Friday, March 30, 2012

Response To "Anonymous"

"Anonymous" wrote on my blog:
"Insurance companies have the decision on when and if to settle. Sometimes it's cheaper to pay an ambulance chaser and walk away. They are paid for their time and their bill goes up and gets paid regardless."

Assume for the moment that you are being sued for libel.  You are not forced to file a claim with your insurance.  You could always put your money where your mouth is, and pay for your own attorney to "air it all in court".  Also assume that you enjoy attacking people on a tabloid website.  Why would you agree to stop attacking someone you hate so much, especially if you are confident you would win the lawsuit?

"Also, sometimes it's better to settle for a puny amount than to risk more facts coming out in court."

Maybe you get lucky and the people suing you don't want your money.  Maybe they just want the libel to stop.

"Facts were always posted. Now only verifiable facts will be posted."

Totally idiotic statement.   If you don't personally witness an event and someone just tells you about the event with no proof, how do you know it's fact without verification?  What if you accuse someone of a crime, but you have no evidence and you can't even cite the law that was broken?  How do you know for a fact that a crime was committed?

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

I tried posting this several times this morning on the previous post where this one was and it lost it each time. Fortunately I saved it to Word after retyping it after the first time.

Hey Bozo, here is a definition of Fact: I am probably wasting my time as you guys over there seem to not be able to grasp well most anything. I am going to give it a shot even though it is probably futile.

Fact:
A truth known by actual experience or observation

Notice it doesn't say something you are told or something you believe is true. People can tell you anything. It doesn't make it true. Bob was told about info on Fred and how to get it. How did that turn out? People have been known to falsely accuse those of rape or child molestation due to covering their own butts or for revenge. That is just one example of lies told that get believed by some thus damaging lives.

Anonymous said...

“Insurance companies have the decision on when and if to settle”

Once again, ignorance is shown. The majority of insurance companies have a little thing called Consent to Settle in their policies. This means they have to defend the case if the insured states they do not want to settle. This would be a big thing in the example of a big mouth (Bob) claiming he had proof and would use it if needed. Amazing though that someone would settle if they really had proof which could defend them in the case of oh something like….libel. The thing with Consent to Settle though is if you decide you have proof and tell the insurance company you want to fight the case and then lose b/c you lied (repeatedly and often) and actually committed libel, the insured would have to pay the damages and the insurance company only the cost of the defense.

"Facts were always posted.”

Ever play the card game bull sh**? I’m calling it right now. Bull Sh**! There were many threats of “facts” coming out, but all some people had were opinions and unfortunately were more than ready to hear themselves talk and write them down for others to read. Time to get real and get a life of your own!

E

Dude said...

"Facts were always posted."

Here are some examples of "facts" that were posted:

"Fred knows that is not only against the rules, but it is against the law and could be considered a felony."

"He (Fred Barkes) and some of his staff should be removed from office and charged in a criminal court for crimes they know they are committing."

"We also know that that office breaks the law regularly. And we intend to prove it and file complaints with the state officials."

"It is illegal for him to manipulate the funds the way he does. Just because he hasn't been convicted or just because the SBOA doesn't have the balls to crack him on it, it doesn't mean he isn't breaking the law."

"You twist what Barkes does illegally to look like it's legal."

"Unfairness in their distribution of relief is illegal. Manipulating the funds and the tax money as they do is illegal."


So, "Anonymous", I will ask again for the millionth time. Please cite the laws that were broken.

Anonymous said...

Talking Head
"We have a book smart Mayor who has never governed anything in her life until getting elected last November."

Yet, something tells me that Talking Head was a big Obama supporter.


Paula Jarrett
Seems to me that was a HUGE factor of Brown running for office, she had NO experience. There was NOTHING about her office ethics, how well she could communicate, if she coud make decisions about a city, that she was absent from for YEARS, being great in the broardroom, makes not a mayor, based on these credentials. Scalf had all kinds of experience, she too wanted to do something with these trash fees, but she never got a chance.
Scalf got her education at the school of experience, which can outweigh any Harvard degree.


Hypocrite. Obama had far less experience that Brown. He had done next to nothing as far as running anything, McCain's experience far outweighed Obama's as did Palin's. If I recollect correctly, you were quick to talk about Obama's education and how important it was.

And from an article presumably from the ever-ignorant Jeremy or at least one of the sufferers of dimwitteditis there.

As we passed the child entered the vehicle, so our assumption is the child was ridding in the cargo area of the truck.

Anonymous said...

"Facts were always posted. Now only verifiable facts will be posted."



There's a difference?


The Internet is a great source for finding idiots who believe they are smart.

Anonymous said...

If you can't or didn't verify, then how can you know they were facts?

Dude said...

http://www.columbuzz.net/index.php/permalink/3783.html

Describes Bob perfectly.

Dude said...

http://www.columbuzz.net/index.php/permalink/3784.html

"You're attractive and could easily find a decent man."

Sounds like Bob has a crush on her.

Bob is a Loser said...

http://www.columbuzz.net/index.php/permalink/3784.html
"You're attractive and could easily find a decent man."

http://i.1dl.us/t4N.jpg

Bob is a Loser said...

http://i.1dl.us/t4P.jpg

Dude said...

Note that "Anonymous" did not respond to my question. "Anonymous", you are a liar, plain and simple. Now that you're supposedly a Christian, maybe you should ask God to help you with your pathological lying.

Dude said...

Bob wrote on columbuzz:

"He told me that he was a good friend of Fred Barkes and that some of what I wrote about him simply wasn't true. I tend to disagree with him, but he might be right. The fact that some of my terminolgy then actually required a conviction says he is right. For that, I sincerely apologize to Fred."

Shocking. Wish I could believe Bob really means it.

"What bothers me is the fact that everyone concentrates on the small percentage we MAY be wrong about and they look over the majority that we were right about."

Sorry Bob, but you're still a narcissist and delusional.

"I respect this man greatly for standing face to face and telling me exactly what he thought."

Maybe you should apologize to Fred AND Sandy Barkes face to face.

What's up Blob said...

Could it be that ole Fat Boy is suspicious that the Doc might be plunking a member of his household or one of his fat Girlfriends at the TOL .

Dude said...

Bob wrote on columbuzz:
"Does it? That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I disagree."

Duh!. Of course you would disagree. Real sociopaths don't actually believe they are sociopaths.

Dude said...

By the way, Bob, it's not my opinion. It's one of those unverifiable facts.

Dude said...

http://www.columbuzz.net/index.php/permalink/3781.html

Every day is April Fools Day on columbuzz.

Anonymous said...

A few points.
The original purpose of Columbuzz was to stir up drama and it certainly does that. It was not to help people. Nathan himself used to tout about drama and even called himself ColumbusDrama. So, they can polish the turd all they want, but it is still a turd. They can try to re-write history, but that is what the original purpose was as far as I know.

Secondly, I would like to see Paula explain how she can denigrate Mayor Brown, her education and lack of experience in governing when she supported Obama who had even less experience. I brought this up before, I would like to see her justify herself. Is Obama a better speaker than Mayor Brown? I haven't heard her speak, but it is likely true. However, talking even if useful in the job is not nearly the most important. There have been snakes who have talked a good game and deceived people, but were anything but good or useful. Satan (the serpent himself) is an example of this. You have my permission to use this and or my other post that contained the same question about Paula over there. I refuse to post there and that is your own fault. You all banned, disclosed personal information on posters, edited, attacked, etc. posters over there, so I want nothing to do with it. This is your fault. You should consider yourself lucky I am responding to your posts over here. I wonder how many do not read or post due to your past injustices and bullying behavior with posters who disagreed over there.

Bob, when are you ever going to realize that even if it is technically true that if you say someone told you something, you are not lying, it is still harmful? You are putting something out there that may or may not be true. Sure it gets you off the hook (or so you think), but you are still repeating gossip and rumors and adding fuel to the fire. You should not put things out there unless and until you have true evidence. NOT believing it because it fits your own hunches. NOT believing it because someone told you. NOT believing it because there is circumstantial evidence that could also be explained in other ways.

Bob, you are professing Christianity and doing this to right wrongs. Is it right to put accusations out there and put these seeds and suspicions out there when you yourself do not know if they are accurate? Just changing how you do so to protect yourself from lying does not make it right. When those rumors are out there, it is impossible to get them back. The damage is done and you can't undo it. Think on this, Bob.

[i]I heard a story once about a Jewish Rabbi who was newly appointed to a small town.
One of the men in the town was very unhappy at having a new Rabbi and could not seem to accept him. The townsman began to talk about the Rabbi to his friends, questioning the Rabbi’s motives and putting a negative spin on his behaviors and words. This went on for some time and resulted in a split in the community as some townsfolk believed the harmful rumors which seemed to grow in the telling. The townsman fell upon hard times and was having difficulty
with illness and financial problems within his family. The new Rabbi, having heard of the difficulties, came to the townsman and offered him aid and comfort. The townsman was very grateful and he began to realize the enormity of his offense in gossiping and spreading rumors about the Rabbi. He felt great shame and went to the Rabbi and confessed what he had done, asking “How can I possibly make amends?” The Rabbi was sad but in his wisdom he instructed the man to take a feather pillow up to the top of the nearby mountain. “When you reach the top”, he said, “open the pillow and release the feathers to the wind then return to me.” The townsman did as he was asked. When he came down, the Rabbi instructed him “Return to the mountain and gather up every feather that you loosed to the wind.” The townsman cried “But that is impossible!” The Rabbi looked at him sadly and said “That is how it is with spreading gossip”.[/i]

Anonymous said...

“We have really always intended to only do good. No matter how it looked, we only wanted to reveal and stop the bad”

Wow, this really makes me sick to my stomach. Bob, this is a prime example of why we have said you have multiple personalities. Do not kid yourself that you “intended” to do good with the vicious way you attacked the whole Barkes’ family. You wanted to win an election and got nasty trying to do so. Then when you lost you tried to ruin people who had not done anything wrong to you. “No matter how it looked”…trust me, it looked sick and disgusting the way you attacked them time and again with nothing but the words from a few people. It will take a long time, if ever, before I hear your name and do not feel my stomach turn.

E

Dude said...

Great comment!

Dude said...

"It will take a long time, if ever, before I hear your name and do not feel my stomach turn."

I'm right there with you, E.

Anonymous said...

Thanks. I wish I had used HTML instead of UBB though. Old habits die hard sometimes.

Dude said...

Question for Jeremy:

What is your connection to Data Cave, Inc.?

Dude said...

Very odd that Jeremy won't answer this question.

Little Birdie said...

Somewhere on here someone was complaining about Columbuzz posting pictures of Dude's wife and kid.

If I remember right they took those pics from a very public FACEBOOK page.

It seems to me that DUDE posted pictures of his kid on the internet. Columbuzz just borrowed it.

But Bob is wrong for posting a picture he found in a public arena.

Dude, maybe if you kept your nose out of Columbuzz's business they would leave you and your family alone.

Maybe if your uncle wasn't such an ass they would leave him alone too.

I think Columbuzz should attack you and your family every time you attack them. I bet they still have those pictures.

Anonymous said...

Gosh Little Birdie, is that Christian behavior? I seem to recall people posting pictures of Bob's family which too were gotten from very public places. Yet he flipped out too and said leave him family out of it. What is good for the goose and all. Oh, that's right you libs are generally hypocrites. You want to have it both ways and dish it out, but not take it.

One could argue that Columbutts starts it. They post things about other people with no substantiation at which point Dude responds here. If they kept THEIR noeses out of people's business, Dude would keep his nose out of theirs.
It's funny how Bob posts under different names here. It is pretty obvious when he posts here no matter what name he posts under.

Dude said...

"If I remember right they took those pics from a very public FACEBOOK page."

True, but I did not give them (you) permission to use it. Re-posting pictures from facebook like that violates their terms of service, but they (you) probably think those rules don't apply to them (you).

"It seems to me that DUDE posted pictures of his kid on the internet. Columbuzz just borrowed it."

You justify everything you do, no matter who it hurts. Nice "christian" attitude.

"But Bob is wrong for posting a picture he found in a public arena."

Yes he is. It's the WAY Bob (you) uses it.

"Dude, maybe if you kept your nose out of Columbuzz's business they would leave you and your family alone."

Hypocrite. Maybe if you kept your nose out of other people's business, I would leave you alone.

"Maybe if your uncle wasn't such an ass they would leave him alone too."

Hypocrite. Maybe if you weren't such an ass, I would leave you alone.

"I think Columbuzz should attack you and your family every time you attack them. I bet they still have those pictures."

Wow, Bob, you're truly an ogre, and not the good kind like Shrek.

Dude said...

"I seem to recall people posting pictures of Bob's family which too were gotten from very public places."

That may have happened on another site, but I will not allow that on my blog. That's one of many differences between Bob and me. He attacks everyone in your family.