Thanks for your concern. I believe there is parity in our reciprocal appreciation of each other’s comments.

Since it’s gone totally past you, I’ll reiterate that I have zero issue with fair and honest criticism of the N&O (or anything for that matter). Heck, I’ve been and will continue to be critical of the N&O myself. What I take issue with is criticism that is factually wrong or based on seriously misleading information. Of course, what should I expect from someone who feels it necessary to refer to our president using his middle name as though the moniker is somehow relevant to his ideology or character.

And, while you may feel great about the dawn of an era in which less eyes are around to keep our tax dollars from being misused and/or squandered, I’m entitled to express my concern for the loss.

There is an old analogy used to explain the universality of opinions among all humankind. We’ve all got one, but we don’t have to be one.

1. Filled the Tampax machine in the Teacher’s Lounge with slugs - Lester Maddox Elementary School; 1963.
2. Dined and dashed on a ravioli platter, two Pepsis and a side order of bread sticks. Pizza King, Doraville, Georgia; 1970. Abandoned his date to face the consequences.
3. Claimed to have a terminal illness to get sympathy sex from the head cheerleader; Nostradamus High School; 1971.
4. Later that same week, feigned ignorance when said cheerleader confronted him with the fact that she seemed to have contracted an illness from him, but it wasn’t “terminal”.
5. Squandered his trust fund to finance his dream of becoming an empresario. His only production ‘Beowulf, The Musical’, opened and closed on the same night; January 21, 1973.

Evil Me: “Bag the blog. I need another day off. The fish are bitin’ so to speak.”
Virtuous Me: “For God’s sake man. Consider your devoted following! You only work 2 days a week as it is! And how much beer and pornography can one man consume?”
Evil Me: “Oh bite me, Me. And that’s a question I damn sure aim to answer one of these days.”
Virtuous Me: “You’ll soon regret your sloth and mendacity, oh slothful and mendacious one!”
Evil Me: “Let’s see… a twelve pack of cold Coronas, an institutional sized bag of barbeque-flavored Fritos and Jenna Jameson’s latest hummin’ (good pun Danny boy) in the disk drive. Yeah, I got a lot to regret.”
Virtuous Me: “I’m…getting….weaker. Can’t fight Evil Dan any……longer. Must rest…to fight an…other d…ay.”

I’m guessing this is your substitute for a response on the other thread. Certainly would fit the profile

Strategies of an N&O conspiracy theorist…

1. Use only generalized accusations which are difficult to confirm or dispute as the basis for your position. E.g. — Abuse exists, check the coverage of Fetzer & Helms and you’ll see what I mean — it should be obvious so I don’t need to tell you what to look for.

2. Rely on only the the most superficial research or fact checking to support your claims. E.g. I ran a single search with very narrow search criteria and I couldn’t find a thing — therefore, it does not exist.

3. When faced with directly contradictory evidence proving your claims are false, down play it as “random scraps,” “thin gruel” and change your allegations — “Okay, exists but it was buried inside the paper.” Don’t bother fact checking this claim as it could be wrong and it doesn’t matter if it’s wrong, just claim it anyway.

4. Take a cue from Lou Dobbs & repeat claims even if proven to be completely factually inaccurate as repetition will help bolster your argument. E.g. “As I pointed out, it doesn’t even show up on an archive search.”

5. Allege the most generic and basic coverage about a large commercial operation owned by a prominent family in NC business & politics is some sort of retribution to tarnish their image. Again, provide no specifics or comparisons that can be used to either substantiate or disprove — just make the claim.

6. Imply that events which don’t fit your argument happened by chance and are not the result of work done by the paper to uncover corruption. E.g. the provost’s spontaneous resignation is what forced their hand to cover the story. Do the Dobbs again and repeat inaccurate claims.

7. Claim the reason no good evidence exists for the very core of your argument — That liberal rag only goes after republicans! — is due to the fact that majority control has been in democratic hands for a long time. Never mind that roughly 36 percent of the current state senate and 38 percent of the current house is made up of republicans. If they don’t own the majority, they cannot be corrupt and that is why the N&O hasn’t aimed any of their abusive coverage at them.

8. Downplay the fact that the most damaging stories have been almost exclusive written about Democrats by labeling them “window dressing.”

9. Bolster your allegations with more generic claims. E.g. “If the N&O was really doing their job Marc Basnight would be in jail.” Don’t worry that your earlier claims would fly in the face of this assertion as no other source has uncovered any corruption on him either — “The days of the N&O’s local media monopoly are over. We now have alternatives.” Again, it only matters that you make these claims, not that any can actually be proven. After all he’s been controlling the NC democratic machine forever, he has to be corrupt. [Truthfully, I think Basnight probably has abused his power, he’s just been better at covering his tracks to this point. However, I also don’t think N&O coverage of him has been or is very favorable]

10. Allege that a job whose duties include expressing opinions is no different than reporting. Any separation of editorial pages (clearly labeled as such) and news is merely a ruse. Everyone who researches or writes anything for the N&O is like minded and support the same political agenda. Throw in a false implication to support your argument — no research or fact checking required — E.G. the N&O has never endorsed a republican.

11. If anyone disputes any of your claims, repeat any or all of the above. If that doesn’t work, just ignore it and wait for another opportunity to make the same claims. Remember, repetition is the key.

That should have been:

“Grandad had an article in the News and Observer”

Not that that’s real good English anyway.