Saturday, November 06, 2010

Brancaccio: bloodied AND bowed.

A few days ago, Bully Brancaccio was gearing up to do the same thing to Brent Boger that he did to me: attempt to assassinate his character and attempt to injure him personally.

Up until now, Brancaccio has been able to get away with his playground bullshit. But because that punk came after me, people had a foretaste of what was ahead for Boger, and they wanted none of it.

When I saw where Brancaccio had backed down, I had a cartoon vision of his body with a gong for a head, vibrating while Craig, Pat and Betty Sue took turns banging it.

Others, no doubt behind the scenes, took Brancaccio to task for beating on Boger. They rightfully pointed out that the Boger's and, God Help Us, even the slimeballs like Golik are the reason our democracy exists.

For the first time since he fell off the back of the turnip truck to our great misfortune, it appears that Brancaccio finally... FINALLY, has been held accountable for both what he has said... and for what he was going to say.

Editors of papers have a duty of even-handedness. They have a duty to be responsive to the community. They have neither the duty nor the ability to force the community to accept their vision and their agenda as superior to that of the people.

So, what happened? Bully Brancaccio was forced to retract. He was forced to apologize. He was forced to acknowledge that he was wrong; a state he frequently finds himself in, but one he has admitted to about as often as the passage of Haley's Comet.

This exercise in humility SHOULD start as the foundation of some serious introspection on The Bully's part.

I emphasize SHOULD.

Will it?

With a years-long history of arrogance and efforts to inflict pain on those wise enough to disagree with him, I doubt it.

Because the arrogance that led him to stupidly threaten Boger for being wise enough to cancel his subscription to the cancer on our local society is present in everything he writes. The arrogance exhibited towards Peter Van Nortwick in particular... the idea that Seekins had NEVER VOTED IN HER 53 YEAR LIFE, which should have been the closest thing to disqualifying someone from holding office as I can think of... making no difference to Brancaccio while they never missed an opportunity to engage in their rank bigotry in hammering VanNortwick because of mental illness issues?

That was way over the line. And until now, there was no evidence that any line existed for Bully Brancaccio.

Every puff piece on the unneeded, unwanted, unaffordable bridge/toll/loot rail project he's so eager to shackle us to, every time he writes about civility while his pet monkey tears into the paper's opponents generally and Republicans specifically, every article where he shreds anyone to the right of Lenin, every article giving leftists a pass while focusing on the people on the right attempting to vilify them and cast aspersions and heap scorn on them by Rule 5'ing them... like a good little leftist.

The massive, ongoing hit pieces against David Madore serve as an example of that kind of arrogance and bullying. Beating the hell out of a Madore on the right while not even mentioning a Nierenberg on the left who is roughly the same thing, but who supports those people and issues Brancaccio supports... it's that approach where Brancaccio's nonsensical observation:
If a newspaper is doing its job right, we will hold both Republicans and Democrats accountable for what they do and say.
...falls apart.

(The purpose of beating up Madore was the same purpose Brancaccio had for beating me up: to poison the well, to stop people in politics from associating with us, to vilify us to give Bully the excuse to beat the hell out of those who do associate with Madore... or me, for that matter. It was basically formulaic; it was deliberate; it was political; and it was done to harm the impacts of major, outspoken opponents to Brancaccio's agenda.)

For example, they've never held Steve "Easy Money" Stuart accountable for being bought outright by David Barnett, or arranging to have his buddy Craig Pridemore amend a bill so he could keep $60,000 in campaign contributions.

They certainly didn't hold Jeanne "Gavel Down" Harris accountable for her recent city council debacle.

And Tim "The Liar" Leavitt? Yeah, they reported his flip, but they made no effort to hold The Liar accountable for running a false and misleading campaign... because the position he flipped TO was he position they WANTED.

Clearly, like sex to Clinton, accountability has a situational meaning to a leftist like Brancaccio.

If these positions and parties were reversed, not a day would go by where the rag wouldn't express their righteous indignation and demand resignations all around... much like Koenninger demanded Marc Boldt's resignation back when he was in the House.

Of these three corrupt slimeballs, which has Brancaccio demanded resignations from?

Need you ask?

Only time will tell. Has Brancaccio finally met face-to-face with his arrogance? Has a lesson in humility finally been delivered?

When i was a boy, my Mom taught me that you can generally say what you want, but you risk an ass-kicking if you do.

How's your butt feel today, Lou? Still hurt?

Cross posted at Lou Brancaccio Watch.

No comments: