A few weeks ago Joey defended Paul Tucker and took full responsibilty for missing the deadline to submit his poison-pen pre-election slam everyone adv. I have highlighted his comments in blue. Then today I see Joey's response (Joey's responses are in red) to the poster "Red Rover" and the Tucker story seems to have changed. Now it seems Joey is saying that Tucker did receive pressure and responded to it, thus leaving Joey out in the cold. So which is the true story Joey?? Is it that Tucker caved to pressure as you seem to be saying now, or is it that you screwed up your deadline as you claimed earlier? So what's the truth here Mr.Truth, Justice and the American way? Either you screwed up as you claimed earlier and missed your deadline or Tucker caved? If Tucker caved why did you cover for him? If it was your fault as you claim earlier why are you throwing Tucker under the bus now? I can wait for your answer.
RE: Paul Tucker/Union News sticks it to Pilchesky? For the record, Paul left two messages on my cell that he bumped up his deadline. It was my fault that I didn't check it in time. My wife and I were in Canada at the time and service was eratic. I did reserve the centerfold, as I had for recent elections, but Paul moved his deadline up due to the volume of political ads to give them all more exposure. Paul is a good man. Don't read anything into it. My fault, clear and simple. I'll make up for in another way. I know Paul to be a man of integrity. He'd be the dead last man for sale in this area.
John Taxpayer, I'm actually posting this from inside the prison. Warden Donate, being such a big fan of free speech, is allowing me to use her computer while she's out shopping. I was arrested for failure to conduct myself like a sheep, meaning I'm supposed to stand still long enough to be sheared by the Lynetts. No bail for me, the judge said I'm a flight risk because I recently renewed my Passport and I had a brochure of India in my pocket. They have me in a cell with some guy trying to convince mehe's in labor.
Paul Tucker got pressure, a lot of pressure. No Pilchesky. End of story. Pilchesky is just a little too over-the-top with his aggressive writngs.
Hmmmm, and now the truth is called aggressive?
Politics is as politics goes. The Union News is a union paper, a good one.
Agreed.
Pilchesky was turning it into a political lynching with those centerfold editorials of his.Tucker should have never let him put the first one in.
Lynching? Is that what it's called when you call the Lynetts the cancer of our community? Not strange to me that lynchings are what the Lynetts do best as the only voice in the area.And, then there's,"We endorse Bob McGoff". Because? Tucker couldn't keep me out if I want in. He has to let me advertise as I please. This last issue that was run without my ad, which placementI had reserved months ahead, can be looked at as political pressure. I don't think anyone can deny that it's out there. Am I happy about being left out? Of course, not, but it is what it is. We learn as we go, don't we?
At any rate, as you have seen for yourselves, no one is out of reach or reason.
I beg your pardon?
People still have to pay their bills and survive aroundhere. Pilchesky's crusade shouldn't jeopardize anyone's livlihood.
I've never asked anyone to compromise their livlihood, or anything else. I know the drill. Thank you.
-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 07:07, 2007-11-11