Alihandero wrote on Nov 18, 2008 8:05 PM:
" An excellent example of an ad hominem personal attack on the "anile" MS. Lopez by a local Obama supporter and generous cash contributor. Not your average Joe Democrat, so to speak. Who can afford 200 to 300 dollar a month donations anyway? Just google him online if you don't believe me.
Oh well, at least he actually lives in Hanford, California, U.S.A.! "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 18, 2008 9:07 PM:
" Bill, many people don't know you represent the union, why did you conveniently leave that out of the letter.
I think Obama will be very similar to you, I think he will make promises and not keep them and when we need him most, he won't be anywhere to be found. Only difference is when he lies it will be at state dinners, not breakfast at Ryan's. "
Deb wrote on Nov 19, 2008 12:59 AM:
" Wow - both Alihandro and WD - going to lengths to discredit a person for their opinion. Why does this not surprise me.
Now on to the post. Most all op-ed writers are the same as commentators on TV and all are partisan to the extreme on their shows and op-ed pieces. i.e. Hannity v Obermann. One week we'll have the left, another week the right-or some other structured schedule.
I've found almost a comic relief from some of the writers - the level of creativity in their writings make creative financing dim in comparison. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 19, 2008 12:39 PM:
" Ali, he indeed does live in the area, but he also failed to disclose he is the Representative for the SEIU which represents county employees in Tulare and Kings. As well as many teachers union's up and down the state, and we know how they put their money to use this year. The CTA donated 1 million dollars to the No on 8 campaign.
This is like having Pee Wee Herman speak on behalf of Mr. Rogers. After the movies just let out. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 19, 2008 5:58 PM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 19, 2008 12:59 AM:
Suddenly you question Alihandero's and my write to respond to a letter to the Editor? Deb, I never thought you of all people would try and squash our right to speak on any subject? I mean you believe in so many rights for the people of Kings County who have spoken in high numbers approximately 3 to 1 on certain Propositions in the last election. A significant landslide victory to pass a Proposition Mr. Shawhan's many unions deposited monies into the No Vote account. Certainly you wouldn't deny us the right to answer his letter about this inexperienced, untested, newcomer to the White House, now would you? After we listened to many of you bashing Bush for everything from Viagra to Medicare. You the party who seems to think that "The Star Wars Program" is a sequel to the movie! Instead of a measured response for self defense. President Elect Obama has responded to almost everyone but the Russian threat to not disarm a nuclear program they already signed an agreement to disarm. Where's all that talking at? (Continued) "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 19, 2008 6:09 PM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 19, 2008 12:59 AM:
(Continued) Oh that's right he can't deal with any of those former allies of ours he's too busy selecting a dog for his two little girls, now isn't he. If this was a promise made even if he didn't get elected, then why didn't he take time away from the campaign to pick a dog for his kids? He found Joe The Plumber but he couldn't find a K-9 in all those cities? All he has to do is do what you did pick the tallest, lankiest, youngest one with no experience. Mission Accomplished!
Now lets see in that interview he said; We have campaigned in 57 states and I believe we have one more". No folks this is what the man said; if you want a wake up call visit the video on How Obama Got Elected, on Randy Rickman's site.
You won't believe the number of people voting who have no idea who Nancy Pelosi is, "they don't know who the leader of the United States Senate is" and they are voting.
Continued "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 19, 2008 6:10 PM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 19, 2008 12:59 AM:
(Continued) We have 7/8 states out there somewhere that haven't been ratified and Obama is the only one who knows where they are. That doesn't include Hawaii and Alaska either folks. I guess that just goes to show IGNORANCE TRULY IS BLISS. "
dose wrote on Nov 19, 2008 9:25 PM:
" Who cares if this guy is president of SEIU, it has no bearing on the content of this letter. He obviously wrote it ias a citizen in response to the writings of Ms. Lopez. Not once does the writer write anything that has to do with his work or proffession.
When was the last time Ali Handero or WatchdogFred have told us where they work or who they are? "
Deb wrote on Nov 19, 2008 10:45 PM:
" WD - If his letter were a representation of his work or whatever he does, that's one thing. This apparently is his own opinion. The Sentinel does not require him to provide disclosure so why should he?
Are you afraid his letter is going to influence someone?
And, while I may think one thing or another I've always tried to maintain my writings to be as factual as possible without slamming people or calling them idiots and liars as you have done personally to me.
I said you were bloviating at one point, but it's kinda hard to mask the truth. Another post has well over 1000 words all directed at me. And, that's just this evening... "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 20, 2008 2:21 AM:
" To: dose wrote on Nov 19, 2008 9:25 PM:
When was the last time Ali Handero or WatchdogFred have told us where they work or who they are? "
This remark from the guy in Ohio who still thinks he can vote on local elections in Hanford. Come on do~se use your cavessa, just this once!
I think that the people should know that this letter is written by a paid representative of a union and that his opinion is slanted by how his union tells him how to think and vote. They pay his salary, they pay his car allowance, they provide his medical insurance, they pay his cell phone bills, they give him a fat expense account to buy breaskfast, lunch and dinner. Gee do you think they have an influence on his opinion. They tell him if the Republican's get into office the unions will suffer, of course people should know where his opinion is formulated and presented in writing this letter. If for no other reason than the author should he read this should know who is taking him to task and why. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 20, 2008 2:24 AM:
" To: dose wrote on Nov 19, 2008 9:25 PM:
The elections are over go sleep it off will ya? You've partied long enough, now get a job and make a living. ACORN left you behind sweetheart. "
jasper wrote on Nov 20, 2008 9:43 AM:
" Shawhan is a consultant for SEIU, not the President. Most of the SEIU local members have opted to have SEIU per se negotiate their contracts and represent them. Shawhan still represents several parts of County and City General Employees. Having said that, he's still got an opinion and he's entitled it. So, what's the big deal? Why is he any less entitled to his personal opinion than let's say Don or Prudence Eiland or Dick Jacques? "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 20, 2008 12:32 PM:
" To: jasper wrote on Nov 20, 2008 9:43 AM:
Oh and consultants, they are given even more perks, higher wages and benefits, aren't they. As a consultant what exactly does he do. Furthermore, yes the man is entitled to an opinion but those reading it are entitled to know what light shines within the tunnel that the train delivers it's message from. For instance, if this was a Republican lobbyist you'd be all over his comments like white on rice. Isn't a Union Consultant a form of a lobbyist, doesn't he perform work to benefit the unions?
You just need to understand, when he takes a part the author and says his facts are factless, then people need to realize Shawhan's facts are bought and paid for several times over, just like a lobbyist and they need to know who they are dealing with as readers and bloggers here. Does that fact bother you, that he writes as a regular concerned citizen and someone points him out for what he truly stands for and represents? People may soon learn what unions have done to the American Auto Industry. One example. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 20, 2008 7:25 PM:
" Mr. Shawhan's letter to the Editor headline says it all: "Opinions are factless."
He provides not one fact to support HIS opinion but spews forth only personal attack diatribe.
But ever opinionated-to-the left "Deb" cries ‘foul!'
She apparently believes that this local ‘Letter to the Editor' is NOT a personal attack at all on Ms. Lopez . . . indicated by a typical left wing tactic for ignoring the truth about a local letter-writer with a striking political agenda.
What, "Deb," we don't have a right to know who someone is and why they write published letters attacking a person?
Why does this not surprise me? "
SJT wrote on Nov 20, 2008 10:48 PM:
" I guess one only has to look at the local election results to understand why Kate the Hack is published weekly in the Sentinel:
Obama - 42%
McCain - 56%
The newspaper has to pay staff and show profits to the home office in Iowa, and printing Naomi Klein or Noam Chomsky or Seymour Hersh or Pulitzer Prize winner Paul Krugmen, et. al., certainly won't help pay the bills (in this case).
Kate is a hack, no doubt. Her column is an opinion piece - nothing more, nothing less. A reporter she is not. I'm thinking we'll continue to receive a steady diet of the hacks Kate is aligned with as long as local voters produce 56% for Sarah Palin to become our Vice President.
Perhaps over time many more reasonable folks will see right wing punditry for what it is. Certainly, Mr. Shawhan appears to get it. "
Warden Bob wrote on Nov 21, 2008 1:18 PM:
" Alihandero wrote on Nov 20, 2008 7:25 PM
"What, "Deb," we don't have a right to know who someone is and why they write published letters attacking a person?"
So Alihandero, who are you??? Or does this only apply to other people? "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 21, 2008 5:23 PM:
" To make it crystal clear for those who need a slow, careful explanation:
Bill Shawhan wrote a 'Letter to the Editor.'
The Sentinel has a rule - if you take the time to read the published rule - that says a letter needs to be identified with the writer's "full name, address, and contact telephone number."
So, when I write a letter to the Editor at the Sentinel I will comply.
"Warden Bob," do you possibly have any on-topic remarks the we can actually read on this column, or have they all been censored due to the Sentinel's rule violation on personal attacks?
I continue to conclude that the above author has his own political agenda and now we, the readers and voting public, can judge for ourselves.
And "Warden Bob," we don't know what you think on the current topic, which just might be appropo. "
Deb wrote on Nov 21, 2008 5:33 PM:
" Alihandro--gee you say I'm left as if that's a dirty thing. Do you think, as Michelle Bachmann does, that all people who are left of center are somehow anit-american or anti-patriotic?
A person can have an opinion if they want - the Sentinel asks they provide their name, prove they are who they say they are and that's all.
He disagrees with the right. So? For some reason you seem to be taking this personally - as if he were in the same position as the writer he speaks of and you seem to want the world to know his credentials because of course he couldn't have his own personal opinion.
Gee Alihandro - his opinion probably is derived from what he does in life and where he's been - you know... world view. Kind of like most of us.
He's right - op ed pieces from either side are purely entertainment and that's exactly why they are paid for - their opinion - not their expertise - if it were their expertise they might actually be doing a job other than hurling words. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:16 PM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 21, 2008 5:33 PM:
From one word hurler to another, you fall under the same classification my dear and so do I.
if it were their expertise they might actually be doing a job other than hurling words. " "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:21 PM:
" To: Ali, have you noticed when you and I make a comment in the same blog we are ganging up and share the same opinion. Dah! Yeah that is what we do we share opinions the purification of why the blog was established in the first place.
Yet in this one blog Deb, SJT and Warden Bob try to pick your statements apart as well as the authors and that is appropriate behavior. Who would have guessed it? As for what is printed in the Hanford Sentinel in op eds Mr. SJT is it any different than any other paper? Aren't they all politically connected, with benefit of your own survey it looks like they are catering to the right audience. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:23 PM:
" Once again I have to correct you, "Deb."
If you take the time to read Union consultant Bill Shawhan's letter, and then if you read what I wrote fully and with comprehension, I stated that this letter was a PERSONAL ad hominem attack upon Ms. Lopez.
Please "Deb" look up the term 'ad hominem' to better understand my comment as I don't believe you know what the term means.
Also please remember that I never wrote an ad hominem attack on you or was insulting your personage by calling you a name better left in the Urban Dictionary.
If you continue to disregard the facts, more power to you, as they say.
That is your right - to play by the rules. "
Deb wrote on Nov 22, 2008 12:09 AM:
" Alihandro - I know what an ad hominem attack is (although you didn't need create a double negative as an ad hominem attack is on a person which thereby makes it personal.)
My point was is that both you and WD demean those with opposing views, at any opportunity available.
In this case, yes, I felt by your referring to him as Joe Democrat you were demeaning him and his not so average campaign contributions. If you don't see it that way, oh well.
As I tell my children - it's not what you say, it's how you say it.
Why do you feel you must talk about other people in that manner? Why do you think you must educate the readers? Did you really bring anything valid to the table with your points?
And no I do not believe you have to provide more than the required information to spout any opinion you want with or without facts. It's up to the reader to discern their own take on "opinions". "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 5:43 AM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 22, 2008 12:09 AM:
But if there is a certain knowledge that points to the slanted view the letter writer may have. You don't think it is valuable information to provide to those trying to discern those facts?
Isn't sharing knowledge what we do in these blogs, Deb?
So by demeaning Alihandero and I for doing that doesn't it make you speak with a forked tongue? You want people to discern information but you really don't care that all the facts aren't available, like where this letter might really have come from, "like the Union". It wouldn't be the first time a union planted a seed so they could watch it grow. That thinking is what got Obama elected in the first place. By people telling other people to vote for Obama, not why, just told them to do it. Don't hesitate, don't investigate just do it.
"And no I do not believe you have to provide more than the required information to spout any opinion you want with or without facts. It's up to the reader to discern their own take on "opinions". "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 3:50 PM:
" If I might, I would like to point out something here. A Conservative viewpoint is not only accepted and legal but is the majority of the voters in this county, according to SJT's own statement.
Leftest Liberals are not the only opinion to worm it's way to the front of the newspaper or in the Editorial Column.
Did anyone ever think that the Hanford Sentinel has a policy in place regarding their printing of letters to the editor for more than one reason. Could it possibly be to give people who may know and agree with or disagree with the view of the writer of that letter? It looks like to me the policy is working as intended.
I know Bill Shahawn, have met him, long ago have heard of his reputation long before our first meeting. If you don't think that the public has a right to know that the Author of this letter is a Consultant to the Union and is swayed very heavily by his belief in and of the union then you are more naive than I ever anticipated.
Continued "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 3:57 PM:
" (Continued) the Union as a bargaining agent has lost it's hold over employers ever since Ronald Reagan took on the union for the Air Traffic Controlers back in the1970's. When an old, old law was found that gave employers the right to hire permanent work replacements during a strike period. That meant regardless of how long a union member worked for an Employer if they were replaced by a new employee hired during the strike, they may not get their jobs back. Even if they did get their job back the new hire had more senority than the union member out on strike. Since that took place, the striking power of any union has been deminished significantly. Also with the popularity of the unions deminishing, many employers have won the right for their employees to be union or non-union and the union cannot discriminate against non members. The unions in their beginning won many battles that needed to be won, but as greed replaced honor in many of the organizations we end up with the three major auto makers begging for a bail out. Unions will be accepting more concessions because of it. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 22, 2008 5:40 PM:
" Hey "Deb,"
Yes, I used the double negative on purpose so you could better understand the personal attack term I used truthfully.
Now I ‘feel' you are once again taking a superiority stance with correcting my grammar of all things . . . a nice personal dig if not somewhat petty. Par for the course, so to speak.
You said: "I felt by your referring to him as Joe Democrat you were demeaning him..."
It is a descriptive label, "Deb," meaning in a neutral way ‘average Joe Democrat' just like an ‘average Joe Republican.'
Seeing that YOU think that calling someone a Democrat is demeaning then answer me this: Why do you think that calling someone an average Democrats is bad? What do you have against Democrats anyway?
Google the author who proudly attached his name to this Letter to the Editor.
See all of his contributions that are quite generous and what party they were going to. Look on down the google hits and you see the public disclosures on who this person really is representing.
Why do the public facts on this topic scare you so much "Deb?"... "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:21 PM:
" Alihandero - I see what you mean by the many donations and one was for $2100 direct to Obama. If he had given that much to the Yes on 8 campaign the gays would be targeting him to be fired. But I am sure if he was for Obama he was probably for No on Proposition 8.
He isn't about to go against the CTA of California. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:24 PM:
" To: Alihandero - the facts bother Deb, dose, dandy dre', Scott, Jeff et al simply because they don't like the facts to surface about anything, until the DNC and Obama campaign have had a chance to put their spin on it. That's why. "
Deb wrote on Nov 23, 2008 11:58 AM:
" HaHa - Alihandro, you've given me something to chuckle about while reading the online version of the Sentinel.
First post out of the box on this opinion and you'd have me believe you posted a double negative just to insure " I " understand what you mean.
HaHaHaHaHa
Again, I'll repeat what I wrote - it's not what you say, it's how you say it and what you imply throughout the Sentinel site. Google that. :) "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 23, 2008 10:10 PM:
" Hey "Deb,"
You said: "First post out of the box on this opinion and you'd have me believe you posted a double negative just to insure " I " understand what you mean."
Please "Deb" look up the term "generic you" and learn this:
"In English grammar, generic you or indefinite you is the use of the pronoun you to refer to an unspecified person."
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_you)
That is the correct form of grammar I used. You are certainly one of the unspecified persons reading these posts here so if you believe I meant to write it only for you then I am the one to do the chuckling now.
As for your expressed laughter, well, I too am enjoying your evolved input here. After all, it's more polite to laugh with someone than at someone, right, "Deb?"
If one can't successfully debate the facts, then attack the person presenting them - ad hominem at it's finest.
I am sorry that you didn't adequately address my specific comments or Watchdog's presented facts on what motivated this opinionated attack letter on Ms. Lopez.
Thanks for highlighting the value of laughter, though! "
Deb wrote on Nov 24, 2008 2:08 PM:
" Your opinion is yours to keep and share with whomever you wish on whatever blog you wish. I can be entertained by it nonetheless and yes, I was laughing at what you wrote.
In your post "directed" to me, you wrote what you wrote, in black and white - period. Generic may have had a part of it in the original post, but that's not what you told me in your post of: Nov 22, 2008 5:40 PM. A post is not generic in nature when they start out with a person's moniker. So, go ahead, keep saying it's so... I know the difference. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 24, 2008 6:33 PM:
" To: Deb wrote on Nov 24, 2008 2:08 PM:
It is refreshing to know that you've come to a conclusion without significant help from others. There is hope for you yet, if you'll just turn down the sound bites and listen to factual information, not heresay or inuendo from the left predominantly.
It's good to know that at least in your own mind you can take suggestion and try and reason it out to an understandable conclusion. Congratulations. "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 24, 2008 9:39 PM:
" Hey "Deb,"
Thank you for permitting me to comment and agreeing with me.
Like lawyer and disgraced former president Bill Clinton said under oath, it depends upon what the definition of ‘you' is. (He said "is...is")
And of course - the readers here can clearly see who you are and what you represent. Thanks for letting them decide for themselves, "Deb."
You still didn't answer any of my significant questions and you didn't deny any of the facts I presented on this post, so I consider this matter is closed.
Pity you couldn't contribute more relevant information as you are one smart cookie. "
gaucho mom wrote on Nov 25, 2008 9:36 AM:
" To WD: Sharing knowledge? I beg to differ. I can only stand to check in here occasionally as it's so depressing to see the ridiculous opinions so often expressed here. This is exactly why so many of the young people here who are able to break away and be educated never come back--to escape the ignorance. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 25, 2008 1:00 PM:
" To: gaucho mom wrote on Nov 25, 2008 9:36 AM:
I beg to differ, the difference in our opinions is what makes this blog successful. If everyone had the same opinions, how boring would it be. As for ignorance they say it is bliss, so you must be one of the most blissful among us. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 25, 2008 1:09 PM:
" To: gaucho mom wrote on Nov 25, 2008 9:36 AM:
A measuring stick I always use is the simple fact that there has not been any specific rebuttal to anything that I've said on this blog and many others. If I spoke a falsehood point to it, if I didn't then perhaps you might want to ask yourself, how can these statements be made and no one comes to Mr. Shawhan's rescue? It is because what I've stated is the truth and I have witnesses to same, so get over it. "
Deb wrote on Nov 25, 2008 3:13 PM:
" Oh Alihandro, wise man from Hanford or Kings County, what in the world would I do if I didn't have you to correct me.
You may feel you're superior to me, or anyone with more liberal social values than yourself, but guess what? I don't need your permission nor your approval to live my life or share my opinion.
My comments were most if not all about you and WD impugning the letter writer for the work he does or the donations he makes.
He like many liberals, feel that the right wing of America stands upon principles but fails to live by them. "
Dandre wrote on Nov 25, 2008 3:56 PM:
" Fred, you flatter yourself...typical!
Who has time to sift thru all your 'garbage' to find your 'point'!
And you're anti-union.......goooood 'lil brownshirt "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 25, 2008 5:44 PM:
" To: Dandre wrote on Nov 25, 2008 3:56 PM:
" Fred, you flatter yourself...typical!
Who has time to sift thru all your 'garbage' to find your 'point'!
And you're anti-union.......goooood 'lil brownshirt "
I am not anti union and in fact I belong to the Teamsters Union at one time. One of the strongest in the nation. But things have changed and bargaining is in favor of the employer now. Most Union members know and acknowledge that, this day and age and an honest Union Rep will also acknowledge the loss due to Reagans shinannigans.
Did you know that President Ronald Reagan was first President of the Actors Guild prior to becoming President of the United States. So if you have a bone to pick with a union defector there is a good place to start. sans your brown shirt comment. I am not anti union, I am anti liar, Mr Shawhan told lies to me and in front of me.
When a black man stood and raised his hand at the Olympics was he anti-white or pro African-American? "
SJT wrote on Nov 26, 2008 6:49 PM:
" Fred, given your bias toward the right-of-center, here's a helluva rhetorical question for you: are you pro-republican or anti-American?
Ironically, Tommie Smith graduated from Lemoore High School ('63) and (as Fred reminds us) went on to win Olympic gold. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 26, 2008 9:35 PM:
" SJT wrote on Nov 26, 2008 6:49 PM:
Simply stated I am Pro American who happens to be a registered Republican. How is that, and for all my years in service I was a registered Democrat until my eyes were opened. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 27, 2008 4:27 PM:
" SJT wrote on Nov 26, 2008 6:49 PM:
I'm a Patriotic American who happens to be a Republican, why do you ask? "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 28, 2008 3:48 PM:
" Alihandero have you noticed Mr. Shawhan has had no further comment other than this letter?
Perhaps a rebuttal would be senseless against the truth? That is all I can assume at this point. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Dec 8, 2008 7:39 PM:
" Merry Christmas Mr. Shawhan "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Dec 11, 2008 3:24 PM:
" To: Alihandero hey did you catch the Democratic Govenor getting busted yesterday and now Rangle is being investigated what a chock crooks in the Demoncratic Populess.
Also did you catch the connection to this article the Govenor was bartering for a cushy job with the SEIU, what a conincidence eh? "
Subscribe Now
Mobile Site
Place an Ad
E-Edition
Email Updates
Obituaries
Classifieds
Find a Job
Find a Car
Real Estate
Contact Us
RSS HanfordSentinel.com