I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

BVD-clad blogger Wesley "Ding" Elsberry is on a gossiping witch-hunt

As usual, BVD-clad blogger Wesley "Ding" Elsberry (called Herr Fuhrer Esley Welsberry -- pronounced "Velsberry" -- by John A. Davison) -- who shamelessly practices arbitrary censorship of blog visitors' comments -- is up to no good again. He is now on a gossiping witch-hunt. Below are excerpts from a Miami Herald article that cites his Austringer blog. As I said before, blogs where there is arbitrary censorship of comments lack fairness and credibility and so should not be cited by the official news media. Elsberry actually censored comments under a Panda's Thumb blog article on the subject of the Miami Herald article-- more about that later. The Miami Herald article says,
.
Florida's No. 2 education official is tangled in a cyber-tussle with a tiny Minnesota newspaper and a scientist who blogs about the politics of teaching evolution.

Back in October 2003, the Princeton Union Eagle wrote that Cheri Yecke, then Minnesota's education commissioner, explained in ''advance publicity'' for a public hearing that 'schools could include the concept of `intelligent design' in teaching how the world came to be.''

Big news? Apparently not. The line was buried in the 22nd paragraph.

But four years later, Yecke is Florida's K-12 chancellor and a leading candidate to be its next education commissioner. And now she says the newspaper got it wrong.

Through an Internet company called reputationdefender, Yecke recently asked a scientist who riffed on the statement to either remove his blog post or modify it.

The scientist said he would if Yecke showed proof the statement was wrong. But the newspaper is standing by its reporter . . . . .

. . . . . Yecke's position on the teaching of intelligent design, a faith-based counterpart to evolution, was at issue when she was hired in August 2005 by then-Education Commissioner John Winn.

Critics in Minnesota say Yecke tried to ease such theories into the curriculum by misrepresenting the position of the federal No Child Left Behind Act and by quietly tinkering with wording when science standards were drafted.

Yecke has called those characterizations off base.

This week, she said the Union Eagle statement is inaccurate and worth setting straight because she believes such decisions should be left up to district officials.

Until recently, the scientist in the picture, Wesley Elsberry, worked for the National Center for Science Education, a pro-science watchdog group. Now a visiting researcher at Michigan State University, he says the statement in question might be more controversial for Yecke than her other statements because it ''would tie her directly to advocacy of intelligent design.'' But in his view, Yecke's other words and actions already made her an advocate.

Elsberry recently updated his blog, the Austringer, with a written explanation from Yecke. But he said he wouldn't remove the offending statement unless he could examine the ''advance publicity'' referred to by the newspaper.

It's unclear what the ''advance publicity'' was. Union Eagle Editor Chris Schafer said he thinks it was a press release, but neither he nor the reporter who wrote the story still have it. Yecke said any press release from her office would not have included such a statement.

Schafer said the story is ''fair and accurate.'' He said Yecke never contacted the paper for a retraction. ''If there was a problem, why weren't we doing this the day after the story ran?'' he said.

Yecke said she never saw the story. ''They're such a little paper,'' she said. ``I didn't even know about it.'

"Ding" Elsberry is asking for the impossible. He says that he wants to see the "advance publicity," but the Union Eagle newspaper says that it no longer has it. And how can Union Eagle Editor Schafer claim that the story is "fair and accurate" when he no longer has the evidence to back up that claim? This is all nothing but gossip. If Elsberry had an ounce of integrity, he would comply with Yecke's request that the Union Eagle's statement either be removed from his blog or modified.

Also, Yecke's claim that she never saw the story because "they're such a little paper" reminds me of the time that I wrote a letter to a Virginia state legislator regarding a big Los Angeles Times article about a bill that he had introduced. He sent me a reply thanking me for informing him about the article because he was not aware that his bill had been publicized in a West Coast paper -- and the Los Angeles Times is one hell of a lot bigger than the Princeton Union Eagle (however, that was before the Internet was as popular as it is today, so it probably would have been harder then for him to find the article on his own than it is today).
.

Labels: ,

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

> who shamelessly practices arbitrary censorship of blog visitors' comments <

How does this differ from you?

Tuesday, July 03, 2007 5:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have got to check out what Yecke's comment blog has blossomed into. Ding Elsberry is on a witch-hunt again. Now for a fictious social worker impersonator who put Ding on the spot, and Ding keeps deleting his hilarious and insightful return-blog comments. Ding is beside himself with hilarious accusations and mean-sounding threats, and he thinks everyone blogging from the southern California area with a Verizon IP address is the social worker impersonator out to get him.

This is hilarious. Ding Elsberry has forgotten about evolution, and is just ranting. I had occassion to read some of the return Blogs from "Torvik" (the social worker impersonator extraordinare) before Ding deleted his comments, and it was entertaining as hell.

I really think Ding has finally lost it guys.

Saturday, July 07, 2007 5:02:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Anonymous #2 --

Thanks for the tip -- I managed to save one of Chris Torvik's comments before it was censored:

Comment #186336 Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on July 7, 2007 12:59 AM

I appears that I’ll be doing periodic clean-ups of the vandal’s messes.

To the vandal: I don’t scare that easy. And, even if I were so yellow-bellied as that, it is out of my hands. I’ve already provided law enforcement with what information I have available. Even if I were to renounce any interest in the matter, they are going to pursue it on behalf of Chris Torvik, the officer of the court you’ve been impersonating online.



Comment #186415 Posted by ctorvie on July 7, 2007 7:15 AM

Anybody here afraid of the cops????

In these types of circumstances, not since the inception of this great country in 1776.

No one has impersonated anyone here. Certainly not illegally. You are whack. Maybe you should get some sleep and quit being so gossipy.

At least you’ve let poor Yecke alone. She didn’t deserve that from you. Maybe someday you’ll learn and get off your highhorse.


The witch-hunter has become the witch-hunted.

I don't know who in the hell Chris Torvik is, but I think he is going to be one of my own favorite pseudonyms.

Saturday, July 07, 2007 9:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Other said...

How do you know he's "BVD-clad"?

Monday, July 09, 2007 4:29:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

It's a variation of the term "pajama-clad blogger." I prefer the term "BVD-clad" because Hugh Hefner considers pajamas to be formal wear. The terms refer to a small-time amateur blogger who wants to be treated like a big pro without having the responsibilities of a big pro.

Monday, July 09, 2007 4:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Other said...

How do you know whether Elsberry wears BVDs, pajamas, a tuxedo, or a birthday suit? Has he ever expounded on his attire?

Monday, July 09, 2007 6:12:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home