« Home | Morning Round Up » | 65 Democratic Veterans running in 2006 » | Questionable Hackett Site Wants your Money » | Why the Left is Right - Liberal Quotes » | Hackett in the PD » | Morning Round Up » | Red State, Meet Police State - Harrassed by police... » | Morning Round Up » | SherrodBrown.com - Brown unveils new website » | A name worth remembering - Jennifer Martinez » 

Monday, February 20, 2006 

Facts Facts Facts

I am happy to clarify and correct any misunderstandings I may have had. This blog, as all blogs, really are only worthwhile if they start a conversation. Tim is welcome to post a follow up diary on my blog.

Okay - let's set the record straight. First off, there seems to be some -- lets call it "confusion" -- about my use of the term sex offender. Even Tim says in an email to me "no court has adjudicated me a "sex offender". Personally, I don't know whether "sex offender" is a legal term with some special meaning as I am not a lawyer. To me, if a person pleads guilty to a crime listed in the Ohio Revised Code in the chapter (2907) titled "Sex Offenses" then he agrees that he has commited a sex offense, and that makes him a sex offender. It is correct that Tim is not in the sex offender registery. But in the Court Docket, Tim pled guilt to importuning which is a sex offense and involves minors.
From Docket -- (click on link to view docket, enter with Tims name or case # under criminal cases and then when the case appears click on the tab marked Docket above, it will list all of the crimes Tim pled guilty to)

Tim states in his email "i have committed no crime against children". I am not claiming that he actually committed a crime against a child, I am simply copying from the record which indicates Tim was indicted in crimes against minors under 16 - which in my book are children. We should be thankful that the police stepped in when they did.

Tim also states he is not "excluded by law from the political process". I never said he was -- I said he "probably was" because I seemed to remember learning in High School that felons were not allowed to vote. But Tim is right -- in Ohio, Felons are excluded from voting only during the period of their incarceration.

Normally - I would not have posted on this, as it has no relevance on Tim's political views and regular postings . However, when a person tries to lay down a new moral standard, as Tim did, they necessarily imply that their morality is superior to that of everyone elses. It is at that point that this piece of information on Tim's own morality became very relevant and thus I felt needed to become public. I do not care whom Tim supports or doesn't support. If you check into my background you will see that I gave my money to Hackett not Brown, and when you read my archives you will realize I was pretty ambivalent about the primary going back and forth between the 2. So, don't turn this into a Ohio Senate race blog - It isn't. I was sincere when I said - I am concerned about the NEOblogospheres reputation.

Update: I fixed some grammar errors at 10:56. Thanks everyone!

Tags:, ,

lady, you need to get laid.

You finally speak up, and that is what you say?

You see. Artistic & entertaining!!! At least you know who he is. Whats wrong "anonymous"? Afraid of your own shadow? As usual, a typical coward..call someone out but hide behind "anonymous".

~~You finally speak up, and that is what you say?--Posted by Anonymous | 9:30 PM~~
I think Tim's trying to shift the focus from himself to Cindy; I think that's only fair, at this point;let's all analyze her for a while. I think we have enough material already, enough "facts, facts, facts," to begin to form the same creative assertions about her as she has in analyzing Tim. I think a lot about what's transpired here over the past few months. I think we need to strip out the anonymity from all this. In that vein, then: "Anonymous," please rear up on your hind legs and let us know who you are.

Cindy, I think your blog clock's about three hours off--it's actually 0628 EST.

Many of you post with your real identities. Why does that make your ideas better?


Tim uses his real identity. Cindy uses her real identity. Look what we're talking about! I had to look up importuning.

If Tim posted anonymously we could just be talking about the way he bullies on other blogs and his crass relationship advice (see above).

These thread show that putting actual names in posts in no way elevates the discussion.

Cindy, your a jack ass. What exactly are you trying to achieve here other than making a fool of yourself ?

I'm somewhat relieved that all this has come out. I ran across reference to Tim's past on a Kos post (which started out pro-Tim, then a commenter posted this stuff, then . . .) and have been troubled by it ever since.

Upon learning this, I've been torn between keeping my mouth shut and shouting from the virtual rooftops. Once upon a time I specilized in prosecuting crimes against children. I dedicated over four years of my life and a significant swath of my soul to bringing people to justice for exactly this sort of offense. I cared enough about this to burn myself out and cut short my career as a prosecutor. In addition, I am a father of two girls and an uncle to literally a couple dozen kids. I simply cannot say that learning of Tim's past doesn't affect how I feel about him.

At the same time, Tim's criminal history is largely irrelevant to the arguments Tim makes. It may or may not be the genesis of his palpable bitterness toward certain Democrats, but aside from that sort of armchair-psychologist crap, it doesn't have much bearing on the weight of his arguments.

Tim is a polarizing figure in the blogosphere, inspriring either fierce loathing or deep admiration and loyalty. Or, in my case, and oddly equal dose of each.

To the Tim fans I say: do not minimize what he did. From the facts we know, he attempted to commit a great evil and was stopped only by happenstance. I've seen too many cases where friends and family minimize a defendant's crimes, giving him the opportunity to commit more crimes.

To the Tim haters I say: keep your eye on the ball. When Tim stays out of smartass mode and really brings it, he can put together compelling arguments. You can't just dismiss them by yelling "Pervert!" (Though it should be noted that Tim is no stranger to the ad hominem attack.)

Finally to Tim . . . what do I say? To the Tim of four years ago I say, "YOU FUCKING SELFISH BASTARD! I WISH THE HOUNDS OF HELL UPON YOUR MISERABLE HIDE!!"

To the Tim of today I say, "I don't know you. I don't know if you are a guy who made one mistake and won't do it again or a con man waiting for the next opportunity. The problem is those two guys look the same and I can't see into your heart."

Post a Comment