Once again I find myself having to defend myself against the rantings of a self-important blowhard. Carol McKinley calls me “Dan Rather” Bettinelli (oh, very original) and says that I am making up lies about Deal Hudson. “The CRISIS Board [sic] not tell Deal in no uncertain terms that he had to resign. That is Bettinelli Baloney. I don’t know where he is getting it from. Maybe Feurhard!” No, Carol, perhaps if you actually read the post that I wrote, I said that it is what the newspaper articles wrote. Am I to be held responsible for what other people report?
Here is what I said: “They will also report that certain members of the Crisis board have told Deal in no uncertain terms that he needs to step down as publisher.” “They” is the aforementioned newspapers. All I’m doing is saying what they’re saying. I took no shots at Deal Hudson and to my recollection have taken no shots at him. I don’t really want to be involved in this at all. But Carol has to have some bete noir for her fevered imaginings and I suppose I’m it.
As for her other accusations, I publicly apologized on my blog, and through an intermediary, to Fr. Scanlan for perpetuating the Boston Globe’s reporting error about him immediately after I was contacted by his intermediary. If Carol chooses not to read my blog every day or search the archives for such things, I can’t be held responsible. As for approaching her about “stealing my work”, I have the emails to prove it and am considering posting them for all to see. I usually hesitate to do such, but if she’s going to attack my veracity, I will defend myself.
Once again, I do not have a public opinion about the Deal Hudson situation. I posted what I did last night from what I had been told about the content of the forthcoming articles. I was not reporting anything myself nor vouching for their veracity, as I made very clear in the last sentence of my post!!
I know you’re problem, Dom. You’re too well-known in the Catholic blogosphere. This is how you know you’re being noticed, when Carol “Nobody-expects-the-Spanish-Inquisition” McKinley goes after you at the slightest pretense. According to her, I’m some sort of apostate or heretic or just pretending to be orthodox when in real life I’m not, something like that.
Maybe that’s her car in front of my house every night, but I can’t be sure. Could be one of my many ex-wives.
People need a reality check.
It’s a good rule of thumb to treat a Blog like a BBQ in someone’s backyard. If you don’t like the cookin’ stay home, it’s okay to be provocative in speech but just remember that the host has the right to kick you out of his backyard or at least ask you to not defame him in his own backyard.
Some Blogs serve up hotdogs and burgers. This one is like getting shrimp and lobster.
Dom, has it ever crossed your mind that the only reason The Mouth libels you is because she knows you’ll link to it and thus, increase her traffic?
Dom:
I don’t envy you in the slightest. Every instinct tells you to ignore her, but her charges are so outrageous (comparing you to a purveyor of a known forgery?) that silence isn’t an option.
As Zell Miller said, in the old days you could have challenged her to a duel.
Hey, good idea Dale!
Laptops at 10 – Dom…?
In the old days you couldn’t challenge a lady to duel, however.
Dom:
In the immortal words of Groucho….