Sunday, October 31, 2010

Ginny speaks... kind of.

At the risk of Dan Kelineman calling the act of posting Ginny's own words on this blog as "harassment", I will anyway. Ginny actually allowed a few comments on her recent paranoid post about the library. Read them here. Ginny in her own words:

"This display by the West Bend Library lends credence to one thing only, and that is that the only support a gay person could possibly want is affirmative. Do you see books or materials that assist homosexuals who want to leave this lifestyle? How about books about the ramifications/dangers of homosexual activity? "

Ginny also seems to address a comment left by Maria Hanrahan, but she didn't actually post Maria's comment. Stay classy, Ginny!


  1. "[T]he act of posting Ginny's own words on this blog as 'harassment'...."

    No, they were not Ginny's words. Her account was hacked, a post was made by the hacker to make her look bad, the hacker grabbed screen shots of the effect of the hack, then you claim the hacked account has actually Ginny's words.

    It is wrong to continue to smear someone's name in this manner. I fail to see how anyone could be so filled with hatred as to take a part knowingly, even joyfully, in such a destruction of personal character.

    I am again writing on this non-library issue because you are again broadcasting yet another smear, another defamation, another personal attack.

    Won't you ever address the issues she raises instead of her personally or her hacked accounts you continue to promote as her own?

  2. That said, I see your point about Maria.

    But that said, in your previous post technical difficulties kept my posts from publishing though you saw it. It would not surprise me in the slightest that the same thing happened to Ginny.

    I know my Blogger blog has had similar problems publishing Maria's comments. They ended up in spam. I'll bet that's where they are and Ginny doesn't yet realize it--she likely responded to the email, not the online comment that never made it online. I did that once. But that does not make Ginny the bad person you are implying. You have to check your facts first.

  3. "Her account was hacked, a post was made by the hacker to make her look bad, the hacker grabbed screen shots of the effect of the hack, then you claim the hacked account has actually Ginny's words."

    Please submit your proof, or any action taken in support of this claim.

  4. We had this conversation a while back, Dan. If you believe her Facebook account was hacked you are gullible, and idiot, or both. Ginny has never claimed on her blog or here that her account was hacked. As far as I'm concerned you are the one putting words in her mouth about all this hacking business. She hasn't said boo.

  5. Marshwood, you already know the answer to this. You are attempting obfuscation. How do I know? I already answered that question, in response to you yourself.

    Let me quote what I already wrote, to you:

    "I can now report that Ginny has informed me that her Facebook account has been hacked and she had previously reported the hack to Facebook. She says the hacker added that post."

    Marshwood, you know it is a hacked account, yet here you are again arguing like it is not. You are compounding your problem.

    As to "any action taken in support of this claim," are you asking for lawyer-client privileged information?

  6. So, you are now Ginny's attorney?

  7. No, Marshwood, I did not say that. Neither was I thinking that. Neither can I figure out how you even surmised that.

  8. Dan Kleinman - I kindly ask you to stop speaking on Ginny's behalf. I have no way to verify if you are really in contact with her and relaying accurate information on her behalf or simply making stuff up. Ginny is welcome to email me or post here if she has anything she would like to say.

  9. You learned about hearsay in law school, right Danny? Let Ginny speak for herself; don't be her rube.

    And you're the one who suggested some kind of attorney-client privilege.

    All this talk about defamation, yet YOU defame people all the time on your blog, here (accusing me of being the hacker in past threads), not to mention Ginny's personal attacks on the kids librarian, Maria, etc.

    Glass house, my boy....

  10. "I can now report that Dan Kleinman has informed me that his Blogger account has been hacked, and that he actually doesn't feel that the ALA is the root of all that is evil in the world, or to blame for the fact that people litter, swear, and covet others' wives within 500 feet of a library."

    Wow, look at how easy that is to claim a truth without providing any falsifiable evidence. Awesome!

  11. OOOOOOOOO!!! Burn. Dan's taking it in the shorts from Marshwood today.

  12. For those reading that thread on Ginny's blog, note that the "American College of Pediatricians", a medical 'front' organization for religious, socially conservative physicians.

    (I posted this there, but presume it won't be approved)

  13. Wow, I hadn't checked either this blog or Ginny's in several days.....I'm more than a little confused about her musings about me. I just submitted another comment that asks her and why she thinks it's fair to "respond" in a public arena without posting my words. I also asked about what of my public commentaries about my original comment (i.e., where it is) elsewhere (I'm assuming here) she supposedly finds "damaging to my otherwise admirable efforts."