County Republicans Launch Website

In an article that reeked of bias and personal opinion, The News reported on the launch of a new website by the Cumberland County Republicans.

The site itself is professionally put together and borderline inflammatory – although less inflammatory than MagazzuWatch.com, another Web site launched earlier this year critical of the Democrat-controlled freeholder board and, in particular, Freeholder Director Lou Magazzu.

We thought that the real news was supposed to print articles containing only fact, not personal opinion. The above paragraph in particular smells suspiciously of editorializing.

We at MW do appreciate the free press. I almost spit my coffee out of my mouth when I red the next line – “The Republican county chairman has denied involvement with MagazzuWatch.com.”

Matt, let us lay your fears to rest, neither the Cumberland County Republican Organization nor the Millville Republican Organization nor even Vineland had anything whatsoever to do with this website.

Advertisements

10 Responses to County Republicans Launch Website

  1. slappythedooman says:

    You know the local press with the exception of the AC Press loves the Big Lou

  2. Matt Dunn says:

    When you put a picture of money in a toilet on your Web site or a doctored picture of Lou Magazzu as your header, expect to be referred to as inflammatory. Those types of images serve no purpose but to invoke a reaction – or “fan the flames”.

    In the same story, I pointed out one of the low-brow tactics the Dems used last year in their campaign – the point being, both parties are guilty of gutter politics when there’s an election to be won.

    Matt Dunn

  3. RDOwens says:

    Since you are giving out information, how about you come out from behind the curtain and announce who you are?

    It would allow the community to judge the points made here in a more true light. As it is, one must take a boulder of salt anytime you post something. Since I know there are multiple accounts for multiple users, it would go a long way to bringing you in from the fringe. As it stands, there is not much credence anyone can give to what happens on this site. You are marginalized because reputable sources of information are named.

    I know I will be dismissed. I’ll hear about retribution from Big Lou, etc. You’ll tell me that others know who you are and that’s enough. I’ll hear about some folks being insiders and cannot divulge who they are. It’s all an excuse.

    You can make all the excuses you want about hiding behind pseudonyms, but until you declare publicly who you are, who will be relegated to squabbling with knotu daily. That does not appear to be particularly productive.

    Consider it before you dismiss it out of hand.

  4. mango says:

    RD Owens prefers not to believe what he reads on this blog because he does not know who we are. He suggests not revealing our identities means we are making it all up.

    This opinion is not, we believe, widely shared. The responses we receive suggest that not only do people grant credence to what we say; they also support many of our assertions based on their own experiences.

    We are averaging about 1000 hits a day during the week from different people. Some are inspired to contribute. Of those who do write something here, only knotu/tryagain has good things to say about Lou. If more people want to use this blog to praise Lou, they are welcome to join the conversation.

    I don’t believe revealing our identities would make much difference, as this blog is not really about us. What difference does it make if we are opponent Republicans, errant Democrats, or whatever. One unwelcome outcome of telling who we are, however, would be the personal attacks to which we would be subjected. Any reader of the Daily Journal online forum is familiar with the depths to which some people go when they vent their hatred, especially when they know or suspect the identity of another forum participant. Knotu is an example of how ugly name-calling and character assassination can be, and his insults are based on his assumptions (wrong) of our identities. Can you imagine where he would go if he really knew who we are? Of course, we would be compelled to delete his aspersions, and then we would be charged with censorship.

    In our view, it is better to keep the blog focused on its subject: Lou’s track record as an elected official. I believe we have been successful in doing this. I will admit we have, on occasion, strayed from our own high standards (we probably should not have mentioned the hemorrhoids), but our goal remains to tell the real story of what is going on with Lou — a story that the regular news media will not or cannot tell.

  5. Matt, you do a disservice to your readers. If we labeled ourselves as “inflammatory”, or if you interviewed a third party that described us as “inflammatory”, then the adjectives would be unbiased reporting of news. However, you have taken it upon yourself to label two sites based on your own opinion, and that is editorializing. Editorials belong on the Editorial page, not on Page One of a newspaper.

    But then again, that is just our inflammatory opinion.

  6. RDOwens says:

    I do not conceal my identity. I am not attacked as you fear you will be. Could it be that posting with a real name keeps the level of discourse a bit more reasonable?

    I did not suggest that anything was made up. Nice distraction from what I posted.

    When you use the pronouns “we” and “our”, I have no idea to whom you are referring. It diminishes your point when the reader has to disregard based on having no clue as the folks you discuss.

    As I said previously, I don’t expect a change in your policies. Then again, I don’t link to the writing here either.

  7. RDOwens – you also do not have a position int he county where you could be subject to harassment, such as a prominent employee was last December in direct violation of the Rice Law.

    There is a genuine fear of retribution from those in high places. Just because you are not in a position to be attacked doesn’t mean that others are not.

    What does it matter the identity of a messenger if the facts are presented with backing documentation? What we publish here, if not admitted as an opinion, is backed up by documentation that is publicly available.

    If people are so hung up on who is behind this website that they would ignore the evidence, then they deserve the government they get.

    All we ask is that people read, listen to both sides, and we do encourage all sides to speak up, and sort through the facts for yourself.

    In the end you might end up agreeing with many that the corruption in county government does not affect you directly. That is your prerogative.

    Those of us involved, and it is legion for we are many – to misappropriate a bible verse, may at some time in the future decide to identity ourselves.

    Until then, as mango stated, it is our desire to keep the focus on county politics and not the bystanders maintaining a proud American tradition of anonymity. I am certain that you are familiar with the Federalist Papers.

    Politics in Cumberland County is dirtier than you can imagine, and for that we can only ask that you take our word for it.

  8. mango says:

    RD Owen, if you think posting with a real name “keeps the level of discourse a bit more reasonable”, you are living in LaLa land. Were it only so. Perhaps you haven’t been attacked because you have nothing controversial to say.

  9. RDOwens says:

    Mango, you have obviously not read my opinions.

    Eyes, dismissing me as deserving the government I get because I do not blindly accept what is written here is laughable. Discourse cannot occur with the writers of this site for I haven’t a clue as to who you are. Yes, it matters when DISCUSSING.

    You may post, but the rest of us can only discuss. It makes a decided difference in doing so.

    Again, you used “we” in your response to me. Who is “we”? From what little I know about those who post here, I have no reason to believe that Eyes and mango are not the same person. Others who post do so with multiple accounts, why not you? There’s one reason to come clean.

    Obviously you aren’t going to budge, so I will return to my lurking and stay out of the fray.

  10. Mango is so much more literate than I am, I expect that our writing styles would distinguish us as two different persons.

    However, We is more than Mango and I. Mango’s posts are Mango’s. Mine, however, can be one of many people that do not want credit, only to get the word out.

    Your approval is not needed. Our opinion, also, is not needed to maintain discourse with the many others that post, most anonymously.

    We do not care whether people post under a real name (how do we know you are the real R D Owens?) or a pseudonym. Our only concern is that people keep the comments on topic.

    We reserve the right to throw in our two cents int he comments, but the website is more about interaction and debate. One need not know another’s identity to debate. Again, I am now feeling that perhaps you know nothing about the Federalists. You might want to Google “Federalists” and “anonymity”. It is an American tradition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: