perfectly simple deal. I will answer your questions if you answer mine.
Are you willing to answer a few questions?
Is this gonna be one of those “Have you stopped beating your wife?” type of things?
No, it’s a perfectly simple question, I want him to c,larify exactly what the hell he is complain ing about.
Yeah, I don’t really get why the statement that Delauter asked for a few more parking spaces made him so angry. Was it just a control thing, that Rodgers would dare write his name again? Or does Shreve have a reputation as a loon/Nazi/babykiller, and Delauter doesn’t want his name to appear in the same article as Shreve?
I did not ask you any questions that are in any problematical. You’re asking me to trust you that you will do the same.
I don’t trust you.