Saturday, February 1, 2014


THE REALITY IS, THERE MAY BE NO ART OF BLOGGING - BUT SOME INSIGHTS NONETHELESS

People are increasingly visual.   Without Photoshop and adverbs and adjectives, it is hard for a blogger to meet the visual needs of the  readers.  Sometimes Photoshop does not work.  I was blown away by how many readers in their 20'sand 30's had no knowledge of the reference to the Gestapo or SS officers.  That visual was lost on them.

A lot of times I use words I myself do not like.  But when I proof my post, if the words give me an effective visual, words which I agree may offend, I stay with them because I know my readers want and need all of the visuals I can give them.

The creation of visuals is the biggest challenge we as bloggers face.

There are no rules as to what is and is not blogging other than writing on the Internet.  Highly profitable blogs are on the Internet and are quoted by the so called main stream press [for me they do not even exist any more]

All news and blogs which run on a profit are governed by money.  I have told this story before - the award winning writer Brooks Egerton of the DMN either went to NYU's school of Journalism or Columbia and lectured on his experience of covering the Dallas Diocese child molestation cases.  He spoke very openly about how the publisher or even board members would demand he remove a name from a story because that person was a friend of a board member or publisher or they spent a lot in advertising.  Sometimes it was simply out of fear of offending too many readers.

I represented a Frank Sharpe who came forward with the minutes from a meeting wherein the Bishop, the Chief Administrative Judge for the Region [lost his job over it], judges and a lot of lawyers were at what became known as the Tower Meeting.  The plan was to remove the sitting judge from the case before the hearing for New Trial and the Regional Administrative Judge would appoint a judge from East Texas who would grant the motion and void the $119 million judgment.  Well Frank being a  dumpster diver looking for evidence in his own case concerning fraud and his parent's estate, found the notes from the meeting.

Brooks Egerton told the story about how he was ordered to leave certain names out of his stories, after the story initially broke - for example Darryl Jordon - Chief Pro Bono Counsel for the Texas Bar in a case before the Supreme Court.  He was at the Tower Meeting - Me going after Mr. Jordon for Frank Sharpe ended my legal career in the courtroom. 

My point is, even the main stream press is guided by unethical standards based on money and protecting the guilty.  So why should it surprise us the blogs do the same thing?

I have said over and over again - I have no problem with Montoya taking the money - he is doing nothing more than what the press does.  My only issue is - people need to know who is paying him so they can consider that when he writes.

People can say I take money but I defy anyone to prove I have ever taken a penny other than the money which helped to fund my mobile Internet connection during the Villalobos trial.

My issue is - if people are lying about you or violating your rights I will stand with you.  McHale knows when Montoya was illegally confined for not paying child support I gave him the latest Texas Supreme Court decision on the issue which showed he was illegally being confined.  Sorola knowing nothing about the law allowed Montoya to be taken away to jail. Dominguez came in and got him out after I went to McHale with the current law.  The state must now prove not only you have not paid, but that also you did not pay but had the ability to pay.  The state never proved the latter and Montoya was released.

Did I get paid to help the Montoya who was wrongly being held - no - I did what I always do - I tried to right a wrong.  It is sad that people must lie and say I get paid when I help the victim.  No one believes Josefina Fisher Canales calling Yolanda Begum a fake is a crime.  Am I getting paid? - no - it has actually cost me a lot of money to help her.  It is that simple.

I do not doubt than when some of you liars accusing me of being paid will be the first to call me the day you are a victim of the system.

BIAS

Every blogger is biased. You cannot remove your life experiences from your perspective.  You try your best, but you cannot. In my Masters Thesis I defended the Supreme Court decision in Bowers v. Hardwick - upholding sodomy as a crime.  People were shocked because I was such a vocal gay rights activist.  But I spent a year reading well over a 100 Supreme Court decision and saw a pattern as to how the Court comes to recognize rights.  I  created an analytical model based on the pattern and then compared it to the Bowers decision and learned the opinion was consistent with that pattern.  There was no aberration in the process, so I wrote. Am I always this successful?- no

But people are surprised with me being part of the true left, I oppose abortion (the true left position) I support gun ownership (I do not own one and you may not bring one into my home)  I love watching my neighbor clean a deer hanging from the tree out front - he shows extraordinary respect for the deer when he prepares the meat for his family.  He knows that deer died to feed his family.  He is an artist in how he butchers the deer.

I defended the guy on Duck Dynasty with the simple fact reality TV should reflect the reality of who we are as  nation - an endless mosaic of ideas and values.

But I am certain that when it comes to defending people whose rights are being violated - I may get a bit antsy and push the limits of objectivity - but certainly no more than any news network. But then our rights our special and need a bit more pushing of the line.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Bobby it's not that you have your own opinion that bothers people it is the FACT that YOU call people IDIOTS when they don't see eye to eye on your opinion or views. For instance I don't agree you trying to defend Erin on her pocketing the waiver money or defending Ernie.

BobbyWC said...

First of all I over use the idiot thing - and this is not an excuse but an insight

I got am email yesterday from the person who asked the question about campaign limits. I told them I was sorry for my response - I now understand what they were after.

But I also explained I am tired of the 30 or so threatening posts which never get through, having garbage thrown at my home, and finding new dents and scratches on my truck nearly every time I go to the court house.

It gets old - and I ask that you understand how it is the ignorance which justifies this conduct towards me, my home and my truck.

But you are dead wrong when you say I call everyone an idiot who points out things I missed or challenge me.

The other day I agreed with the poster who said Valley Central should have disclosed John Blaylock represents Ernie Hernandez.

All of the time I make clear it is not the comment but how you say it - all of the time I tell people thank you for extending the discussion in a different direction from mine - why? because they make a professional argument instead of being insulting -

so on the issue of me calling everyone an idiot who does not agree with me absolutely no merit in your claim

But on over use of idiot or moron - you are correct

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You certainly enjoy pointing out the financial debacles that have befallen poor, old Montoya. How about telling us exactly how you make a living? I think that is a fair question as you present yourself as a pure altruist, you must have independent means.

BobbyWC said...

I have explained my connection to Dallas a millions times - tell me how many times do I have to explain it before it will be enough.

In the last two months or so I have discussed several hung juries in a molestation case. I have discussed winning in a medical liability case and who is covered and not covered.

So just give me a number how many times must I explain this before you stop your con job questions?

And for the record - I have always defended Montoya on the money and called it business and have always made clear he is doing nothing more than everyone else in the for profit press business.

Are you suggesting I am wrong for defending him on the issue.

I have never been paid a penny by anyone in Cameron county for anything - period - years ago I had clients in Hidalgo County, which is how I came to know Justice Hinojosa while arguing before the Court of Appeals.

Other than the donations for the mobile internet for the Villalobos trial I have never taken a penny from anyone in Cameron county and never will.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

Dude you obviously know nothing about the law and the ABA - they have no jurisdiction in Texas. I will not allow for a bogus distraction.

I am governed by Texas law and I will follow Texas law - plus I can in 6 months start practicing in Court again if I so choose - I simply refuse to sign the papers - so you are going no where - but with endless distractions because the one thing you cannot do is counter my arguments or documents so you use distractions.

You underestimate the intelligence of the people which is why con artists like you will never make any headway.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Nice piece! I agree with the first commenter that I feel you attack people who post a view different than yours. I've been following your blog for some time and have gotten to know how you respond and not take it personally. I do respect your work profusely! We can sometimes agree to disagree.

BobbyWC said...

I do not disagree that I overuse the word idiot, but I explained my frustration.

But it is entirely false to say I go after everyone who disagrees with me. All of the time I thank readers for extending the discussion in a different direction.

The issue the quality of the post - conclusory attack posts ad nothing but distraction - the distraction is what we cannot solve problems.

People who confront my specific claims nearly always get my praise even if they seek to take it in a different direction.

I have said over and over again this is when the BV works best - when someone takes a contrary view in a professional manner which actually extends the discussion.

But comments with insults and distractions will always be dismissed for what they are distractions from the issue

Bobby WC