I'm also the reason the snapshot is so late. I called Kat and got her to grab C.I. who was in the middle of dictating the snapshot and put that on hold to deal with me.
C.I. told me, "Betty, I can personally deliver those e-mails to the head of McClatchy and ensure that she is fired."
And that calmed me down some. (She would be fired for what she wrote about the paper, not about me. She would be in trouble for what she wrote about other journalists, not for what she wrote about me.)
It just really pisses me off.
The stupid idiot even claims that I'm lucky she's not suing me. I met with C.I. attorneys today (she keeps them on retainer) and that idiot has no standing to sue me. If she did, I was informed that the response would be to counter-sue for a frivolous law suit and that considering the woman continued to trash me even after I'd done a note to my blog where I took responsibilities for her errors, a judge would ask a professional journalist what the hell was wrong with them:
This blogger not only cleared your name, she took responsibility for your mistakes. Why would you continue to trash her to her friends unless the entire point was so it would get back to her? You started this mess with sloppy reporting, when an olive branch was extended you still attacked the woman. You waste the court's time and your own.
That was the legal opinion.
What a stupid bitch she is.
She's a sloppy reporter who makes 'mistakes' that look rather intentional and then wants to hide behind, "It's a computer glitch!" That excuse holds water for about one day. After one day, either you or your paper fix the problem or both expect not to be taken seriously.
You made an error on March 13th and a month later it is still not corrected. It was a serious error -- that the killer of Trayvon Martin had called 9-11 46 times since the start of this year when it was really 46 times since 2004 -- and that error was picked up and repeated on MSNBC and other outlets. You fix that error. Don't whine, don't moan, don't think up excuses.
And it's not anyone's responsibility to read your stupid Twitter feed -- your endless Twitter feed to search for some stupid remark that you might have made in the last month about your sh**ty article and sh**ty reporting skills.
The correction belongs on the online article.
And don't blame me for it, bitch.
If your article had the needed correction, I wouldn't have called you out in the first place.
And your 'computer glitch' is sounding an awful lot like "The dog ate my homework."
The bitch thinks I should have contacted her last Friday before writing. Her nearly month-old report has a glaring error in it.
And there's no correction to it.
But, according to her, before I call that out, I'm obligated to call her.
She's a stupid bitch.
That's not the way media criticism works. If I offer a review of the media, I'm reviewing what's in place. I am not doing interviews. That's beyond stupid on her part. "The Miami Herald" music, TV and film critics are not obligated to call anyone before writing a review. Nor am I.
She's a stupid, stupid bitch.
And that's most obvious by the fact that Ty made it clear he and I live together and yet she continued to trash me to him. He defends me in his e-mails over and over (Dona printed them all up this morning and showed them to me) and yet the bitch continues to trash me.
The stupid bitch who LIES and claims she would have contacted me but I don't have any way to be contacted.
This is a reporter?
No wonder journalism sucks.
First off, all Blogger-Blogspot websites using Blogger templates -- as I do -- have the option of "About me." On the template I use, it's mid-way down the screen on the right. You click on that and you have my contact info.
This woman couldn't figure that out and we're supposed to trust her reporting on Travyon Martin?
She trashes me repeatedly for not having contact info. What is in every post I have ever posted?
An Iraq snapshot.
All she had to do was click on the snapshot and she'd be at the site where C.I. lists her public e-mail twice a day as well as "About me" and e-mail to ask, "Do you know how I can contact the person who runs 'Thomas Friedman Is a Great'? The person reposts your snapshot so I thought you might know." Whomever read the e-mail (there are nine people reading the public account of The Common Ills), would have immediately forwarded it to me unless they picked up the phone to immediately call me and tell me, "Some reporter's trying to reach you."
But apparently the bitch doesn't have the basic skills or knowledge necessary to function as a human being let alone a reporter.
After castigating me for not reading her entire Twitter feed, she wants to whine that I don't post any contact info when I do?
And when Ty nicely pointed it out to her, when he copied and pasted it so even the idiot could follow, she shoots back with yet another excuse for her incompetence: It didn't show up on her cell phone.
Probably not. Because you have to move it to the side. Does she not know how to work her cell phone? Probably not. She's probably too stupid for that as well.
She can kiss my Black ass.
And if she bothers me or my friends again, her e-mails will be given to the person who can fire her and will fire her upon reading them. That has nothing to do with what she wrote about me. She was insulting and worse about me. But what'll get her in trouble is what she said about the paper and other journalists.
So, again, kiss my Black ass.
And don't go whining to Ty. Ty's not your enemy. Dona gave me the e-mails. If it weren't for Ty right now, I'd be posting your e-mails here which would embarrass you and leave you jobless. I'm not doing the because Ty asked me not to.
Jim has stated the policy at Third over and over. You who think I need to read your entire Twitter account before commenting on your bad writing should appreciate this. The policy, as Jim has outlined over and over, is that e-mails to Third are not private. They do not guarantee that they are. Ty is one part of Third. Third is also Ava, C.I., Dona, Jim and Jess.
Ava and C.I. vote together always. Ava and Jess vote together always. Those three are of the opinion that I can publish them here. Jim's opinion and vote is: Publish them. Jim doesn't believe in this secrecy bulls**t. As he pointed out, "She's not a whistle blower. She's a reporter whining and bitching in an e-mail. Our policy stands and I did not give her privacy. Only I can give her privacy because I am the one who came up with the policy that we treat all e-mails to Third as letters to the editor and they are not private and they become our property once received. That policy has been stated clearly and repeatedly year after year."
Ty's the only one voting to keep it private.
So he's outvoted. But I'm respecting his opinion and not publishing them. For now.
I think most Americans, reading the e-mails, would marvel over not just how petty the reporter is but how she managed to find time, in a work day, to write over and over and over to trash me. We're talking nearly ten LONG e-mails in one damn day. And even when I had written the very nice note at the top and even when Ty had forwarded that to her on Thursday, she continued to trash me in e-mail after e-mail. She's a bitch.
UPDATE: Get this! She wrote me! Sadly, it was yesterday and it only showed up this evening. If she had written me today after the above, I'd be publishing her e-mails. Come on, tempt me baby, poke the angry bear.
In her e-mail, the Media Whore wants me to remove all reference to the fact that she's a "whore."
She doesn't run this site. She can kiss my ass. (I already removed that post this evening when I added my update to it. If I had seen her e-mail, I might have left it standing. I removed it to add an update. Per the attorneys, I saved a copy of it and a copy of the previous update I had written.)
So bitch wants you to know she's not a whore. I'd called her a media whore. I don't believe I called her a whore personally. For starters, whores are more honest and work harder than the bitch does. Again, she can kiss my Black ass.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):