We are SOOOO BAD!

[gatordog]

Stop the presses! This just in... some new parts of the Daily Herald article that somehow were omitted from the story. Here is the rest, with apologies from the editor:

"We DH reporters just blindly accepted Michelle Davis' characterization of the message board, and the one example thread she gave to us because we were too lazy to actually do a complete job on this story. However, we later did see that there was another major MD thread discussing improprieties in significant campaign donations she received. We are shock, SHOCKED, that MD didn't give us this as an example.

We must acknowledge that these amateurs who discovered these facts completely scooped us on a major story that we professional journalists were unable to uncover. They ate our lunch on this story and put us to shame. But I guess we are in pretty good company as journalist, because after all, the best in our business at the Washington Post and New York Times missed out on the story involving politically motivated firings at the Justice Dept. It was measly, lowly bloggers who put the pieces together and figured that out, too.

Also, the message board communicated this story to the broad public, which not long ago used to be something only us high and mighty newspapers could do. They provided deep and thought provoking examination of this story and discussion, something that we print journalists say is our domain, something we excel at. We scoff at our colleagues in electronic media, saying its them that provide shallow, slanted coverage while we newspapers are the true and just guardians of the integrity of the Fourth Estate.

Yes, we reporters show here our continual slide into irrelevancy on local issues. Why not...after all, we don't work for local newspapers, anymore. Thats a thing of the past, gone the way of your locally owned pharmacy. But we sure look good to our corporate heads at the regional and national conglomerations that print local sounding names across the top of our papers. What do you readers really expect from the concentration of newspaper control into fewer and fewer hands, further and further away from our towns and neighborhoods....do you really expect an appreciation for real local reporting? And we are clueless to understand how this just might have a little bit do do with our declining readership.

Until then, readers, be wary of learning about school district issues on that voice of the people rabble thing called the Internet. We professional journalists know whats best. "

[we4]

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

She is just looking for attention and trying to play the victim role. I have lost all respect for her and truly regret voting for her (yes I did vote for her last time and have learned my lesson about not being educated before going to vote)

[gatormom]

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

She is just looking for attention and trying to play the victim role. I have lost all respect for her and truly regret voting for her (yes I did vote for her last time and have learned my lesson about not being educated before going to vote)

I agree 100% with you we4. CV states that she knew who it was and emailed the person back. You don't email someone you are afraid of. You call the police immediately. She knew exactly what that email meant and the spirit it was sent in.

Attention, bitterness at the loss of her chosen candidates; you can call it what you will . . . but fear of a threat, I think not.

I too voted for her as well and deeply regret that. I voted for her because she lived near the Gombert area and I thought she would represent us well, big mistake.

[momof3]

gatormom said:

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

She is just looking for attention and trying to play the victim role. I have lost all respect for her and truly regret voting for her (yes I did vote for her last time and have learned my lesson about not being educated before going to vote)

I agree 100% with you we4. CV states that she knew who it was and emailed the person back. You don't email someone you are afraid of. You call the police immediately. She knew exactly what that email meant and the spirit it was sent in.

Attention, bitterness at the loss of her chosen candidates; you can call it what you will . . . but fear of a threat, I think not.

I too voted for her as well and deeply regret that. I voted for her because she lived near the Gombert area and I thought she would represent us well, big mistake.

While we are confessing, I will finally admit that I voted for her too (as well as my husband). Where was this board in '05?!

[doctorwho]

momof3 said:

gatormom said:

I agree 100% with you we4. CV states that she knew who it was and emailed the person back. You don't email someone you are afraid of. You call the police immediately. She knew exactly what that email meant and the spirit it was sent in.

Attention, bitterness at the loss of her chosen candidates; you can call it what you will . . . but fear of a threat, I think not.

I too voted for her as well and deeply regret that. I voted for her because she lived near the Gombert area and I thought she would represent us well, big mistake.

While we are confessing, I will finally admit that I voted for her too (as well as my husband). Where was this board in '05?!

to continue the tales of true confessions, I have no idea who I voted for in '05, which is why information like that which is found here is vital to decision making.

[bluemoonoden]

gatormom said:

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

She is just looking for attention and trying to play the victim role. I have lost all respect for her and truly regret voting for her (yes I did vote for her last time and have learned my lesson about not being educated before going to vote)

I agree 100% with you we4. CV states that she knew who it was and emailed the person back. You don't email someone you are afraid of. You call the police immediately. She knew exactly what that email meant and the spirit it was sent in.

Attention, bitterness at the loss of her chosen candidates; you can call it what you will . . . but fear of a threat, I think not.

I too voted for her as well and deeply regret that. I voted for her because she lived near the Gombert area and I thought she would represent us well, big mistake.

This is a valid point I have wondered about. Vickers lives in the McCarty area which I believe is a Title 1 school. I have a child going to Gombert next year and I would like to know where CV has been concering Georgetown who really needs help and the other Title I schools in her area? It seems to me these schools have been ignored by our elected officials.

[dpc]

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

I'm curious, how do you know this? Are you CV, her husband, one of her children?

[we4]

dpc said:

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

I'm curious, how do you know this? Are you CV, her husband, one of her children?

I know many of the people on this board. I hear conversations. I usually do not post about things I have heard, but when I read this article it made me mad that the whole story behind this email was not told. That's all I will say.

Are you CV, her husband, one of her children?


Thank goodness I was finished drinking my water when I read this. You should post this in the humor section.

[spousestonethrow]

justme said:

Where is EagleDad these days?

I am wondering the same thing.

[Arch]

dpc said:

we4 said:

I am almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke and that it referenced the 2009 election before she called the police.

I'm curious, how do you know this? Are you CV, her husband, one of her children?

Are you?

[wvhsparent]

spousestonethrow said:

justme said:

Where is EagleDad these days?

I am wondering the same thing.

not to worry...he is around.......

[dpc]

archwinsome said:

dpc said:

I'm curious, how do you know this? Are you CV, her husband, one of her children?

Are you?

No I am not and I don't think it's wise for anyone to say they are "almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke" unless, of course, they are Christine Vickers. Makes we4 lose a whole lot of credibility IN MY OPINION.

[spousestonethrow]

wvhsparent said:

spousestonethrow said:

I am wondering the same thing.

not to worry...he is around.......

Not posting these days? Seems odd. But then again I did hear about the reason why prior to the Herald article. Guess the rumor was actually a fact. That is unfortunate.

[Arch]

dpc said:

archwinsome said:

Are you?

No I am not and I don't think it's wise for anyone to say they are "almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke" unless, of course, they are Christine Vickers. Makes we4 lose a whole lot of credibility IN MY OPINION.

It's also entirely possible that the person who said that knows the person who received the email and have talked with them about it. They don't actually have to be the recipient to know how the recipient took it if they indeed did share this knowledge with them. So, there is no credibility lost nor gained; IMO.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

dpc said:

No I am not and I don't think it's wise for anyone to say they are "almost positive that Christine Vickers knew the email was a joke" unless, of course, they are Christine Vickers. Makes we4 lose a whole lot of credibility IN MY OPINION.

It's also entirely possible that the person who said that knows the person who received the email and have talked with them about it. They don't actually have to be the recipient to know how the recipient took it if they indeed did share this knowledge with them. So, there is no credibility lost nor gained; IMO.

Sorry, no offense meant at all but What are you saying. I read it a few times and couldn't at all understand your point.