piss off shooter

You know, I've been as critical as anybody on here about the stuff on that other site, but this editorial is actually relatively reasonable.  I have far fewer comments on this than I do on a standard Slager-penned piece.

First, IHL - I know you've been on this board longer than I have, but that type of comment doesn't help the current situation.  More importantly, it hurts the credibility of the people posting here who are trying to move in a positive direction.  I know you're angry, but if you found a way to channel that angry energy into productive efforts, we could fix these problems right away!

Now, "Shooter's" piece.  I know this is an editorial (Slager informed me I should look for the little tiny text at the very end of the article to confirm that), but it would be nice if some of his claims were backed up by some facts, or at least some more meat behind the opinion.  He says that Bruce has to go because he treats people like crap, but Cronan can stay because "if he just learned to shut up once in a while he could do a good job".  By saying this, he's basically admitting that Cronan isn't doing a good job, but still wants him to stay.  Not sure I agree with the logic there. 

I don't understand his CBW paragraph.  He calls on them to "knock off their crap".  I'm not sure what "crap" he's referring to, and he never makes any allegations.  This is actually the second time he attacked the CBW without saying why.  In his first editorial, he said "I am sick to my stomach over what the Citizens for a Better Wareham are doing to this town".  Again, he didn't say what that is.  I'd like to hear his accusations instead of this mudslinging.

He says "The hate bloggers and the recall people are all one group of people."  Well, that's just plain false.  If we assume that he means the people on this board are the "hate bloggers" (a point with which I disagree, but hey, it's fun to say, and I bet it sells copy), then I don't know anybody who is a "hate blogger" and wants a recall.  Bob specifically said he doesn't want it.  As of the time of writing this, there is no mention of the word "recall" in the most recent 100 or so threads on this site.  This is actually a pretty Slager-esque line.  First he pushes the repetition of "hate bloggers", then he tries to tie them in with the recall.  Now, maybe he really is new to writing and didn't mean to do that, but it's awfully convenient...

He says "I read what the blogger “commonsense” wrote on Bill Whitehouse’s web site about how people who read the Observer are uneducated and don’t know how the world works. I almost threw up in my mouth."  Honestly, I agree with "Paul" on this one - I hope it was a situation where common's true intentions didn't come through in his type because of the lack of intonation and subtlty, but I'm not sure.  I don't know Slager's demographics.  I do know that many of them don't have another source of local news (e.g., the folks that get the paper for free through the COA/Meels on Wheels).  What I hope is that common was referring to these people not getting any form of balanced view, and that accounting for how they see the world.  To make a comparison, let's imagine that the only TV station you get is Fox News - what do you think your political philosophy will be?  Also, he says that Slager "has these people pegged" - this is another attempt to group everybody together with one bad comment.  90% of the people on here wouldn't fall into that group, but he's picking out the couple of folks who do.

I disagree with him on his idea of "chuck(ing) all the stupid little fights".  These are important examples of ways that the BoS is failing to serve the people of Wareham, and need to be fought and cataloged come election time.

Overall, it was a pretty balanced post.  I wonder if Slager will give me a weekly column :)

I wonder if Paul/Bobo has ever visited the CBW site onewareham.com. There are some intelligently written editorials on there and the breakdown of K and P spending is very informative. I am not a member of that group, but I think that if you read what they want for Wareham---like good schools etc. you would have a hard time disagreeing whether you were a bos fan or not.

To complain about and criticize a group without backing up your statements seems irresponsible.

Paul Shooter mystery continued...... Talked this afternoon with someone who said that a little over a week ago his curiosity led him to "case out" the  Rag office on a day when The Ayatolla's red van wasn't there.  He was surprised to see a head sticking out of a very small window of "a gray haired, white mustacheod man about 60 years old with the blank stare of someone they would describe in Nova Scotia as 'not quite right' "

This person had not heard the Paul Shooter  rumors so it wasn't like a  competitive birder trying to expand his Life List. It could have been the landlord;it could have been a repair person,... or.....ta dah!!..........Paul Shooter!!!

I received this email today after I started this thread:
From: Warehamobserver@aol.com [mailto:Warehamobserver@aol.com]
Sent: Mon 8/17/2009 2:22 PM
To: Larry McDonald
Subject: Hi.


I read how you believe Paul Shooter should use his real name and accept the ramifications for what he writes. I was wondering if that same rationale applies to everybody on Whitehouse's web site. These folks constantly claim they use anonymous screen names because they fear retribution. How can you criticize Mr. Shooter and give the bloggers a free pass? Just wondering. Thanks.

Robert Slager

I'm not sure how to approach this, but what the heck. The people on here are bloggers, not published journalist. If they were to become public journalist, I would hope they would use their real name. The kind of retribution the posters on this site would face are far greater than anything an immature young man would have to face. These people have jobs, some may work for the town, some may work for a business that works with the town, and some may be business people that have to go before the Selectmen for whatever reason. That is very real based on what has happened to those who have spoke out and I understand they do not want that to happen to them. Of course, I don't know who Paul Shooter works for, but he talks about punishment from the hate bloggers. That is a bit different. Again, he is being published in a newspaper, not a blogger on either site.

In reality, it doesn't matter. As far as I know, we aren't trying to out him to punish him. We are curious more than anything and he has provided a great many jokes! (I miss Ham!)

I hope he gives you a column Casual! :)

Larry,

You got it. Robert Slager made him a columnist. Different standard than anonymous bloggers. Can Slager give us one example of a current columnist writing for a reputable website or publication under a pseudonym?

I suggest Paul Shooter ask someone he trusts to tell him the truth without regard to his feelings whether his fears about revealing who he is are realistic or overblown.

Yep, I made the point a week or so ago that Woodward and Bernstein filed a number of *news* reports attacking Nixon under their real name.  I'm sure there are examples of others who stuck their necks out further than that, but I can't think of any at the moment.  If you're going to be reporting for a news publication, you should be using your real name.  End of story.

acasualobserver wrote:

Larry, if you think about it, Slager's site is a blog.  "Paul Shooter" is, for all intents and purposes, a blogger.  If he wants to write a bunch of opinion with no substance under a pseudonym, that's fine.  I really don't have a problem with it.

Casual,
I don't mind it when it's on his online portion, but when it is published in the print edition, that's different to me. Personally, the whole Paul Shooter thing is funny to me. It's like another personality.

I get this queasy feeling when I think about the original Paul Shooter articles that quoted Slager. You are right, it was very different than the current works. That is why I get this queasy feeling about the whole Paul Shooter thing. The mere fact he talks tough but is afraid of being discovered because he will be punished? That is an odd combo.

dan,  I am wondering pondering about you.  Why have you changed so much?  You are older now we all are.   But still I wonder what are you up to?

Just 6'1? Geez Dan!  I have shrunk from 6'4 1/2 to 6'4". I'm not sure how I lost a half inch, but I want it back! It must be the bad knees falling apart!

I am just so amused by the whole Paul Shooter thing. I had the opportunity to read the Paul Shooter chronicles. It is amazing how his style has digressed. The original article attributed to Shooter was much more fluent. It just baffles me on how he has lost his command of syntax and proper sentence structure.

Do i care if there is a Paul Shooter? Actually, no. I just enjoy the entertainment value of the entire epic!

I don't think I am going to have much choice on the knees. My left knee has had multiple surgeries. I had 3 surgeries when I was playing college football. I've had both knees drained so many times, they didn't even numb it the last 50 or 60 times. My last appointment with ortho doc revealed I have arthritis in both knees and will need both replaced in the next 10 years. Oh well, I got an education from these knees!

My entire theory on Paul Shooter:
I think he was a figment of Slager's imagination at the start. Just someone to interview himself with. There is probably now a "paul shooter". The styles are completely different and point of view is very telling. :)  Some very big contradictions since the beginning. In any case, I wish Ham was around, we need his humor and wit.

Rip Dinkle is a good 'ol' boy...strong as a well rope...ain't a hill too long for him to climb...serious as a heart attack...tough as a bull ridin' rope.
He can write better than Paul Shooter. He doesn't have to be edited. He can write sentences that flow together and are not interrupted by obvious attempts to disguise the writer.
Plus...more importantly..Rip Dinkle can kick Paul Shooter's ass.

I ain't paying that $24.00 you want. That's for damn sure!!

He might as well have said "I edited Mr. Shooters news stories. And by 'edited' I mean that I wrote them and slapped his name on the end after it was published to try to make it look like I wasn't writing 'news' articles that are primarily about me and quote myself extensively"

I couldn't have said it better Casual. The are very distinct differences between the early stuff and later stuff. If you compare the early articles to Slager's work, you almost have a dead match. Anyway, enough for now, I'm off for a meeting until later today!

Larry McDonald wrote:

Another wonderful and inadequate response:
From: Warehamobserver@aol.com [mailto:Warehamobserver@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 10:22 AM
To: Larry McDonald
Subject: Brain teaser II

I edited Mr. Shooters news stories. I did not edit his columns, per his request. That is why they appear different. Yet another simple answer to another uneducated assumption.


And yet, the writing styles are different? Hmmm, okay, you edited it by re-writing it? I know, i'm uneducated and just a poor dumb redneck. Yep, I couldn't cypher a three letter puzzle. :) 

Anyone else buying this?

Gee, Slager used to change entire paragraphs that Liz Pezzoli wrote and she only found out about it after it was in print.  If he did this to 'HIS PARTNER',  what would he do with a little columnist?