Tales of Hoffmann

Joel...

You don't need to cite your academic credentials to defend yourself against board attacks, and you don't need to change your subject matter. You need do only two things:
1. Consult with an attorney, your professors, and an association of professional journalists, and cite the rules covering your blog; in the Local and here. If you have already done so, do it again.
2. Then write the truth.

Further, if by stating "out of respect for Pete" you infer that any change in your tone at this time is going to make things easier for Pete, or the Local, think again. I'll tell you what I have told Pete repeatedly: No matter what you do, no matter how "reasonable" your words, THEY ARE GOING TO TRY AND SCREW YOU. ONLY COMPLETE AND UTTER FEALTY AND OBEDIENCE WILL SATISFY THEM.

And frankly, after what you have already done, the acts of contrition you would have to submit to would have you jailed in thirty-two states, and any retreat on your part will be viewed by them as a sign of weakness and embolden them to screw you harder and deeper.

Moreover, "reasonableness," "civility," the following of rules by their adversaries is exactly what they count on, what they insist upon. It has served the interests of the board for years.

For as long as as WE are constrained by decorum and the by-laws that they they regularly disregard, they will NEVER LOSE. When only one side follows the rules, guess who wins?

Please watch the video again.



I cited Dina with offenses that would gotten her arrested in another venue. And what did "attorney" Ed Berg address? I wasn't being polite.

But by not being polite, I got heard, and every day I get e-mail from incredulous viewers that ask me, "Why aren't these people in jail?"

What you didn't see in that clip was Anne Spaeth being frozen out, by a board vote, from sitting on a by-laws committee. By-laws that she had helped to write. After that vote, I yelled "How dare you exclude Anne!" As Tolis gaveled me down, others in the audience, some attending their first board meeting, spoke up in support of Anne.

By the rules, they were all out of order. The boards' faces were shocked at this act of mass defiance, and for the first time I had ever seen, the board backed down - immediately - and reversed their decision. Anne got on the committee. No more than 15 angry people called their bluff - and won - proving once again that bullies are just cowards when confronted.

Mob Rule? Maybe, but when fighting tyrants you must use what works.

I know the following as well as I know my own name.

IF EVERYONE WHO SEES THE BOARD AS ETHICALLY BANKRUPT - AS SELF SERVING, AS TYRANNICAL, AS DESTRUCTIVE TO THE HILL - SHOWED UP AT A MEETING AND ROSE AS ONE, THE LOCAL'S PROBLEMS WOULD BE OVER, as would the tenure of admitted election-fixer Dina Hitchcock.

Those who have held the Democratic process hostage would leave quietly. I GUARANTEE IT.

Besides, they're trying to get the votes to fire Pete at the next meeting as we speak. Delivery boys Keintz and Rossman proved that this week. And if they do, only the angry presence of Pete's supporters can save him - and you.

But just so you know that even I can sometimes be reticent about language. I'll admit that I changed some of the words in this piece - particularly a more descriptive one that I changed to "screw" earlier.

So I'll close with a line from a great American writer, one who is taught in Universities around the world, Henry Miller:

"THERE'S A BONE IN MY PRICK SIX INCHES LONG.
I'LL SHOOT HOT BOLTS INTO YOU."

Thanks - I needed that - Nothing personal Joel - Mongo straight.
Ed (actually eight and a half) Feldman