Mar 12, 2012

Special Notice

While I hardly ever moderate comments (all readers are responsible for their own), I've removed a comment today allegedly left by someone named Brad Bacom.

Instead, I'll post it here with a caveat: this may or may not be the real Brad Bacom:
It amazes me how bold some people are while hiding behind the name "Anonymous". Maybe some people are ashamed of their name. Or maybe they want to make accusations without any evidence or truth so they have to hide their identity and thus not have to stand behind their slurs. That smacks of cowardice.

Brad bacom
I have no way to verify the origin of this comment  and I'm a little skeptical that someone would reference their last name in lower case.

As of 2009, Texas law prohibits impersonating someone else on the internet with the intent to harm, threaten, intimidate, or defraud. Read more about this law here.

One of the fundamental freedoms upon which this country was founded is the right of anonymous criticism without fear of reprisal. This concept is so critical to the nature of our republic that's it's codified in the Bill of Rights as the very First Amendment for a reason.

The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed this right in numerous cases, and we've fought our own action in the Texas Supreme Court to preserve this right. Read more about In Re John Does 1 and 2 here.

I'm certainly sensitive to the opinion purportedly expressed by Mr. Bacom.  I've frequently busted Philip for manufacturing quotes from "anonymous sources who wish to remain anonymous."  In other cases, he publishes gossip as fact with a reckless disregard for the truth.

Philip has harassed those who  criticize him under their own names. I've documented several such cases, and in a recent example, he's apparently threatening to sue people who leave negative comments about his poorly written and factually deficient book. Other incidents involve my own readers who left comments under their own name in the past.

Using one's real name doesn't make an argument any more credible. The Federalist Papers provides one such example. A best seller in the last decade, Primary Colors, is another example.

For the best example, though, see the Southeast Texas Political Review. Philip is the idiot who didn't introduce any evidence at his own evidentiary hearing to back up his outlandish claims. 

Since Sam and I have incurred legal costs of approximately $150,000 to preserve your rights to anonymously criticize the town idiot on this blog, please honor the freedoms afforded us by the U.S. Constitution and refrain from using your real names.

However, with freedom comes responsibility when exercising your First Amendment rights. It's entirely okay to say that you think Philip is a liar, but it's illegal to make up something that you know to be false about Philip and post as fact.

The bottom line is that PRK provides so much fodder that one doesn't need to make anything up - when it comes to Philip R. Klein, the truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

Sincerely,

Gus Pillsbury

P.S. to Philip Klein: It's too late to make nice, Philip. We have a list of demands, which you can find posted on the Sam The Eagle Political Review here.

6 comments :

Anonymous said...

Damn right, Gus!

Anonymous said...

Brad Bacom my Butt

Anonymous said...

Who's Brad bacon and why does his name matter?

Anonymous said...

From the reviews for Phil's book:

"There were a thousand aspects to this story, but they were pulled together at the end and made into a credible case. It was a fun, fast paced read. I'm looking forward to the movie. I bet Klein could play the lead."

If Klein plays the lead, they'll have to release this in widescreen format only.

Spurger Burger said...

Is he writing his own book reviews too? Actually, that seems to be a little too well written to have come from PRK...

Anonymous said...

Just found your website and this is funny stuff. Keep harpooning the whale