The Second Coming Out of EnWhySeaWonk

The "Real" EnWhySeaWonkBack in the day, lots of people wondered who EnWhySeaWonk was. People in real life several times even asked his creator if he knew who EnWhySeaWonk was. Depending on the situation, he usually admitted it was him. I don’t know if anyone still cares, but it was my creator’s job that kept him from blogging under his own name. His employment situation has finally changed after over seven and a half years, and he is therefore able to reveal his “secret identity”: EnWhySeaWonk, a/k/a “Enrique W.S. Wonk” is the creation of Matthew Wright Carlin, a 36 year-old attorney who lives in E. Williamsburg, Brooklyn. As so many people already know this, it might be a little anti-climactic, but I hope this post will prove a point about pseudonymous blogging.

Although I hold the exact same opinions and political views as Matthew Carlin, I, EnWhySeaWonk, am a persona, or character if you will. Matthew Carlin would make the same arguments as me, and stands by everything “I” ever wrote, but he probably would have been a little less bitchy about it.

I hope this story will illustrate that there are people who simply cannot use their names on the blogs for various legitimate reasons. My points were just as valid yesterday as they are today and the fact that I can now reveal who posts the words written in my name does not in the slightest change the veracity or sincerity of them. I believe that anyone who rejects commentary because it comes from a source without a real name, is just making an excuse to dismiss it. Truth and opinion are just that, whether there is a name attached or not.

Matthew’s first “coming out” was when he was in college and started telling people he was gay. This is his second “coming out” and it’s happening now, because his job at a small private law firm with mostly conservative Republican partners prevented him from blogging openly (there’s an actual written blogging policy that he would have had to abide by and he’s sure it would have eventually gotten him in trouble). Despite the conservative partners, it was a great job to start his career and he’s made life-long friends in three quarters of a decade there.

He can be open now, because he is starting a new job at very small “boutique” law firm with extremely liberal partners.

Now that he’s “out” (eliminating a certain someone’s primary criticism of him), he will continue commenting, but only sporadically posting, because the reason he cut back his posting and commenting has not changed. One of the great things about his job has been the reasonable hours, which allowed him to serve on the Board of the Stonewall Democratic Club of New York City for the last six years, two as a Vice-President, and then he became the President in last year, a position he plans to hold again this year (he was even recently quoted in the Times for the Club, which he proudly forwarded the link of to his new boss). He stopped posting because enough people knew who EnWhySeaWonk really was, that he wanted to prevent the appearance of impropriety or attributing his personal views to the Club. What he writes on the blogs is his own opinion and not the Club’s.

He tried to explain “on the blogs” his situation the best he could, especially when I was called by, um, someone on this site, “intellectually dishonest” a “coward”, etc., because I did not reveal his name (notwithstanding my valid criticism and points) (and to be fair, other people called me a liar, too, when for instance, I said that I was not and had never been a political staffer, which he hasn’t). When Matthew’s firm created its blogging policy, his choice was either to use a fake name, use a pseudonym, or not write on the blogs. He chose, obviously, the pseudonym route, but he was never cowardly or dishonest, intellectually or otherwise. In fact, he stands by everything I ever said and never put words in my mouth so he could hide behind semi-anonymity (he thinks there’s a distinct difference between anonymity and pseudonymity, but I’ve said enough about that in the past); by the time he stopped blogging regularly, dozens of people knew who I was, so it really wasn’t that anonymous.

Matthew doesn’t remember exactly when he “created” EnWhySeaWonk; it was in the long gone comments of the original Politicker. Much later he came up with “Enrique W.S. Wonk” as a joke when Azi went to blog for another paper (he thinks it was “The 51st State” on the NY Sun’s site) and the paper came up with a policy that everyone had to post by name, even if it was a fake name! He thought being “Enrique” was clever, and played into his mixed-race background, so he kept it, although it was always a joke.

As some people have been dubious about my biography over the years, I will take this opportunity to say that Matthew never lied about anything as EnWhySeaWonk and state the following for the record (many being things people doubted at one time or another), he:
  • Is a native Brooklynite (Brooklyn Hospital, even);
  • Is half Irish and half Puerto Rican;
  • Is a life-long Democrat; and
  • Has never taken a paycheck from any government or candidate for office.
People especially doubted that he lived in all the places I “claimed” to have, however, he has lived in eight neighborhoods or towns in three states in 36 years, despite being a current and native-Brooklynite New Yorker:
  • He grew up since his birth on Eastern Parkway;
  • From ages 3 through 22 (and 29-30 during law school) he lived in the somewhat famous 135 Eastern Parkway or “Turner Towers,” where former U.S. Rep. Major Owen has lived since sometime in the 1990s. (he was there for Rudy’s insane crusade against the Brooklyn Museum, which is across the street).
Apart from Brooklyn, he also lived in:
  • Central New York for college;
  • Woodside, Queens for almost 2 years before law school;
  • Ann Arbor, Michigan for two years of law school (his degree is the University of Michigan); and
  • Chicago for a summer before coming back to Brooklyn (to his parents’ apartment on Eastern Parkway) to finish law school as a visiting law student at NYU.
After law school he lived in:
  • Clinton Hill about a year;
  • Bed Stuy about four years; and
  • His little condo in E. Williamsburg for almost three years.
So, again, I have no idea if anyone still cares, but that’s his (and my) story, it’s all true, as has everything he’s written on the blogs since EnWhySeaWonk was “born.” And, my opinions and views are no more valid today than they were two years ago when this site was launched and I was asked to be one of the founding bloggers because Ben and Gur respected my comments on the Politicker.
 
Coming out of the closet the first time was the most liberating thing Matthew ever did; this doesn’t even vaguely come close to that, but after all the intellectually dishonest name-calling he received from numerous bloggers for not being able to use his name and full biography on the blogs, it feels pretty damned good. And besides, it gave him the excuse to buy a new outfit and have it shipped from Germany for the above-photo (and yes, he realizes how incredibly gay that sounds).


Submitted by The Anonymater (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 11:07am.
Congratulations on the new job Matt.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 11:19am.
I knew that you were Matthew Carlin from things that you had said about yourself early on - ie, Turner Towers, and your parents' backgrounds.  I used to live there myself and thought that you, your brother and your parents were great people.  I recently read a piece about your father in the Times.  I hope they are all well.  You used to be so little, but you've sure grown up!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 1:16pm.
If someone asks to to stop attacking them, just because you can't see the attack does that mean you can't be sensitive enough to stop? What you have done to Rock here I will never ever forgive you for. You sir are a vile and vicious human being.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 1:18pm.
So if Rock runs into your sorry ass on the street he could now beat the crap out of you. Learn to box man.
Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 1:20pm.
If someone asks to to stop criticising them, just because you can't see the criticism does that mean you can't be sensitive enough to stop?

Okay, even before I changed the word "attack" to "criticism" it made no sense.

As to your forgiveness, somehow, Student of Rock Hackshaw, I will sleep tonight.

And thanks a lot to the first commenters; seeing my "old da" (as he refers to himself) on the front page of Sunday Arts section was quite a great thing.


Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 1:29pm.
2:18, you insult Rock, in an attempt to attack me (attack i.e., not legitimate criticism). I'm pretty sure Rock is not a violent person. Despite our disagreements, I think Rock is an intellectual; most intellectuals are not prone to violence, especially over written disagreements.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 2:05pm.

C'mon Wonk; that just ain't so; Rock is the Norman Mailer of the blogging world, so put on your boxing gloves--it's Norman v. Gore (Vidal) redux.


Submitted by JP (not logged in) (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:15pm.

As always, it's important to note that the anti-Wonk, pro-Rock comments come in flurries of about 3-5 minutes (take a look at other posts if you don't believe me) and all have the same cadence, typographical errors and writing style.  (Not) Surprisingly, this is roughly the same cadence, typographical errors and writing style used by Rock Hackshaw in his posts.  Seeing as we already have proof that Rock writes comments in his own favor, it's fair to imply that he's also writing these Anonymous comments.

Wonk, I applaud your bravery in unmasking yourself and wish you all the best in the new job.  I hope you continue fighting for truth.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:23pm.
Hey JP you piece of crap. Why don'y you crawl back in the hole you were hiding in? You started all the shit by lying and blaspheming Rock and now you reappear after the stuff died down when all that Rock predicted about New Hampshire and the Clintons have been proven right. You need to hide your face fool. You guys could only wish you wre as insightful as Rock Hackshaw. Both you and Wonk need to get a good ass-whipping.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:26pm.
There is no proof Rock writes comments in his own favor since he doesn't. I am one of many who will always do that for him asshole. I will defend him till I die. If I see you Wonk you will have a lot of exolaining to do to satisfy me that you not an undercover racist.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:27pm.
Zap
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:28pm.

Is Rock now a G-d?

And JP, it's not that Rock is writing this stuff; it's that Rock's style has become so influential.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:29pm.
Does a writer as talented as Rock need anyone to defend him?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:30pm.
Start looking behind you as you walk Wonk there are some fanatics who want piece of you.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:33pm.
Why did you drag Rock into all this? You are obsessing again Wonk and JP. The man has not commented on these threads for what seems like a week. You start the same shit all the time.  
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:38pm.
Hey Wonkette girlfriend from what I was told the editors were asked to warn you to leave all this Rock attack stuff no? You want to get banned from here? well keep doing what you doing. criticism and attack same difference
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:40pm.
THERE GOES GATEMOUTH WRITING IN ANONYMOUSLY AT 5:28 pm. Another fucking low lifer.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 4:41pm.
ROCK IS GREAT. GET OVER IT.
Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 5:02pm.

Neither Ben nor Gur have said anything to me about Rock or censorship in general, which is what Rock wants: If you disagree with him and don't use your full name, you should be censored. I haven't actually been in contact with Ben or Gur in months, other than an occasional "Hi how are you" with Ben on AIM.

As to "bringing Rock into this," a main point of this piece was that pseudonymous commenters make perfectly valid points. Rock called me a coward and "intellectually dishonest" for not using my name, nothwithstanding many valid points I made. Now he can't call me those things, and I've explained why I legitimately did not use my name before. I think my points were just as valid before I revealed my name as now. If people want to disagree with that, go ahead, but I did not "drag" Rock into anything. It is 100% indisputable that Rock called me a coward and intellectually dishonest for not revealing my name. There was no way for me to make the point about pseudonymous blogging without bringing up Rock's calling me a coward and other things.

And to the person or people who call me racist: show me! Where have I ever been racist? Disagreeing with a black person does mean I'm racist. I have black friends, I have campaigned for, given money to and urged by club to endorse black candidates for office (we endorsed Yvette and I gave the most impassioned speech for why we should have), I just actively recruited a black lesbian to Stonewall's board. I have issues with Rock, and he with me, no question. But that does not in any way make me a racist. So seriously, put up or knock it off.

To JP: Thanks.


Submitted by JP (not logged in) (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 6:10pm.

Eight (8) messages between 5:26pm and 5:41pm, again, all with the same writing style.

Thanks for making my point for me, anonymous Rock supporter.


Rock Hackshaw's picture
Submitted by Rock Hackshaw on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 7:07pm.
I specifically asked in my columns, threads, comments and implied in my last article, to stop this; to put an end to this; and still no change. You are some sick people. Why can't you leave me out of this? I deliberately stayed away and out of the stupidity but somehow you keep trying to draw me in. I refuse. Say whatever you want about me Wonk, and you to Jp. Have your fun. As somone once said: "The truth is plain to see". Can't you see that I have had enough of your silly lies and silly games. LORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Have I ever done something to any of you that could warrant this provocation?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 8:26pm.
...stop putting up those phony Rock posts. Yes, the one at 8:07 is  hilarious (but not HILLaryous), I'm laughing so hard I'm pishing, but it's really unfair to him to make him look so ridiculous, don't you think?   
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/16/2008 - 10:43pm.

Please...now that I see that JP is one of the people criticizing Rock, I know just where it comes from.  I caught JP in his own bit of racist drivel a few weeks back.   

 


Submitted by JP (not logged in) (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:30am.

Please, show me where I've ever said anything remotely racist?  If you knew who I were you would realize how ridiculously ignorant that statement is.

What I don't like is empty demagoguery and platitudes.  That's the reason I take the time to respond to the intellectually empty arguments that people use on this site.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:19am.
Is Rock Hackshaw an empty demagogue and platitudinous? Are his arguments intellectually empty? I would like a direct answer to my question PLEASE.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:31am.
Hey JP didn't you put out a sensationalist smear column on New Hampshire and then dissappear? Are you ready to admit Rock knew what he was talking about?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:46am.
Good luck Wonk. Hope it works for you. I can't do it. You did. Personally I know many elected officials who tell me they come on this site to see what Hackshaw wrote.Those in Brooklyn don't like him much but many readers do.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:49am.
He called the Iowa primary and has supported Obama from DAY ONE. ROCK HACKSHAW IS #1. ROCK HACKSHAW ES NUMERO UNO. They ciriticize him they read him all the time.
Submitted by Larry Littlefield on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 9:11am.
that your former private-sector employer believed it had the right to fire you for expressing your own opinions on your own time on unrelated public issues in a public forum, and that you believe you can do so under your own name now only because your current employer probably agrees with you.

Now if you worked for an elected official or agency and were commenting on the work of public officials or agencies I could understand. But a private company?

What does that say about free speech in general?

Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 9:25am.

It's more complicated than that. I read the policy more than two years ago and don't remember exactly what it said (and no longer have access to it) but it had more to do with making sure your opinions were clearly identified as not being those of the firm, etc. As my politics disagreed with most of the partners (although one of them is a huge Bush hater), the policy put me in a difficult position. I didn't want to identify my employer on the blogs and say "I'm not speaking for them." The policy was created more for posting on legal blogs (of which there are many), so it was an unintended consequence that it effected me. I, understandably, did not want to go to them and say "this has nothing to do with the firm, but I'm doing it." Does that make sense?

I guess the point is that they didn't literally say "don't blog, unless you agree with us" it was just that I felt that the policy would eventually get me into trouble when one of the partners decided to google me and found all this stuff.

I don't want it to seem like it was a horrible place--it was not. And, in fact, when I was quoted in the Times a few weeks ago, the head of my department came into my office and said "Hillary???? Hillary????" because the article said Stonwall endorsed her. I asked him "who do you want? McCain?" "No" "Romney" "No" "Who then?" "Obama, I would turn the knob for Obama." I was shocked, this guy is a conservative Republican, but if it's McCain v. Obama in November, he'll vote for Barack. So, you never know. In any case, it'll be nice working for lefties who as long as I get my work done, won't care about this stuff.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 9:25am.
JP you are full of it!!!  I called you on your BS and you didn't respond.  
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 11:03am.
What is all this fuss about Hack Rickshaw or whatever his name is.  I stopped reading his tedious endless posts years ago.  Who cares about him.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 11:33am.
12:03 pm You are a goddamn liar. You read his columns like we all do here and you know it. Take him off this site and we die from being bored.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 11:38am.
and it is obvious they care about him here since they are always writing  they write about him all the time and he gets the most comments of anyone writing here. So you are full of crap 12 ;03 pm. Another envious player hater you are.
Submitted by JP on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:21pm.

"Hey JP didn't you put out a sensationalist smear column on New Hampshire and then dissappear?"

No. Rock put out a sensationalist smear column on New Hampshire accusing the Clintons of electoral fraud. I responded to that column in an intellectually honest way and the response by Rock and his followers was that I'm a member of the KKK and a racist. I also didn't disappear. If you look at my posting history, I only post around 1-2 times every couple of months. I don't have the conceit or gall to think that everytime I have a thought it needs to be posted here for mass consumption.

"Are you ready to admit Rock knew what he was talking about?"

As far as New Hampshire, no. As far as his hideous assault on the Clintons, no. As far as being right on his support of Obama from Day 1, absolutely. If you look back at my original post, my opinion of Rock Hackshaw was a "distinguished and respected . . . political analyst and activist" He was right on with Iowa and with Obama's viability as a candidate. Kudos to him.

That doesn't excuse the intellectually empty responses to my valid points or the ad-hominem attacks on me for disagreeing with him. It also doesn't excuse the imbeciles who anonymously support him in the comments by threatening to fight people if they see them on the streeet or making baseless accusations about racism.

It's also funny to see how Rock will discount any opinion from an anonymous commenter so long as the comment is negative towards him. However, anonymous comments are fine when they come from his supporters. That's called hypocrisy folks.

There's one thing I agree with Rock on, there should not be any anonymous commenters. This doesn't mean that we should require everyone to register, but at the very least comments should include a partial IP address so that we know when we are being spammed by one person.

Also, I'm still waiting for proof of my racism.


Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:45pm.
JP I had that exact same thought. Everyone should have to register, and I was thinking some kind of encrypted IP address would show up whenever someone posts. It would make it clear whether there are a lot of people commenting anonymously or only a few. Of course, Rock's students would have to find another computer other than Rock's to use.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:53pm.
JP; where did Hackshaw accuse Hillary Clinton of election fraud? Again, give the column, date, paragraph and line. Don't  dissappear again. LMAO. From where I sit Rock was totally vindicated after his New Hampshire column. Go read it again. You didn't understand it then and you probably wouldn't understand it now. It was the most powerful column he has done to date on this primary. All the things he said have come to pass including Clinton losing the black vote, the Holy Grail, dirty tactics, push polling, the Clintons losing the war though winning the battle. That JP is political reporting. That is an example of political analysis at its best.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 12:58pm.
Of this "hideous assault on the Clintons" you claim Hackshaw did, can you list the LIES he told. Here again you are barking up Wonk's alley. Then you can't come back with anything of substance so you create stuff. People like Rock are never appreciated during their run, he is way above your collective heads. 
Submitted by JP on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 1:38pm.

So this commenter isn't Rock Hackshaw posting anonymously? "give the column, date, paragraph and line." "LMAO." These two things, along with the horrific punctuation, are the trademarks of Rock's writing style.

Fine, I'll feed the troll. The TITLE of Rock's hit-piece was "Hillary Clinton Stole the New Hampshire Primary and She Should Be Punished." I don't know if the verb "steal" has a different meaning in Brooklyn, but when someone talks about "stealing" an election, it inherently implies fraud and deceit. By saying that "Hillary Clinton Stole the New Hampshire Primary", Rock is implicitly writing that she engaged in election fraud.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 2:15pm.
Its me the monitor of the lying so called truth policemen like you and Wonk JP. I will harasss you until your life here is miserable. You are both liars and human excrement. "Stole" was a figure of speech you dumb piece of shit. Go back to high school you fool.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 2:21pm.
A man who teaches English in college has a trademark of "horrific punctuation". Are you a university profesor JP? BTW Rock is. You can't judge him can you? No wonder you cannot discern the simple ELEMENTS of writing and writing styles. The last post is correct you need to educate yourself before coming on the blogs. Go learn English grammar first.
Submitted by JP on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 2:50pm.

Oh yeah! Well I'm rubber and you're glue and anything you say bounces off me and sticks to you!

Seriously though, I'm done with this childish nonsense. The last thing I wanted to do was hijack Wonk's post for more of this ridiculous fighting. I think reasonable people can see who's right and who's wrong in this situation. I'm tired of ad-hominem and straw-man responses to valid points.

This is my last comment in this post. Wonk, congrats again on the new job and I applaud your bravery in unmasking yourself to face these cretins.


Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 5:05pm.

Neither you nor anyone else will ever run me off this site. Especially not someone anonymous, I mean, come on! You realize Rock thinks you should be banned from this site, right? He said it again in his most recent post, which he's been saying for 2 years, anonymous posters should be banned. Thus your anonymous defense of someone who thinks you should be banned makes you look pretty damned silly. In any case, if the goal is to get rid of me, you will fail, because you haven't even tempted me to consider the possibility of maybe leaving sometime in the distant future.

And to JP's point, I can't think of anyone else using IM speak in posting like "LOL" or "LMAO" other than Rock. I've always thought it was very odd that he did, but I guess it's good that he cracks himself up so much. 


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:34pm.
I thought that Rock taught History, not English.  i also thought that he used to teach as a substitute teacher in the NYC public shcools but lost his job.  He's probably an adjunct in some college which doesn't quite make him a Professor, now does it?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 6:57pm.
..is even scarier than Rock teaching English.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 7:02pm.
I am convinced that you Wonk, JP, and many many others here are obsessed with Rock. Why? You write these bland articles Wonk and the thread is dominated with comments about Rock that his defenders make to defend your attacks on him. Then you go right back and write another article. Why? Then another and another. Go back and look at your last few articles Wonk. You have been doing this from the day Room Eight started. Then many of the anonymous people who hate him come on to say things which make no sense, Praising him with their bows and arrows. It could only be race. Only racism causes this anger in this country. BTW he is the only black man writing here. Racists never see or admit to their racism. What else can it be? Racism and hate is convincing to me. Stop these articles Wonk. I have said it before you are killing this website. Move on. You are starting to look foolish. Yes I am one of his ex-students. He was my professor once.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 7:21pm.

JP,

    You don't remember stating that a certain person would support Obama solely because he was black and powerful and my response as to the many ways in which your statement was misguided and mildly racist?    You never submitted a response. Nevertheless, you said all that I need to know about you when I read this.   I don't care to know much more.
    

 

 


Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 8:27pm.
"I can't think of a reason why this is happening, so it must be racism." That's the dumbest argument I have ever heard on this blog, and that's saying a lot. You can't just call "racism," you have to show discrimination or hatred on the basis of race, which no one has been able to do to me, because, wait for it, wait for it, I don't discriminate or hate black people. My issues with Rock have nothing to do with his race or mine.
Submitted by Ben Smith on Sun, 02/17/2008 - 9:37pm.
Very nice, Matt. Now you can get the credit...and blame! Congrats.
Rock Hackshaw's picture
Submitted by Rock Hackshaw on Mon, 02/18/2008 - 10:57am.
I cannot with a straight face, make any claim as to knowing for fact that Wonk or anyone here for that matter, has been racially predisposed towards me. I only want this chitter chatter in the threads to end that's all. I would like to re-open my comment section for reasonable dialogue but until I feel this is over I will keep it closed.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.