- Got tips? Send them to tips (at) r8ny (dot) com
- Blog on Room Eight
- sign-up to receive a daily digest by email
- Advertise on Room Eight
- Login / Sign-up
Post-election analysis (40th City Council District) - Finale (Part Two)
A funny thing happened on the way to part two of this column: it died. Beyond finishing up my post-election analysis with some political gems, I had hoped to bring some nuggets of insight into what has been happening to this district in the past 16 years; but at the last minute I realized that there is a level of futility to all this. Most of the residents-and also most of the voters- of this district are really not interested in any of this. Political issues aren’t really salient to their everyday lives. This is why our inept black-elected officials aren’t held accountable. Look, I didn’t just come to this realization today; I have been aware of voter apathy and “citizen-civic-irresponsibility” for decades. I am no virgin to politics; I have been involved in politics all my life. Contrary to my detractors, I have been fuelled to political activism, not because of money, glory or power, but because of my roots and also because of my idealism. So instead of sending my editors a column on this past election, I sent them instead one month’s notice. Yes, in one month I will be leaving Room8. For your edification, I believe that Room 8 will be celebrating its first anniversary on March 26th of this year. You see, last year I lost the argument amongst the pioneer bloggers here, as to whether to allow people to comment anonymously on this site. I (for one) wanted people to sign up with their name, address, phone numbers, e-mail, etcetera, so that those who cast aspersions from behind their cowardly masks would have no vehicle for their pusillanimous subterfuge. Any persons who wanted to comment had to expose themselves to public scrutiny. After losing that initial battle, I told my editors that I would revisit that argument in a year. So now I am. I am more certain than before that this policy should be introduced. Week before last (Wednesday) a large snow storm hit NYC catching me in the midst of flying out of town to attend a backgammon tourney on the pro-circuit. Since I happen to play chess, backgammon and scrabble on the pro-am circuit, I am sometimes flying off to various places at strange times. At the airport I met someone who was a fan of my blog on Room8, and at the tourney I met another person (Republican, not from NY) who professed to be a fan of my columns also. This is nothing new, since I have encountered fans from as far away as Europe recently. It is obvious that Room 8 is read far and wide, but no matter how many profess to be positive about my writings, there are a few people (some of my detractors) who lack the moral courage to support my success without a certain measure of envy. They shouldn’t be allowed to perpetually attack me behind their “anonymous” masks. I put myself on the line when I take my positions openly; so should they. For the past few days -ever since I did Part One of this article- I have been bombarded with hits on my lifestyle, integrity, character, morality and the like, from (as usual) “brave” anonymous people. Today, one even suggested that I was gay (boy, EnWhySeeWonk and Gatemouth sure would have a laugh at this one). Most of these vitriolic comments have been zapped by the editors (and I had hoped they wouldn’t have done that), since some were really over the top. For posterity I had kinda wanted them to stay on the site, but like many times in the past both here, and on other blog sites, the editors in their infinite wisdom chose to zap them. Thus if you follow the threads in a few of my columns you will see many “zaps”. If my editors allow them to roam free it then continues to takes away from the seriousness of this site. It’s time to take away their masks; they are no different to KKK night riders. For the record: I have never shaken down any campaigns, nor have I asked any electeds for jobs (with the exception of Charles Barron and James Davis- both of whom paid me as a consultant). I have asked some electeds to circulate my resume, but over the years I have never even gotten an interview in this regard, so what does that tell you/lol. And I only did this because I know I have a lot to offer any elected, given my integrity, character, experiences and qualifications/ credentials; and at the end of the day and night, its all about “public service”. Further, I don’t approach campaigns for political work, most times it’s the reverse (they approach me based on some recommendation or such). Many times I refuse to charge fledgling campaigns for my advice or recommendations. Let’s go further; I am not gay -never was- and at this stage of my life I could conclusively say that I will never be. To each his/ her own; but that’s not me. In fact, beyond having the human right to choose whatever sexual-lifestyle one wants, I don’t particularly agree with such a choice for reasons I choose at present to keep to myself. I could only wish a person well in their choices, that’s all. Over the next three weeks or so, I may revisit the 40th council district and ask some hard questions of the political leaders there; I will also do the same for some other districts in Brooklyn. I could only hope that those who choose to enter into some type of dialogue will use facts and accuracies in attempting to defend their positions, not venomous lies meant only to intimidate and distort; as Shakespeare once said: “truth will out”. Black- Brooklyn has been horribly represented for decades; one day some of these so-called leaders will be called to account. If the editors choose to change their policy then I will (re)consider writing more articles here; if not, then those brave “anonymous” commentors won’t have me to kick around anymore. To me it’s obvious that these commentors aren’t interested in intellectual discourse (they aren’t developed enough in that regard anyway), since they never use my arguments as reference points, they just perpetually try to ridicule me and the like. I have too many things to do with my life beyond all this. There are too many places to go, and many many people to see, greet and meet. Brooklyn’s politics is getting boring anyway; the voters don’t really seem to care for imaginative high-quality representation, and they seem to expect electeds to lie all the time. It’s really tragic. That is not the Part II you planned Rock. Why?
"Today, one even suggested that I was gay..." You label this one of the "victrolic...hits on my lifestyle, integrity, character, morality" that you have been subjected to. Rock, we get the fact that you're straight. But why do you continue to equate being gay with having a character flaw? And even if you hold this view, why on Earth are you making it public for a second time? I've enjoyed reading your columns, but the fact that you use them to preach hate makes me less interested in what you have to say about anything else. I respect your right to hold views with which I disagree, much as I wish you didn't. But at a minimum, since you have a forum, I hope you'd have the decency to not insult the "morality" of your readers based on who they love. I agree with you that all mames should be posted but think of the big picture. They don't know you and anything that is said to defame you is just noise.
Keep you message strong and think of the manyn not the few nuts.
 I have left close to 100 articles here for full view, can you PLEASE show me- quoting article(s), date(s) and verse(s), etc.- where I have ever preached hatred towards gays (or anyone for that matter). I await your reply.
Here lies the problem (to me): many gays claim to respect other peole's right to their views, but I find mostly intolerance for those who disagree with the life-style choice.
I have said here many times (and on other blogs too) in the threads and also in the posts, that gays have every right to advocate for changes in the law; and that they have every right to be fully protected by the law, from all the atrocities that they have historically faced.
Being gay doesn't make you more (or less) human then being straight or whatever. I just feel that identifying yourself by your sexual preference is strongly suggestive of other underlying issues with "sexuality".
Rock, You are smart enough to know that anyone who puts himself out there is subject to critique. Some people love you, some hate you, some are neutral and respond to your words, either kindly or harshly. That's what it means to be in the public domain, and you know that. Your life sounds very busy and rich, and if that is your reason for stopping your blogs then I support you 100%. If you are doing it because we are not identified then you just don't get it. People have many reasons for not wanting to be public. Doesn't necessarily mean that they are bad .. just means that they have their reasons. I wish you well in your future. If everyone who commented had a psuedonym aimed at protecting their full identity (for whatever the reason), that would be fine with me, as long as we know through their e-mail, full name , address,telephone number, etc. (which could be confidentially kept on file by the editors)who they were. This would surely minimize the types of unnecessary comments and abuse to which many of us have been subjected over the years. It would also make for improved quality of the responses.
Seriously. There are anonymice on every blog, and nobody gives a flying f**k what they say. You're basically the only reliably interesting source for black political news out there; it would be a crying shame if that were cut off because some people have bad manners.
Honestly, I would not like to divulge my identity on these blogs, because they usually descend into name calling. It's the unfortunate nature of the medium. I haven't always agreed with you, Rock, but as the year went on, I grew to respect your opinion more and more. It's too bad you have decided to step down, but I hope you start your own blog. If people really want to comment, they could email you. The irony is that nobody cared about the 40th until Eugene's residency flap. Friends of mine who usually don't care about the City Council were getting all up in arms, so I'm not surprised people have given you grief for whatever your position might be. The rise of the Caribbean community (or rather, communities) has the potential to make things very interesting in Brooklyn and beyond. I look forward to disagreeing with you many times in the years to come. Rock, I agree that people ought to post using their names, as it lends more consequence to the things they say. My last name, Wallner, is on all my posts. But I also understand why people would choose to post anonymously, because you give up privacy. You have a heated dialogue on a board and your name is on your posts, and somebody decides they don't like you and they google you and find other personal information using your name and other things you've posted, or even find your name in the phone book and call you up (this happened to me once back when I had a listed phone number in the brooklyn white pages) Everything is a trade-off. Look at what happened to those two female bloggers who went to work for the Edwards campaign. Suddenly they work for the campaign, and enemies of the campaign googled everything they posted in the past under their own names. Old opinions. Things they could have posted ten years ago when they were much younger, or maybe just thought differently. But to the person googling the information, all those posts were used against them as if they were some current diatribes. Those two girls had to quit their jobs, otherwise conservative negative research folks would have been digging up their old posts on this board and that for months. Their privacy was gone. Now had they posted anonymously on those old boards, their comments would have been just as valid, but they wouldn't have been taken out of context and used against them years later. Some people flat out won't say what they are really thinking, or make the kind of unguarded comments that would really contribute to the dialogue, if they have their names attributed to the comments. Because they fear the consequences. It is like newspapers referring to "unnamed sources" instead of giving names. Everything is a tradeoff. There is no right or wrong. I would suggest Rock, that you'd be giving up a lot more than you'd gain by leaving. You have been gaining influence in the community with your posts here. You can contribute more to the local dialogue than a lot of other people, by doing columns for this board then if you didn't, and that is a good tradeoff. Isn't that worth the grief you get from detractors? For quite some time I have read your blogs and, truth be told, I agree with you 95% of the time. If you decide to not write this column anymore, the Brooklyn community would surely miss your blogs because plain and simple, you keep it real, speak the truth and you are letting it be known that most of our elected officials are not taking care of the business of the community. Please reconsider leaving... the 41st District needs you to continue to tell it like it is. I proudly write my name as I have nothing to hide and wish that everyone else who responds would do the same. Pamela M. Junior First Maurice, then Gatey, then me and now you? (And, ahem, on a side note, where the fuck is Adam?). Oh jeeze, who's left RWallerny and Politiko? (enough already with the Chuck stalking). I've noticed that you are far to sensitive to what anonymous people have to say about you and your stuff--you should not let them win by retiring because of it. I've been called a lot of bad names on here, but my reasons for leaving have nothing to do with that. You have to respond when you think you can change some minds and ignore them when you can't. But giving up because of them? I don't think that makes any sense. I hope you'll reconsider. 1) You are upset because you think people are pissing in your yard? Tough shit. It is the most thin-skinned thing I've ever read from a tough talking reformer. The slander and cheap shots are unfortunate but how much credibility do you think they have? It says more about your insecurities that you are willing to be scared from the forum by anonymous critics. If you want to put opinions out there, be prepared to have them criticized - here or elsewhere. 2) You seem to think that being pro-gay-rights is somehow magnanimous because you don't approve of "the lifestyle" and think there is some kind of equivalency because gays are "intolernant" of your judgment that they have "underlying issues." Again, you are wrong on both counts. Identification of self as gay is a role forced upon homosexuals. It is others that choose to limit rights for gay people; the primary right necessary for equality is to be able to proclaim membership in a group without stigma - the rest is just details. I am particularly disappointed because as a new resident in the 40th I looked forward to reading columns by a veteran of the rough-and-tumble politcs of the neighborhood that had real insight into the history of the changing demographics. Your first election post was filled with the kind of background that is important for anyone that cares about the 40th and I wanted to hear more. Instead, because you didn't get the commenting rules you wanted you are going to take your bat and ball and go home. It's a pity. From the day Room8 opened up for buisness Rock has been leery about the annonymous attacks. It was one of the reasons why he was reluctant to join the Room8 blogging community, and he said this many times. It was happening before he got here. There were those who attacked him for talking out on race issues. Then thosae who attacked him for his position on gay marriage. Then those who attacked him for his friendship with Charles Barron and Maurice Gumbs.Those of us who follow his writings and have talked to him understand his concerns. To the person who mockingly said that this is the 25th time he has brought this up, you are correct, but you still don't get it. Rock isn't whining, he is too fiesty a person to whine, he just believes that there is a simple solution which is to let peolple use their names to comment, and have their info on file so they can be contacted or outed if needed. If people knew that they couldn't hide behind the masks will they do the stuff they do. I wish the editors would have allowed the thread to continue yesterday. One person called him a thief, another a liar, one said he attacks women, and one even said he tried to blackmail the Eugene campaign for money. All these scurrilious accusations were made behind the cover of anonymity. There are those who read this blog casually and would believe what they see. The kinds of stuff they said were libelous. the only thing they didn't call him was a child of God. I believe that the Clarkes or their supporters are behind this attempt to silence Rock. What else can I think. I would like him to stay here and I wish the ownwers of room8 and the editors fix this problem once and for all and for good.
If anyone follows the threads on any of the stories on Mathieu Eugene , you can see the abuse of both Rock and Ben Smith. Go see for yourself.
I know Rock personally. I have been a friend for years, he is a man of integrity, who is fearless and committed. If he says that he doesn't need this shit, then he doesn't , that's all. It's not about taking his ball and going home, it is about constructive dialog.
I came late to this site after a friend suggested I go see the stuff this man Rock Hackshaw was writing here. I have read every single one of his contributions on Room8, it is all powerful stuff, especially the pieces on Barack Obama. He is a brilliant writer. I have heard Charles Barron say that. I concur. Go read the ones on somnambulism. Add the Supreme Court.
Yesterday someone called Rock a political whore. Would any of you who are criticizing him now, like to be called that without any corroborating facts to support such an assertion? Worse yet when the man has spent a lifetime involved in issues and causes for no monetary compensation or rewards. When Maurice Gumbs was out in the wilderness critiquing the democratic party machine in Brooklyn, and also the corrupt court system and corrupt judges, they called him similar names. History has shown us that Gumbs was absolutely correct about the corruption. Why do you think they have been attacking Rock on the blogs for years? I rememeber when he managed Joan Gill's campaign in1996 against Clarence Norman, he never charged her a dime. Same when he coordinated for Reginald Bowman , twice in Brownsville, he never charged a cent. Is that a political whore? He sure fooled me. I hope he stays, better yet, I hope room8 fixes it so that he can stay. I agree with you as someone who has been attacked for no good reason anonymously in these blogs it can be a bit disgusting to say the least. But because of people like you who give a great level of thought and history to your articles they have allowed me to get by that and continue reading them. I hope you reconsider because it would be a real loss to lose you in this blog world. I hope some of the people here realize how exhausting all the attacks on Rock can be, even for a seasoned veteran. Each one of his columns attracts attacks, many of which have nothing to do with the content of his reports or of his opinions. A person can only take so much. Given the insider nature of this blog, I can certainly see how requesting personal information would clear out a lot of the crap that spawns in the comments. I wouldn't know which side of the fence I'd be on in that argument, but, since I'm merely a 21 year-old nobody that became interested in city/local politics after interning for my councilman, I wouldn't mind volunteering that information. I will add my voice (however little it may be worth) to the calls for Rock to stay, one way or another. But still, I can see how the vitriol aimed at him could wear a person down. After all, it's abuse like that that keeps many people with the interests of the community at heart away from politics. That's my $0.02, anyway. one thing that should be banned from this board IMO are "farewell posts" This isn't the first time Rock has posted saying he was going to leave or threatening to leave. I hate "farewell posts" where some longtime poster posts solely to say, "this board has turned to crap, the rules of this board suck, I'm tired of this place, I'm leaving" .etc whatever But what happens is the poster ends up staying around a few days or weeks, to read this post and let posters grovel, say how much they'll miss him, beg him to stay. Then he stays once his bruised ego has been soothed. I know of boards that actually ban farewell posts, because too many of these posters end up not leaving, and in most casers the posts are entirely self serving. As Rock's post is. Rock titled this post as part II of his post election analysis of the recent council race, and most of us looked forward to reading it. But it was not part II. It was a "farewell I'm leaving and here's why" post, but put up under the "part II" banner to get more readers. It was self serving. (Rock you should really re-title this item since it is not in fact part II.) Also self serving is giving "thirty days notice" Why do that? It comes across as Rock wanting his ass kissed and ego stroked to stay and he is telling us in advance how many days we have to do it. I love Rock's posts. He's a great contributor. I hope he doesn't really want to leave. But if you are going to leave Rock, just leave. Don't put everyone on this guilt trip for a month, the moderators who won't change the rules and the posters who flame you. Don't make this big splashy production over your leaving with this "thirty days notice" bullshit. Just leave. Farewell posts should be banned. Anonymous logins should not be. I agree with you to some degree when you say: "Farewell posts should be banned. Anonymous logins should not be." Farewell posts giving 30 days notice seem to be a bit strange. Wahen Maurice and Gatemouth and Wonk left, it was done in a different way - I'm finished. Goodbye. That's more like it.
Actually, I really hoped Errol Louis would have said goodbye. He is a real prick. Maybe we can all sign petitions to have Rock replace Errol at the shitty Daily News Blog that endorsed Jennifer James.
Rock can not stand the heat. He does not want to be exposed as someone who has begged politicians for jobs. Rock there is nothing wrong with asking someone for a job. You know alot about politicians and they also know alot about you.
I never did understand why you or other bloggers would put up with the garbage spewed by anonymous haters unless it was part of a paid day job. Like you say, who needs it? Half of the anonymous idiots want to BE you, the other half wouldn't recognize an original thought if you handed it to them, as you so often did.
Take, for example, the genius at 3:12 who doesn't understand that the Daily News editorial board, not the blog, makes endorsements. Hopelessly stupid.
Try thinking of them as the digital equivalents of Larry Hogue, that sad, insane homeless man who used to shout abuse at passers-by in Manhattan -- occasionally annoying, but not worth taking seriously at all.
Rock, I am saddened by your decision. Your voice is needed -- as are all independent voices when it comes to our politics. Someone called me yesterday to yell at me about a letter I wrote to the Brooklyn Paper criticizing two elected officials for their namby-pambyness regarding Atlantic Yards issues, particularly eminent domain abuse. This person repeatedly advised me not to "alienate" elected officials whose help I may need one day. That's the problem here, Rock. Everyone is so worried about pissing people off that they allow grave injustices to take place. Yes, we must all pick our battles. But the political environment in New York City is not one that fosters real debate by community leaders of any sort. And, even more sadly, money defines what the constituencies read and hear. So we need you, Rock, whether we like you or not, whether you like us or not. I do agree with your recommendation that posters provide limited yet verifiable information regarding their identity -- at least to the backoffice folks. There needs to be a deterrent to hate speech and gross irresponsibility. Beyond that, however, you have chosen a mode of expression that requires open debate, even heat, to remain of interest to many of us. I, for one, find everything you say to be of value. Hang in there, Rock! Chris P.S. -- I'm waiting for someone to accuse me of ending Rock Hackshaw's tenure with Room 8 ... C'mon! Anyone? Don't you just WANT to? I know you're out there! Sorry Errol but those comments are true elitist snobbery, the words of someone who thinks he's better than most people because of where he works or because of his own accomplishments. That homeless man, Larry Hogue, is a human being. A real person whose comments are as relevant as anything Errol Louis has ever written. He has lived and survived and suffered every bit as much as you have, and what he has to say about life has just as much relevance as what you have to say. I have done volunteer work with homeless people at times, and you try to convince people down on their luck that they have worth, dignity and value. Not just who they are but what they think. This gets hard to do when they then turn around and read elitist snobs like Errol Louis go out of their way to say, in words or in actions, that he is better than them. Only the beautiful people, the intelligent elite are worth taking seriously right. Larry Hogue isn't? Errol Louis has just proved that he is not a true liberal progressive. He could try to understand the Larry Hogues of the world, to emphathize with them, to actually HEAR their words. But he is too good for that. Some homeless guy on the street, or some anonymous poster, they aren't worth Errol's time of the day. Give Errol only the beautiful people, the vip's, the intelligent academia whose words are really worthwhile. He thinks he's too good to post here, that there are few people here worthy of, being good enough, to respond to, and now he is pleased that Rock might be copping the same attitude. It is pathetic. Your job Rock is to expose and show people the light. Read below. Socialist? Well Errol louis is a card carrying member of the communist party. Look up his writings on how he suggests deporting all rich people out of this country via Ellis Island and waving the past. Posted by: Red Pinko at February 18, 2007 09:50 PM Reprinted by permission of Ny Daily News Blog. Interview with Errol Louis, By David Dyssegaard Kallick One place I think there needs to be a massive intervention is in the question of the maximum wage. When you hear that Bill Gates is worth $100 billion - it would take a person making $50,000 two million years to make that much - you've got a situation that is out of control. One place I think there needs to be a massive intervention is in the question of the maximum wage. When you hear that Bill Gates is worth $100 billion - it would take a person making $50,000 two million years to make that much - you've got a situation that is out of control
I" don't think they would. We should test them. But If people are going to defect so radically from the social contract, get rid of them [laughs]. Don't have them hanging around like parasites. I'll go down to the docks at Ellis Island and wave goodbye to them. " One thing that bothers me about the flaming Rock gets from all these anonymous posters, is that I can't help thinking some of it has to do with the fact that he puts his picture on all his posts. These anonymous posters see who Rock is when he posts. And it gets him flamed more than a lot of others here who post just as much but don't put their pictures up on their posts. Am I offbase at what I am getting at? If he didn't have his picture up there, and I'm sad to even think this, would he get flamed less?
The amount of your flame......"fame" id directly proprtional to the amount of feathers that you ruffle and is an indication of the good or bad job you are doing. This post has over 34 responses. Hardly any other posts or writers get more than 4 or 5. See for yourself Rock. Also can you tell, looking at ips or whatever, how often anonymous posters are in fact posters with ID's who are also posting anonymously. I know this happens. Some of these posters are not really anonymous.
Rock, you will surely be missed. Your political insights are refreshing and usually dead-on!
But, with comments like those posted by rwallerny and the anonymous person who attacked Errol Louis at 3:12, who could blame you for wanting to beg off??? I think the personal attacks on the bloggers are disgusting and add nothing to the dialougue. One big problem is that people do not read the post before they offer mindless dribble as a comment (what a concept!). Oh, and I totally agree with Louis, the venom is because those anonymous commenters really want to be you! And yes, rwallnerny, the blog operator can tell where the comments are coming from, whether or not "anonyomous" is a senate or assembly staffer or with a media outlet, which you will see often on these blogs. Stiff upper lip pal. After all, Rock, you hardly knew me. LOL Owens is a sanctimonious fraud. Make a joke out of it, but you are as convincing preaching free speech as Wilt Chamberlin would be as an adovcate for chastity.
What happen to Eugene and his daily press announcements when he moved into his apartment? The story is not about Rock leaving but why he did not write the part II about the 40th that he promised. Ben do change Room 8 policy this entire Rock thing could be part of a larger coverup to seat Eugene.
Rock: Here's the bottom line. Do not let anyone chase you away from writing this blog. The mere fact that your opinions, "per se" are not challenged but your character has been assailed means that "they" don't have a foot to stand on. You're absolutely right. Central Brooklyn has not has it's interests well represented given the seniority of many or our electeds. Many of us have family or job obligations that preclude us from being in the room. You've helped to fill in the blanks so that people who live and love our communities can make the elected accountable. My advice. Nah run from the cowards. There is no disinfectant like daylight. This is the second or third time during the past year that Rock has raised the issue of the bloggging etiquette of anonymous bloggers. After the debate I am now convinced that he has done this deliberately. He ought to tell us why. if you take away anonymous bloggers it will be boring.
If some anonymous blogger accuses you of multiple felonies (like they did against Rock) won't you be angry. Many people believe any and everything they read. There is no defence against someone attacking you in the dark, it is like being blindsided or shot in the back. Rock is absolutely correct here. Let us make them all reveal themselves. Betcha all the negative stuff ends. This site should be exclusive for only those who are serious about politics.
It's only fitting that Rock would close out with controversy. As he would say:"LOL".
For those who don't know "LOL" means = "Laughing Out Loud".
I am wondering if Rock isn't doing a "Roflmao"as we debate this issue. (Rolling on the Floor Laughing My Ass Off).
Either way, he has raised a serious issue in the world of political blogging. Let the debate go forward. Over the first year existence of Room 8, guess whose threads got the most comments? I don't have to tell you that on average Rock's writings get more comments than all other writers here. This has been consistent all year. With Maurice Gumbs, Gatemouth and Wonk now all gone from this site, can Room8 afford to lose Rock?
Take it from someone who knows, Rock is just like his father. His dad was a provocateur when he was in politics, intelligent and controversial.
Rock, why do you have to leave because some people post as anonymous. You should be able to handle it and also have the intellect to prove what they say as false whether you know who they are or not.
Rock, are you going to continue part II or not, please let us know. I honestly wish you would because it would make you more credible. It is not a good sign when people start something and do not finish. In your case it would mean that what they say is true and you are not up to the challenge because you can not challenge the truth. I haven't finished part three on my Barack Obama series either; so what's the rush? It's my perogative. I may or may not write here again; who knows? I don't; and it doesn't bother me. I know who I am, and what I am about.
Look, to all of you fools out there who are intent on trying to terrorize me here, I bring 34 years of credibility in NYC politics to the table. I have enough influential and exceptional people who I can draw down on, to verify this. So have your fun, and enjoy youselves. I could only guess / assume that your lives are so empty, that trying to mess with me must give you all a rush and / or an orgasm. How trite and pathethic.
I may or may not write here again; who knows? I don't; and it doesn't bother me. I know who I am, and what I am about. Rock, you may or may not write here again. Rock you are evading the issue. And it makes one think that the things that were said might be true. Cut out the drama you are acting like a drama queen. The 34 years that you bring to the table are they 34 years of asking for nothing in return or 34 years with a price tag. Yvette darling will you please lend Rock a pair of your shoes?
Post new comment |
Hot Topics
Gov Wire
Political Update
Google AdsSearchRoom Eight Extras |
delicious
digg
Wink!