Bullshittery in the David K Case
David K has a public apology on his blog. For some reason, some people have characterized it as a loss for David K.
These people are about as detached from reality as a Palin family reunion!
David K's apology doesn't represent a loss. It actually represents a win. Anyone who knows their ass from a hole in the ground knows that it was probably because of a settlement. It could've been much worse. David K could've been forced to pay big bucks.
I talked to lawyers - you know the people who actually know the law - and they said that if the people suing David K really felt like they had a case, they would've gone in for the kill. Instead, they settled for an apology.
Anyone who knows David K, knows this: he probably only apologized to put this behind him. You see, you can make someone apologize, but you can't make them mean it.
So what did the plaintiff really win out of the situation?
The answer is nothing.
Its not like David K can't blog any more. It's not like the blogger police came to his blog, put up crime scene tape and road-blocked his corner of the internet. The damn thing is around 40 words. Hell that's only slightly longer than a tweet.
When we were kids and would fight with one another, my mom always made us apologize. We never meant it. I'm still pissed at my sister for losing my GI Joes in an irrigation canal and I'm still not sorry for what I did to her dolls in retaliation. Once I'm certain the statute of limitations has passed, I'll explain what exactly I did to them. I live two states away, she'd have to drive 7 hours to come kick my ass for it anyway!
In my opinion this whole suit was an attempt to silence a voice critical of the two most powerful attorneys in town. They have the ability to say some very controversial things about elected officials, the police, other lawyers, and judges.
Some have pointed out to me a line that was written in a blog recently Theresa Caballero, who is a close associate of the plaintiff Stuart Leeds. In a preface to a letter written by both Caballero and Leeds, the following was written:
“Judge” Smith does not like blogs being written about him. Another example of ”Judge” Smith’s disturbing mind is that he has actually whined to the State Bar that my blogs are disrespectful to him.–Poor “Judge” Smith!
Some say the fact that the DK suit was about the fact that the plaintiff didn't like blogs being written about him is really ironic.
Personally, I think its hilarious. DK didn't lose, he won.
DK bumaye!
These people are about as detached from reality as a Palin family reunion!
David K's apology doesn't represent a loss. It actually represents a win. Anyone who knows their ass from a hole in the ground knows that it was probably because of a settlement. It could've been much worse. David K could've been forced to pay big bucks.
I talked to lawyers - you know the people who actually know the law - and they said that if the people suing David K really felt like they had a case, they would've gone in for the kill. Instead, they settled for an apology.
Anyone who knows David K, knows this: he probably only apologized to put this behind him. You see, you can make someone apologize, but you can't make them mean it.
So what did the plaintiff really win out of the situation?
The answer is nothing.
Its not like David K can't blog any more. It's not like the blogger police came to his blog, put up crime scene tape and road-blocked his corner of the internet. The damn thing is around 40 words. Hell that's only slightly longer than a tweet.
When we were kids and would fight with one another, my mom always made us apologize. We never meant it. I'm still pissed at my sister for losing my GI Joes in an irrigation canal and I'm still not sorry for what I did to her dolls in retaliation. Once I'm certain the statute of limitations has passed, I'll explain what exactly I did to them. I live two states away, she'd have to drive 7 hours to come kick my ass for it anyway!
In my opinion this whole suit was an attempt to silence a voice critical of the two most powerful attorneys in town. They have the ability to say some very controversial things about elected officials, the police, other lawyers, and judges.
Some have pointed out to me a line that was written in a blog recently Theresa Caballero, who is a close associate of the plaintiff Stuart Leeds. In a preface to a letter written by both Caballero and Leeds, the following was written:
“Judge” Smith does not like blogs being written about him. Another example of ”Judge” Smith’s disturbing mind is that he has actually whined to the State Bar that my blogs are disrespectful to him.–Poor “Judge” Smith!
Some say the fact that the DK suit was about the fact that the plaintiff didn't like blogs being written about him is really ironic.
Personally, I think its hilarious. DK didn't lose, he won.
DK bumaye!
Comments
Post a Comment
We encourage constructive community dialogue, debate, and conversation - but we reserve the right to refuse to publish a comment or delete a comment if we feel like it. Be a respectful adult. Use common sense.