Consistently rated by BlogNetNews as one of the state's most influential poliblogs, The Pennsylvania Progressive is shutting down. Amazingly, blogger John Morgan reports he is suspending publication. Just as talk show host Tavis Smiley has stopped his morning radio show, Morgan has been forced to suspend his provocative blog by Obama's thought police.
"I am hardly the only person who has been targeted by these people. Meanwhile I suppose it goes without saying that I now endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton for President. I cannot support a man whose campaign tolerates hate speech."
Philosophically, John and I have our differences. But his is a voice that should be cherished, not stifled. He is welcome to blog here.
40 comments:
This is simply sickening. I have a hard time believing that Six Apart letter is real -- how can you have a blog service and fold like that?
We'll do whatever we can to support PAProgressive -- just let me know.
Dave Mastio is the editor of BlogNetNews.
I must say I think it's unfair that you would claim that the Obama Campaign is silencing John's blog. Isn't this just a battle with one lady who is an Obama supporter?
You may be familiar with the story of the Clinton supporter who stabbed his brother in law, the Obama supporter, in the stomach. Under this logic, does that mean the Clinton campaign stabbed the man?
It's not official, but someone in Obama's campaign has silenced John Morgan. And according to John, people in parked cars have been spying on different HQ and he's had his tires sliced at least once. It may not be official, but it appears to be a concerted local effort.
prove it
OK. Back in a few.
But your taking John's word as gold. He hasn't shown us any proof that anything he's saying is truth, besides the one woman silencing him. He has to prove people are stalking the HQ and slashing his tires. Where's the police report for the tire slashing? He has a camera, why doesn't he take pictures of the stalkers? As of right now he's just making wild accusations and everybody is just eating it up.
Original anonymous,
1) I have not yet finished putting together an answer and you're already dismissing it?
2) John Morgan, unlike you, is signing his name to his accusations. Inherently, his charges have more credibnility than those of some anon poster who is afraid to sign her name.
3) I may disagree from time to time with John and certainly don't share all of his beliefs, but I have found him to be a credible and trustworthy source. Over time, his stories have found their way into the MSM at various points andf his blog is highly rated. More importantly, his reputation among fellow bloggers is beyonf reproach.
Now let me finish putting together mny answer. Like John, why don't you try signing your name?
I wouldn't mind signing my name if I didn't think I would suffer the same consequences that others have suffered. I don't want nor do I need my named smeared all over the planet because I dare to question the almighty JM.
Since you are unwilling to identify yourself, what you say concerning Morgan or anyone else necessarily lacks credibility. That is an inevitable consequence.
Oh and incase your wondering, i'm not thee "her" your probably referring too. This "her" is not involved with the Obama or any other campaign in any way, shape, or form.
I also did not ask you to "prove it". I wouldn't want to waste your time with such an impossible task.
Actually, you just proved it yourself. By your own admission, there is more than one of you. Like Carol Wentz, you apparently have a hot nut for Morgan. Before I can even respod to a request for proof, you pepper this blog with anonymous attacks against him. So apparently, there really is a concerted effort by local Obama supporters from Berks to silence Morgan.
I've been asked to prove that a concerted local effort has been made to silence John Morgan.
1) We all know that, as a result of a suspicious complaint made by Obama supporter Carol Wentz, who also posts anonymously and as Cats R Flyfishin, Morgan has been forced to suspend his blog. This complaint, from what I can gather, is completely spurious.
2) We all know, from various entries in Morgan's blog, that his tires were slashed outside of Hillary HQs by an Obama supporter. According to Morgan, Obama supporters sit in parked cars outside of Hillary HQs, ostensibly to spy. According to Morgan's own words, "I also now have confirmation that the tire vandalism was done by an Obama volunteer. I also know an Obama endorser has been caught parked outside Hillary's office (where the incident occurred)which explains how they knew I was there."
3)Morgan was even attacked for an anti-Obama ad placed on his blog by Google, something over which he has no control.
4) Morgan has been falsely accused of being a paid Clinton operative. These allegations have been repeated after Morgan's denials. "Tom Caltagirone paid me from his personal funds to consult for him. Not knowledgable in FEC rules and laws he depended upon me to advise him so the operation he set up for Hillary would be in compliance. I also consulted in the leasing of the office and several othe rmatters relating to his being Berks County Chair for Hillary. I never consulted to or for the Hillary Clinton campaign and have never been paid a dime by them, something Carol Wentz keeps insisting in emails, on blogs and in person."
5) Morgan has been falsely accused of refusing to cover an Obama event when he actually posted a video.
6) Yesterday, I visited Wentz' blog and asked her to explain. She has no answer. Silence in the face of an accusation is an admission of guilt.
haha. Did you just say 2+2=6? I'm not anti JM or pro anybody else. All I'm saying is that he's making all of these accusations and is picking and choosing the ones he wants to prove. If I prove to you that I have 10 fingers, would you still want me to prove that I've walked on the moon? Or is this whole conversation null and void because I don't wish to post my name?
I'm not anti JM or pro anybody else.
Bullsit!
You already sarcastically called Morgan the "almighty" JM. You claimed it would be "impossible" to prove John's allegations, and made that claim before I even posted my response. You obviously have a bias. And since you choose to comment anonymously, what you say is entitled to no credibility.
A concerted effort by local Obama supporters has obviously been made to silence Morgan. In addition to Wentz, Morgan claims to have proof that his tires were slashed by an Obama supporter and that another Obama supporter is camped outseide Hillary HQs. I hope he has taken this info to the police. His blog has come under ridiculous attack for not following the Obama mantra.
All you are doing is damaging your own candidate.
Even thought this response is not directed towards me, I might as well use up my free time to do so anyway.
1) From what I gather, which truthfully is not a lot. She asked JM to remove her name from his blog, he refused and she had to take legal action. Her legal action was only to remove her name from his blog. He chose to say farewell.
2) Now this is where I personally need proof. You say you know this to be true, but you don't have any actual proof.
3)I agree, that is ridiculous.
4) I also agree, being paid by a guy who was being paid by the Clinton campaign doesn't equal being paid by the Clinton campaign.
5) I am unaware of this incident.
6) You did not ask her to explain. You asked another author to explain.
You need to stop making so many assumptions. Your acting as though JM can do no wrong. I said it was impossible for you to prove his tires were slashed and that their are stalkers outside the Clinton HQ because you can't. It's impossible to prove something that JM himself has yet to prove. I'm not saying it's impossible that it happened, just impossible to prove at this point and time.
Original,
1) This was obviously the last straw in a series of incidents designed to silence Morgan. By itself, it means little. Taken with everything else, it meanms quite a bit.
2) His own statement is proof. Morgan claims it is an Obama volunteer who sliced his tires and an Obama volunteer spying on Clinton HQs. He claims to have confirmation annd has presumably taken it to his attorney or the police for further action. I have fouind Morgan to be credible over the past 23 months, even though I don't share all his opinions. His word means a lot to me. The word of an anon means nothing.
3 - 4) OK, you concede these points.
5) I have a link that backs up whaty I am saying. Check it out.
6) Wentz posted comments both before and after my comment posted. She obviously saw my comment and ignored it. Tacent Clamant.
I make no assumptions. I do choose to believe people I've found to be credible. I choose to disbelieve those with no credibility.
2) You have the write to believe whatever you want. But if you remember the original reason I cam on here is because I think it's unfair for you to spread your thoughts as though they are the truth. If you want to believe what he says, that's one thing. But it's not fair for you to decide for your reader's what they should or shouldn't believe. Am I making any sense?
5) I'll check this out when I get another free moment.
6) From what I see she only posted comments after your comment and therfore probably assumed you were asking for the other author's opinon. Check it out again.
2) Your argument, in essence, is that you don't believe Morgan. I do. I will accept his factual averments about what is happening to him specifically. I think that is eminently fair, and makes more sense than accepting some anon who has demonstrated a bias against him.
6) Yes, there are three Wentz comments that follow my request asking hewr to explain herself. But to remove all uncertainty, I'll pose the same question again in a post from her.
I have now made a detailed request to Wentz on her latest post.
My detailed question to Wentz, posted on one of her own blogs, has already been deleted. That tells me all I need to know.
I actually think it's wise of her not to talk about JM with a JM supporter. What would she have to gain from this? Your money is already placing bets on JM so why should she try to convince you otherwise?
First, this loser claims you failed to pose your questions at the right place. When you do so, and are immediately deleted by these truth manipulators, you are told that person was right not to respond to you.
Hey, Original,
You can't be serious. Re-read this entire thread. You make no sense and waffle like crazy when evidence is brought before you. You are beginning to sound like a stubborn child. Give it up already.
Wow, name calling huh? That's pretty mature. You can't complain about someone not answering your quesiton when it turns out you asked it to the wrong person. Now he can complain all he wants. :) I just hope he wasn't really expecting an answer because I'd be suprised if she gave him one.
Pete,
Why don't you add something substantial to the comments, rather than commenting just for the sake of butting in. If you have actual evidence i'd love to see it.
Original,
After seeing my question deleted in a matter of minutes, I know all I need to know.
FYI for Mr. O'Hare:
http://wordpress.com/tag/cats-r-flyfishn-pennsylvania-for-change/
It says:
"URGENT: Patriots
The Lehigh guy is posting comments here defending the other blog and continuing with trashing my real name. He actually said my name in a comment that he posted here. I marked it as spam so that it wo … more »"
The link at the end takes you to a 404 page.
Her name, Carol Wentz, is no secret. That's one of Pa Pro's points. I did not trash her name, but I did mention her by name. If she considers her name spam, who am I to argue?
Sudffice it to say that tnone of my questions were answered.
For someone who claims not to be involved and who has no interest in this matter, you seem to know an awful lot about that strange blog.
And now that post is gone.
"http://wordpress.com/tag/cats-r-flyfishn-pennsylvania-for-change/
It says:
"URGENT: Patriots
The Lehigh guy is posting comments here defending the other blog and continuing with trashing my real name. He actually said my name in a comment that he posted here. I marked it as spam so that it wo … more »"
The link at the end takes you to a 404 page."
I went back to her site and she deleted the comment herself, claiming it was a FLAME comment. In other words, asking her to reposnd to Morgan's accusations is flaming her.
And what the hell does this have to do with patriots? Are those who ask questions unpatriotic? It's pretty clear by now that you are either Wnetz herself or someone asscoiated with her blog.
Just to make things clear. I am the original anonymous poster, and from then on went by either "orignal anon" or "original" I knew nothing of the post on her blog above and therefore did not post the summary for you to read. Thanks.
Anon 3:21 here.
The FYI was not a threat to Mr. O'Hare, but rather a heads up from one of his regular readers. Perhaps this woman's "Patriots" may have jumped all over PAProgressive just before it was suspended, so I thought he ought to know.
I also posted the 4:19 observation that the "Urgent: Patriots" message was now gone.
I apologize to Mr. O'Hare if my original comment came across as threatening. My intention was quite the opposite.
Anon 3:21,
Thanks for the warning. It is a little surreal to see a message going out to "Patriots," as though the only "Patriots" in this country right now are Obama supporters.
Here's the thing. I really like Obama. I wanted to vote for him. But the tacticts used by his campaign are Orwellian, and I am talking about them all. His Pa. guys send emails nonstop, but won't take the time to answer one question. Locally, I've had no responses to questions, and Morgan had his tires slashed. And then Obama makes remarks I can only view as condescendingly elite.
Next thing we know, pods will be springing up and we won't be able to fall asleep.
I think events over the past few days have nudged me into Hillary's camp, a place I never thought I would be.
A few facts for a change:
Carol Wentz is claiming to be an anonymous blogger when she isn't. That's fraud. I believe this is a felony. We have been assembling an enormous amount of personal information, including her name, that she has publicly exposed connecting her to this blog name. This is extensive as she spends a great deal of time on blogs.
Typepad's basis for initially ruling against me was that I used her name without her permission. As a legitimate source who volunteered this information to me without any hint it was confidential, I was citing a legitimate source. She is also an elected public official with no expectation of privacy under the law.
There is NO such thing as confidentiality on the internet. If you post on the internet and someone determines your identity through what you post you have no legal basis to complain.
Carol claimed I used her email address on her posted comments to determine her identity. I did not because she told me where she blogged and what her name was on Jan. 26, 2008 at the home of Cynthia Baughman in front of Cynthia and one other person. I knew this information because Carol told it to me!
Now she is claiming retroactive anonymity. One cannot restore one's virginity. One cannot restore anonymity as a blogger after revealing it all over the internet.
She has cleansed her blog of all sorts of personal information in an attempt to cover up her fraud.
As for the tires, I set a trap to prove it was done by an Obama supporter and someone stepped into my trap.
Mayor Tom McMahon was caught spying on Hillary HQ by Donna Glaze, the building manager. She also, along with many others, caught them trying to steal the large Hillary sign.
I believe Carol Wentz has perpetrated a fraud against me by claiming to be an anonymous blogger and I am taking the voluminous evidence to the Attorney General's office.
We have been collecting information she has voluntarily shared on the internet disclosing personal information which proves she was not blogging anonymously. Carol, you can pull it off your website and a few others but not all, especially Common Sense 2.
John, I can guarantee you that your comments and charges will stay here, too. Hang in there.
In some cases, even if someone cleanses their blog, can a record of previous posts/comments be traced back? Does anybody know?
Google cache can retrieve deleted posts and comments, but it's hit and miss. I was able to retrieve a few blogs posted and deleted at another site.
"Carol Wentz is claiming to be an anonymous blogger when she isn't. That's fraud. I believe this is a felony."
A legal conclusion, not a fact.
"She is also an elected public official with no expectation of privacy under the law."
Another legal conclusion, not a fact.
John continually uses lies, half-truths, and distortions to attack others. Now, he is getting some of it back.
It's about time.
Post a Comment