Saturday, May 26, 2007

Potomac News: BVBL Hates the Police

UPDATE: I just wanted to make it ABUNDANTLY clear that I in NO WAY think BVBL hates police, nor am I endorsing the letter writer. I'm trying to make a point by way of analogy, but I am doing some "clean-up" to bring this more clearly back to the realm of issues, not people. Correspondingly, I've changed a lot of references from Greg to BVBL, in multiple posts, because my arguments are about the issue of what is said at BVBL.

Today's Potomac News has a great example of how "guilt-by-association" works, which I presume even BVBL's minions will disapprove of. A letter-to-the-editor attempts to smear Glenn Hill, candidate for Sheriff, by associating him with BVBL and all of BVBL's "bigoted" and "hateful" comments.

In the manner of a BVBL reader, the next thing would be cries of anguish that Glenn should drop out of the race for the good of the party, that we should all jump behind Mr. Fotis because he "doesn't have the baggage", and to ask Glenn Hill to explain his relationship with BVBL who hates the police.

Anyway, from the Potomac News, A Negative Blogger and Glendall Hill:

He calls himself "Black Velvet Bruce Li." He has a website which recently came to my attention. I am perfectly aware of our sacred First Amendment rights, but in my estimation, this guy has crossed the line on decency. He has disparaged the Journal Messenger, our local politicians, our police officers and both Manassas Park and Manassas City.

That much of the letter is mostly true, although BVBL would point out that he only attacks BAD police, and that he supports police in general. But a "guilt-by-association" attack uses truth without context, like BVBL does with Faisal Gill. BVBL cannot deny that he has attacked police, and disparaged local politicians. Without context BVBL is guilty.

Reading the volley of negative comments from his blogs is, to me, very reminiscent of middle school students passing notes in the hall. In reality, Black Velvet is nothing more than an egocentric who has attempted to elevate himself to that of genius of all subjects, political, personal, social and religious. There is a nary a subject he has avoided and would have you believe that he has all the answers/solutions to the ills of the world, but most especially our community.

Actually, there are a lot of subjects BVBL has not addressed -- like any real issues in the 51st district race, or ANY reason why Julie Lucas is qualified to be the delegate. But the letter writer has an interesting read about BVBL in general.

Next, we see how the letter-writer turns the corner to address BVBL's leadership of Help Save Manassas (an organization which could also be hurt by "association" with BVBL), and supposed attacks on James Fotis:

He has gone so far as to lead some citizens in the fight to free our community of illegal aliens. He has made it abundantly clear that he is totally anti-law enforcement. Bashing of the newest candidate for sheriff (James Fotis) has already begun.

I don't know what bashing she refers to -- I can't check BVBL to see that it's false, because BVBL is scared to let me read what he is writing.

This brings me to the subject of our current sheriff Hill, and why an elected law enforcement official would align himself with someone who loudly professes his disdain for our police officers? Black Velvet and Glendell Hill are obviously pals and I find this a bit disingenuous and strangely ironic. It is astounding that Glendell Hill is willing to put himself in association with someone who hates police officers.

And there it is. Having used half-truths and truths that are out of context to set the table, identifying BVBL as a bad person, she can now use BVBL's friendship with Glen to attack Glen for having bad judgment, poor character for associating with a "police hater". She doesn't call for Glen to "denounce" BVBL, but how could Glen denounce BVBL?

Glen could pretend he doesn't know BVBL, but we've seen them talking and shaking hands, Glen attends the meetings BVBL attends, Glen is a member of the same PWCGOP that BVBL is. That BVBL's personal opinions really have nothing to do with Glen doesn't matter, it's the ASSOCIATION that matters.

So if Glen wants to defend himself, he's got to actually try to prove that BVBL isn't a bad person. Why should Glen have to do that? only because that's the point of guilt-by-association, to make a candidate have to vouch for people they have no control over.

On the other hand, it shouldn't come as a huge surprise to anyone, considering Hill is now hiring young kids to ring doorbells and distribute his political material in neighborhoods late at night. It's difficult to try to predict what this guy will do next in order to hold onto his cushy job. Oh, we do so need a change!

And the other shoe drops. A claim, without any evidence, but it's from a real person, so it must be true. And if true, it's really a minor thing, but it's not one thing, it "shows" how Glen makes a LOT of bad decisions, from the "golf carts" (not mentioned here, but I'm sure she would have if she had remembered), to his "association" with BVBL the evil police hater, to hiring young kids because he can't get any real supporters, to distributing late at night when it bothers the residents.

We can all rightly laugh at this letter, because we know that Glen is a good man, that BVBL does not actually hate police officers, and that Glen can't really be held responsible BVBL supporting him but also being a hateful person.

But that's just feelings and opinions, while the facts "seem" to suggest the "allegations" are "serious" enough to "raise issues" that make you "wonder" if there "might" be "something" there. And why should we pick a nominee with all that "baggage", with all these "doubts", when there is a candidate (Fotis) who has none of this baggage, and isn't "associated" with the likes of BVBL.

No, this woman's letter can make us laugh. But it's clear that when she read BVBL's blog, she learned from him. She learned her lessons well, as her argument is right out of BVBL's playbook.

BVBL should be happy that he is "educating" the citizens of our county. On how to make unethical and poisonous arguments to tear people down.


Citizen Tom said...

How funny! Shows how what goes around comes around.

Anonymous said...

Do you have a private e-mail address?

Charles said...

anon. Great question. I thought the e-mail associated with this blog was visible, but I can't find it.

"conservathingone at"

I'm not too worried, if someone gets a hold of that and spams me too much I'll just cancel it and set up a new one.