#1 2009-09-15 13:48:40
I think the final straw was a comment made on the local hate site by Maple Springs Road resident Larry McDonald. He claimed that I discussed with him how Paul Shooter came to join the Observer. It was an outright fabrication. I have never discussed Paul Shooter with anyone. I have never even had a conversation with Mr. McDonald. We’ve exchanged some e-mails over the past few months. He challenged me to a fight once. I e-mailed him saying he could name the time and place because I will never be intimidated by anyone’s bullying tactics. He subsequently backed down, claiming he couldn’t get a doctor’s approval. But I have never mentioned a word to him about who Paul Shooter is or how he came to start writing for the Observer. Mr. McDonald never even asked. For him to claim otherwise is simply a lie."
You sir, are a liar, plain and simple. I called you the day the lawyer from ACLU called me and spoke with me about the issue we had both discussed with her. (let's just say you didn't repeat what she said, you ignored it and went on with your racial baiting). I had noticed you had a column where you were interviewed. I asked who is Paul Shooter? You told me he was a journalist you called when you needed someone to interview you. That is the truth and I will swear on the bible to that. I have no reason to lie.
The truth is, we have exchanged emails since 2007. It was at that time you made a sarcastic remark about something that had NOTHING to do with me. In the last month, you claimed you had a "tip" on that story but you let it drop because you couldn't verify the information. That is nonsense! The fact is, you didn't do your research and you got an earful from me because I knew the true story and the source of your allegation. You were wrong, but never bothered to offer an apology.
Challenge you to a fight? As I remember it (I kept the email too), you told me to come on down to your office anytime. I told you that I had no desire to have a lawsuit filed against me, so I offered an alternative solution, provided I was allowed to use the facility. I could not because it would require me to get medical clearance, which I cannot. Simple as that. I then said if you ever felt you wanted to push it, (you had been by my house visiting your "source" and advertiser) feel free to stop by. Since that time, you have not set foot on my property, so until you do, I consider it a non-issue. As far as backing down, that is another lie. you simply twisted that to meet your needs. :)
Bobo, you have been a shill for so long, you truly do not have a truthful bone left. I've read a few of your columns where you DEMAND information, and that is a bully tactic. I've seen you attack anyone that opposes the Selectmen. When it comes to your precious cronies, you are willing to bully anyone or sacrifice your dignity.
The true facts are you are less and less of a factor every day. Your headlines and stories are proven wrong over and over again. You no longer have an office here and your attempt to rally against Susan Gifford resulted in 2 letters! Please do us all a favor and just call it quits. Maybe you can call that mysterious person who offered you 100k and tell them you have reconsidered? You have worn out your welcome in Wareham.
Offline
#2 2009-09-15 14:05:25
Thanks to that wonderful person who sent me the entire column. Again, more twisted lies and allegations. Engage and debate? The last person who did that was banned from his site (LizdaGnome).
Ladies and Gents, this is as sad as it gets. This person wants people to believe he has been civil and forthright, but that is the farthest from the truth. I am glad he will no longer engage us. it is difficult to understand what his motives are when he has no true interest in Wareham. In my opinion, he is the epitomy of a "hate blogger".
Oh, and since he has distracted everyone from his "computer audit end game", he won't have to put up or shut up :)
Now, it's back to work! There is plenty to do leading up to Town Meeting! Maybe Paul Shooter will be there as a reporter! Wouldn't that be exciting?
Offline
#4 2009-09-15 14:45:08
Since Bobo identified me as a Maple Springs Road resident, I felt it was my obligation to identify him as:
Robert Slager
Twin Lakes Drive
Halifax, MA
It must be okay to post that information as he posted mine?
Offline
#5 2009-09-15 14:47:47
he has claimed many times on his online content he has NEVER written about a private citizen.. well that all ended a few days ago with steve holmes and today with larry.. slagers forked tongue is so bad its a wonder he can speak at all..
Offline
#6 2009-09-15 15:07:01
Liz,
It's all about twisting the truth. He will claim I am not a private citizen or justify it. It's no different than his site "being open to all opinions" and yet he moderates all posts.
It does no good to discredit him, he does that himself with his contradictions.
Offline
#7 2009-09-15 15:55:44
I want to wind up this thread with a couple of thoughts.
If you are wondering why the Selectmen have a new mouthpiece, you just have to look at what is going on with their old mouthpiece. Bobo has created an alter ego that writes billy bad-ass editorials and calls out Bobo (or in this case, himself). Would you depend on a person who has this problem.
He called to his "masses" to write our esteemed representative, and she received 3 emails and 1 was praise.
Bobo called for a silent protest and uhmmm, it didn't develop.
He writes an article that claims the Selectmen have been cleared (quoting a Selectmen as the source). The new mouthpiece comes out and says he has no idea what the DA office is doing.
Bobo comments on the audit findings and his sources telling him it's "life changing" and "K& P are going over it with a fine tooth comb". Then he has to eat his pride and tell his readers the audit materials were taken in early June.
During this entire process, he settles with Joyce and has to vacate his office because he can no longer afford it. He receives an offer from an un-named source to buy his paper for $100,000. He refuses it. Hmmmm
If he has any doubt as to why his business is failing, he has only to look at himself. No amount of posts from any of us so called "hate bloggers" could do what he has done to himself. His credibility is zero and he has himself to blame.
Offline
#8 2009-09-15 16:58:04
Bobo's "I'll never talk about the bloggers again" column number 10,982. The last one he wrote, he wrote about the bloggers the next day.
Offline
#10 2009-09-15 17:12:35
just a bit off topic here but since slager is reading this..in case you missed the other posts the state division of public records thru town counsel gave me the dvd of the selectmens meeting i asked for..you sir were wrong.. write about that.. email me i will give you the case #.. thats a REAL story the citizens need to know how the bos and ita refuse PUBLIC RECORDS..
Offline
#11 2009-09-15 17:18:01
What's that, Bobo said? He never talked to Larry about Paul Shooter?
Hey everyone, here's Bobo not talking to Larry about Paul Shooter:
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
Offline
#12 2009-09-15 17:23:48
Bobo said - "I have never discussed Paul Shooter with anyone."
Hey, here also is Bobo not discussing Paul Shooter:
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.
I still love it that he called him "Mr. Shooter." That cracks me up. Oh, yes, we know you don't edit his stories. The first 10 inches of his columns are usually devoted to telling people he asked you not to edit them.
Offline
#13 2009-09-15 18:08:42
Hambone,
Do you remember around the same time Bobo came out with his racial baiting and I made a statement about talking to Bobo about what the attorney said? That was when I asked him about Shooter. He claims he never spoke with me about mr shooter, but that is a bold face lie. I will search out the thread, but it was right before the big meeting.
Offline
#14 2009-09-15 18:41:55
BOBO WOULDNT GO TO A FIGHT IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT. HE IS A COMPLETE AND TOTAL WIMP.
Offline
#15 2009-09-15 20:53:33
he is a total shit head and an asshole.
Offline
#16 2009-09-15 22:16:52
Larry, Slager's latest blog post is so full of spin and mistruths that I will need some time to pull it all apart. However, it's important to note that he's going to continue to respond to what we say, even if he doesn't acknowledge it. He constantly makes changes based on what we write. For example, he posted his jeer about Steve the morning of Sunday, 9/6. His line about being able to attack Steve now that he's a "public figure" remained unchanged until I pointed out the following Tuesday afternoon that Slager basically wrote that he was excited he could now defame Steve without being challenged. Within 30 minutes of my post, Slager had updated his to include some ridiculous claim about invasions of privacy.
Ever turn on a light in a room full of cockroaches, and they all scurry for cover and try to pretend they were never there? That's analagous to what Slager does. He gets proven wrong time and time again, and just pretends that it never happened. Absolutely ridiculous. Though I suppose I should relax a bit - there's currently 3 people online on his site, including me...I'm guessing the other two are Google and Yahoo indexing the site....
Offline
#17 2009-09-15 22:23:46
Cas has a good point.
People in the South know about cockroaches.
Maybe that's a good name for the unnamed...cockroach.
Very appropriate.
Somebody get the Raid!!
The Raid will be the two new Selectmen that you elect in April.
Offline
#18 2009-09-15 22:30:50
Shucks, I was hoping to be the Raid.
Cas,
I know he lied, period. We DID have that discussion on the phone. I checked my phone records and it was the day before the meeting, Wednesday. I told him i KNEW what the lawyer told him and then I asked him who Paul Shooter was. I have a very good memory for those types of details :)
He can spin all he wants, I know the truth. I have no reason to lie. I guess the way I look at it is either he lied to me when he talked to me that day or he is lying now...either way...he is a liar!
Offline
#19 2009-09-15 22:37:57
PShooter wrote:
Bobo wrote:
The only winning move is not to play.
But then he writes an entire piece of (edit) that does nothing except "play".
...and, How come both "Bobo Shooter" & "Bobo Slager" both spell "Hamatron" incorrectly
as "Hammatron?
PShooter
slager has CHANGED his spelling of ham in the story now ONLY 1 M NOT 2...
Offline
#20 2009-09-16 08:26:57
Just for kicks, I searched for the word "Holmes" in the copies of his website that I have. Seeing as Slager's original claims was that Steve's being a public figure would allow Slager to finally write about him, then there shouldn't be any references to Steve in the past, right? Well, that would only occur in a world that made sense, not in Robert Slager's world. (Note that some of these dates might not be the original dates the articles were posted, just when I have copies of them)
Jul 24 - Slager prints a retraction about Steve being an "employee of a local establishment". I couldn't find the original article where he wrote that Steve was an "employee of a local establishment" but presumably there's another hit on the list somewhere
Jul 31 - "Correspondent Paul Shooter" wrote about Steve calling out Slager for race-baiting at Bob's meeting
So three articles (including the one that was retracted) in the span of about a week. Just makes Slager's claim about "invasion of privacy" even more laughable. He just wants to be able to Slander Steve and get away with it. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Offline
