Thursday, May 31, 2007

Me Thinketh the Lady Doth Protesteth Too Much

Albero is out in full force denying that he has any hand whatsoever in any decision to attack the zoo. Although, in typical pussy-fashion, Joey decides to keep the debate on his severely censored website and only to go after Robinson who is possibly the worst debater ever. (But at least props for having the balls to put this idea into the wide open. Now let us see if you have the balls to give me credit.).

Do you really think that the Councilwomen would consider this and discuss cuts to the zoo without input from Little Joey? Do they expect us to believe that all of this was decided completely independent of Joey? Do you think Joey would not want a say in cuts?

The more Joey goes on about how great an idea it is and how he has all the “facts”, the more suspicious I am of the Councilwomens' plan and the genesis of the idea.

Also, the Alberobots are out in full force talking about how Robinson has defamed Cohen and Campbell, and they are demanding an apology. One commentator on Little Joey’s site went so far as to stress their closeness to the Councilwomen before insinuating that a lawsuit was around the corner. (Apparently for Joey’s bluster about public figures unable to take criticism, the Councilwomen appear to be especially sensitive when the shoe is on the other foot and they are held accountable for their actions. If they cant even take accountability, then just wait until I start spreading the Alberoesque rumor that they once were the traveling groupies with the Charlie Daniels Band in the 70s.)

You can tell that you people hiding over at Joey’s site prefer the company of black slapping sycophants to intelligent discussion and debate as they have yet to learn that you need to depend your beliefs with solid rationale and not Straw Man arguments(or Middle School-style sniping at those that disagree). This one commentator keeps talking about the Councilwomen’s love for animals, as if that is sufficient evidence that they have no nefarious reasons for targeting the zoo with these cuts. We get it, they have a dog, that has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I am not suggesting that they want to kill the animals, merely to kill the jobs of the people who care for the animals- and happen to specifically be enemies of Little Joey.

Now, this has never been as much of an Anti-Albero Blog, as an Anti-Bring-Down-Salisbury-With-A-Petty-Vendetta Blog, so I welcome all of these new names (surprisingly these new names started cropping up at a time where Joey had about 3 comments that didn’t belong to his father over a two week period. Just saying.) to discuss the issues and show that you are not merely mindless drones that cannot think for yourself. Of course you are invited to discuss Little Joey, but we all know that you are too much of a pussy and don’t want to risk exposing yourself as an even bigger IDIOT!

Until that point, I really think we need to take a hard look at the Councilwomen’s cuts and see what else is in there that was dictated by the distinguished gentleman from Delaware. A hard look also needs to be directed at how deep this partnership between the Councilwomen and Joey truly goes. (And no dumbass, just because you didn’t give them money doesn’t mean that you have not made significant contributions to their campaign.)


slopbucket said...
This comment has been removed by the author. said...

A recent posting on Mr. albero's website included the following sentence:

"I spoke with John after the Show and I clearly stated that I didn’t appreciate his making such said statements and that he better have something to back it up. He replied, that’s what I believe Joe and that’s all there is to it."

"such said statements"


uhh... ROTFLMAO!

Historical Wit said...

Remember....Joe Albero licks big hairy balls. BIG HAIRY BALLS!

Idiot! said...

...not that distinguished gentleman from Delaware...

PS- Robinson should know better than to mess with Mr. Verify Twice, Cut Once. said...

Dim Wit,

How old are you?

Will you post a certified copy of your birth certificate on your web site?

I will not quote your above statements, but is that not a repeat post?

Are you testing the readership's memory here or your own ability to cut and paste past postings and retype words in all capitalized fashion?

Witless, I must say you strike me especially on this occasion as an ignorant man.

Truly, the "objectivity and observation" your website purports taken together with your comments here have lowered the bar for all of us.

Hadley said...


I had to read this twice "paste past postings"

It reminds me of red rubber baby buggy bumpers.

Historical Wit said...

How dare you accuse me of cut and paste! I type this shit fresh everyday! Anyway, if your pissed enough to visit my site to figure out some other shit to slam me on, I win. You just increased my site meter by 1.

Truth is YOUR the one slackin richard. What kind of lazy ass response is that? Dude you should get yourself up more before you try to bring the heat. And build up that vocabulary percentile. Express yourself like we know you can.

And the bar was dropped by albero. I don't think it lower than that. So for that, albero licks balls. There you go, made you read it again. Stop smiling. you supposed to be mad.

o w grant said...

Check out Albero's cyber rag this morning. Is is me, or did the moron just admit that he violated his plea agreement by driving past the zoo and taking pictures?

o w grant said...

By the way, wit; What kind of balls, again?

o w grant said...

You know,Wit, if we all chip in for a case of mountain oysters to be sent to the little gonadily fixated one, we may not have to bother with him until next spring.

Donations will be accepted at:

The Final Frontier said...

Fair enough--I'll take on the challenge of arguing with you, and I'll even get all of my spelling right! Talk about setting up a straw man! By claiming that Cohen and Campbell are simply the mouthpiece of Joe Albero, you can then dismiss anything they have to say, just like the mayor and the other three council members dismiss anything they have to say. Well, how about this fact: on the first budget debate, Cohen proposed a compromise position, raising the cap 3 cents (which is the equivalent of $660,000). The Stubborn Three immediately dismissed her proposal and went on to vote for the big increase. The mayor and her cronies would have us believe that this is all about personal pique at either: 1)Campbell not being named council president, or 2)Albero's issues with the zoo. Setting aside the possible sexist overtones here (hey, if the mayor can publicly imply that Campbell is a racist for trying to cut a specific job, we all can play that game. Had the council simply chosen to compromise at that moment, we would not be having this debate right now. The budget cuts would have been easy (let's start with cutting the absurd amount we pay the city attorney, then get down to smaller items--why is there a budget line for psychological assessment of the dog catcher?). So, anyone here want to defend the dog catcher?

Historical Wit said...

dude, i don't even live in the bury. I could care less. Hell I dont even live in that county. I drive through it when I have to. Other than that, you can take that comedy routine of a government operation you have up there and drop it in the bay for all I care. The last thing I want to delve in is some other county's political turds. Now if you want to debate if LeBron James performance last night was top 2 of all time, i am all ears. Or I am also ready to go on WWI.

Idiot! said...

Haha, good call- whoops, back slapping, not black slapping.

Alright, thanks for manning up, but it appears as though you missed the whole point of my posts. Lets knock this out and see if we can get on the same page.

Biggest mistake- I never claimed they were mouthpieces for Joey and that we should completely discredit everything they say because of that. What I insinuated, and what I believe deserves an explanation, is that they are possibly repaying back the favor (that would be Joey attacking their political enemies)by trying to eliminate Little Joey's least favorite zoo employee while dragging the zoo and its leadership through the mud in the process.

Did they really think that the Mayor and majority of the Council would sign off on any of these major budget suggestions? Especially one that would make Joey especially happy? If you follow politics you would understand that those in the minority (unless you are a pussy Democratic Congressman who hides under his desk) you propose ideas to embarrass the majority. You almost never expect for your suggestions to be adopted or even discussed seriously. With that said, what message were they trying to send by proposing these cuts to the zoo?

Following so far?

And I believe it was Councilwoman Shields that pulled the Race Card.

And I dont want to turn this into a debate on the budget as I would prefer to stay out of general city politics. I will say though that it appears as though there are two different fiscal approaches and only one is going to prevail. And well, to the victor goes the spoils.

The Final Frontier said...

The mayor also played the race card in today's editorial--it is subtle, but those in the know understand what she was referring to. On the zoo issue, you would have to believe that Joe is so powerful they could not resist his pull and therefore decided to transparently attack a zoo employee, and were too dumb to understand that this proposal would elicit your insinuations. Pretty big conspiracy theory! I believe in Occam's Razor--most of the time, the simplest answer is the correct one. Cohen and Campbell defined "necessary" budgetary expenditures in a very specific way, their opponents define "necessary" in a much broader way, thus the philosophical differences apparent in the proposed budgets. People should challenge Cohen and Campbell on the budget, but they should also carefully look at the Smith/Comegys/Tilghman budget (not going to count Shields, because she has publicly admitted she has nothing to do with the budget negotiations). Cut the city attorney fees in half, easily, by hiring our own in-house attorney (duh) and 3 zoo jobs are saved. But Tilghman/Comegys/Smith will never allow that to happen. Why? Because they are of the mind that the budget process works like this: take last year's budget and add stuff to it, then you are done (thus, the aforementioned psychological testing of the dog catcher--it was mandatory when the guy was hired to make sure he wasn't psycho, but has remained a line in the budget ever since. A silly example, i know, but it epitomizes the problem).
Thanks for the forum to vent, but trust me when I say that Joe has actually had very little, if any, input on the budget proposals.
p.s: one more thing (sorry)--on duvafiles, you stated Cohen and Campbell must publicly denounce Joe, how about the mayor publicly denounces Shields' use of the race card? And Smith, too, since she came up with the civility code? said...

"you can take that comedy routine of a government operation you have up there and drop it in the bay for all I care."

ROTFLMAO! said...

"red rubber baby buggy bumpers."


FOB = Friend of Salisbury (bury) said...

One Question for OutragedRichard.
I never see you posting on Joe's site. Have you also been banned from the kingdom of Johammad?

I agree with WIT, throw em all in the bay, Crown & Coke included.

Gunpowder Chronicler said...

The AdCouncil is now targeting Jihad Joe.

Click here.

Idiot! said...

You are over-exaggerating what I am suggesting. I do not think that Joey is the all-powerful Oz of the minority sect in Salisbury. I just see a lot of coincidences and a continued extremely comfortable and symbiotic relationship between The Eastern Shore American Idol and the “honest” Councilwomen.

I mean seriously, how “honest” and “upstanding” can you be when you are that close with Joey and allow him to do your dirty work?

And no, nobody has to apologize for being aligned with Councilwoman Shields and that is a stupid comparison.

Nobody pays any attention to her to begin with and you would be hard pressed to prove that her comments have any negative affect on the city. If she were to constantly stoke the fire of controversy and allow for others to benefit from her comments without getting their hands dirty, then a clarification of alignment would be needed.

And I am pretty sure that Outie Richie has been banned from Little Joey's site. But it was probably more out of fear of missing out on the joke than out of comprehension of Richard's wordy story/jokes.

TomCat said...

He is working undercover for Joe trying to find out who is behind these blogs.

FOB = Friend of Salisbury (bury) said...

Poor John Robinson, just like SbyDave, SRR, Sparkly, Duvalies, CJ, KBA, etc. etc. will soon be going the way of the dinosaur, devoured by a larger reptile!

The Final Frontier said...

What is your proof that Albero is driving their campaigns? All you've got is this: Joe hates the zoo, and C and C have proposed cutting zoo funding. You might also look into this--why are C and C out there raising money for the zoo? You happen to be wrong on this, I can guarantee it. You can go after people all you like, and I realize you have no reason to believe an anonymous poster (even one as obviously good looking and intelligent as me), but I am telling you with 100% certainty that your assumption here is incorrect. Your same logic would say that because a guy called "Historical Wit" hangs out on this blog, and he apparently has an obsession with licking hairy balls, then YOU must have an obsession with licking hairy balls. That's dumb, you are smarter than this. C and C have minds of their own, and if you stoppped and really looked at their budgets, you would see that the REAL target of their new plan is landlords. As for Shanie's lack of influence, I would believe that, except for the fact that the mayor's editorial also suggested that racism is behind some of the C and C ideas (never mind that both of them have a very strong record of actually working for equal rights). They are good people--not perfect, but good. Contrast these two, who are doing exactly what they said they would do if elected, with Smith, Comegys, and Shields, and there is no contest as to who has integrity. Smith is bailing on the very people who stood out there in the freezing cold for her--including lots of firefighters. Comegys is completely in the pockets of SAPOA (the landlords), Shields is basically AWOL, and yet Cohen and Campbell are getting blasted. Ultimately, none of your responses here have addressed my central comment in earlier posts; Cohen and Campbell have found LOADS of stupid spending by doing what NONE of the other council members were willing to do--read the friggin' budget! PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE FRIGGIN' DOG CATCHER!!!!!!
At least give them their props for that!
FF said...


Not exactly. Mr Albero deleted a post I had written about Mr. Pollitt. Something about Mr. Pollitt being obese, unhealthy, and unfit for political duty.

Oh, now I remember. Mr Albero had a picture of Mr. Pollitt in all his largeness on some billboard with the Salisbury park bridge in the background.

I asked the question of whether Mr. Pollitt was going to cross that bridge and if so, what the weight safety rating of that bridge was. I thought it was a fair question, and I still do.

I was concerned for Mr. Pollitt, other citizens on the bridge with Mr. Pollitt, and the capabilities of the EMS rescue team to do a water rescue.

I believe these were legitimate concerns. I voiced them. Mr. Albero deleted me. I no longer post comments there or at Mr. Duvall's site.

To Mr. Albero's credit he did allow me a farewell post, while that diapered and broken lump of a man Mr. Duvall afforded me none.

TomCat said...

Richard, if you hadn't been so lenghty maybe he would have let the post stand. It is rather humorous. So just like I said, Joe used you to help him with his website and then kicked you to the curb when he was done with you.

TomCat said...

Duvalies has resurfaced.

Gunpowder Chronicler said...

I don't know if C&C are tightly allied with Jihad Joe, or vice-versa, but I do know this:

Every time Debbie Campbell raises an issue in the meeting on which Paul Wilber has to weigh in, his partners must do a dance around the conference room table chanting "Show Me the Money".

It's long past time to go "in-house" with counsel for the daily stuff (i.e. "Does the charter really say that?" or "What is Roberts Rules of Order?") and only bring in outside counsel for the special circumstances (i.e., when citizens are suing you for ignoring zoning regulations and development plans).

Imagine how much smoother council meetings could go if every member of the council (and the mayor) could submit proposed legislation to the city attorney for an opinion BEFORE the brawling starts in the council session.

Idiot! said...

You just made my point for me! I win. Game over. You just said that the Vice-President should be judged because of his affiliation with SAPOA, as the Council President should be apparently judged for her new found close ties to the Mayor. Then why shouldn’t Councilwomen Campbell and Cohen be judged by their symbiotic relationship with Joey?

I am not a mouth piece for the Mayor, and I have no reservation in giving them credit. I am not blasting them for anything that they have done outside of their relationship with Little Joey. I give them all the credit in the world for their ability to find the pork in the budget and cutting it. I also chastised the majority of the Council for giving the impression as well as apparently believing that they do not need to go through the budget.

However, that is another distinction that you have been unable to find in my argument. The Councilwomen provided cuts to many areas, attempted to shift burdens, put off COLA, making little cuts here and there. But then they turn around and essentially kill the ZIP!! Now, they may be negotiating with the County to provide funds, but will this be an annual allocation or a one-shot deal? Will the extra funds coincidently not allow for the salary of Samis?

You are giving me the feelings that you know the Councilwomen well and you fight for their honor. Well, why are they so close with Joey? It is a simple question that you have yet to answer. I am not saying that they are his puppets or there is a huge conspiracy theory, but that there are a lot of coincidences in their proposal. They have chosen to continue association with them and to me that directly calls into question their judgment and honor.

Robinson is another example of a friend of Joey that has had Joey turn on him for not worshiping at the alter of WOPness. Little Joey has got to be the King of Bridge Burning and is so insecure that he has to try to drop the hammer on everyone to prove him masculinity. If they are so smart, then why cant they see a bad end coming to the relationship and burn the bridge now with a man who is so bad for the city?

Just a random thought I had the other day that is not quite deserving of its own post- How much is it going to suck to be the next Director of the Zoo? How much are they going to have to pay this person to take on the task of taking the brunt of Joey’s anger over his family’s shunning from the Zoo? Should they bring in someone from far away or would that be unfair to spring Little Joey on them when they show up? They should develop a program for the city for new employees and how to deal with Little Joey, complete with binder and all-day training session.

Historical Wit said...

Lickin balls lickin balls....

The Final Frontier said...

The simple answer is this:they aren't so close to Joe as you think. If people don't like their ideas, that's fine, but they are their ideas. And as much as I enjoy making people's arguments for them, I haven't done so here. The difference between C&C, Joe, Comegys, and SAPOA is this: follow the money. What's funny to me about all the anti-Albero stuff out here is that you guys actually give him any bit of power he has! If the mayor, council, new zoo director, etc. would just ignore him, he would be just a guy with a camera and a blog. Where's the real power? In the administration and its allies. Rather than believe the hype that C&C are killing the zoo, why don't you look at their actual proposals? Then go back and look at the cozy relationship between SAPOA, the mayor, and City Council over the last few years. Look at who has been placed in charge of housing and zoning, and look at the rulings they have made. The house of cards is about to come down, and they are scrambling to do whatever they can to stop it, including smearing people all over the news--last night the local news reported that the mayor stated that C&C's budget will kill all the raises to the police and fire. Well, that's not true, and in fact is exactly the opposite of what their budget does. But the police and fire will lose their raises because the mayor's budget cuts that! If it wasn't so Machiavellian, it would almost be funny to sit back and watch the mayor and her team manipulate the press. You know what's really crazy? I am a liberal Democrat, tax and spend is my middle name, and I would have happily signed on to a raise in taxes if the mayor and council had displayed any integrity here. I think that's why a lot of people signed the petition. I refused to sign the first couple of times I was asked, but the more I thought about the arrogance of the mayor and 3 of the 5 council members, the more I thought I should sign. I waited until I saw C&C's proposals, recognized that they would not, in fact, gut our city, and signed on. Now any gutting of the city will rest squarely on the shoulders of the mayor and the other council members, even though they will cast blame elsewhere. Now, should you be right, and should it become clear that they are targeting an individual out of a personal vendetta (as the mayor is currently--driving to Wilmington to try to get Bill Reddish fired), I will blast C&C with the best of them, and will do what I can to stop it. I really don't think that is what is behind this, but I might be wrong. Anyway, sorry to write so long--thanks for the forum. I bet we agree on 95% of our politics . . .

Idiot! said...

I am not going to get up here and defend the Mayor and her actions and I do not understand why you keep bringing her into this discussion. It is the last refuge of a beaten debater to pull the “Well everyone else is doing it, so why cant we” card. I do not believe the Mayor is the one running on a holier than thou platform. She is not the one that is aligned with Joey and that is benefiting from his actions while still keeping her hands clean. Whatever message she is putting out there in the media, it is coming from her and has her fingerprints on it and she is to be judged accordingly. With the Councilwomen and Little Joey, the line is so blurred that it is almost indistinguishable as to where one opinion ends and the other begins.

You referenced SAPOA again and stated to follow the money. You are right, you can follow the money. To the cent even. It is public record how much SAPOA contributes to the Vice-President. Where is the public record of Little Joey’s relationship with the Councilwomen? How much has he helped them? A whole lot and it goes a lot more then just a check at campaign time. A daily campaign of character assassinating and constantly galvanizing support against their political enemies is an invaluable asset.

I do not know about you, but I would choose to be aligned with businessmen over a ‘Blog Reporter’ of ill repute any day. Unfortunately, it appears as though the Councilwomen have chosen to accept help from someone of Joey’s ilk.

Once again, they put out some interesting cuts, and they definitely did the work needed. However, there are cuts and there is a suspiciously complete dismantling of the ZIP. And it is a thorough dismantling of the zoo, lets not kid ourselves here. Losing however many workers, a continuous income stream, and more importantly this would weaken its standing in the future. If you are a liberal, then you should be smart enough to catch this conservative tactic in which they say they are going to cut something for a year, only to turn around next year and claim that it can be cut again as it is obviously non-essential- until it is completely unfunded or cut in the near future or privatized so that a private company can make money off of it. (It is this thinking that leads to over-inflated school budgets and unnecessary spending as they realize that if they don’t use one year, they have no chance of receiving as much the next FY.) Now, a debate over whether or not the ZIP is essential to Salisbury is a debate for another blog, as we are merely talking about the coincidences in their cuts to the ZIP and its correspondence to their symbiotic relationship with Little Joey.

Now, all this talk about the budget, and we still haven’t gotten an answer from you as to why their appears to be personal favors going on (once again, they would have to know that the Mayor would never allow these cuts, so this could possibly be a publicity stunt to allow Joey to rail against Rapp and tie the Mayor into this mess) on in their budget proposal as well as their close relationship with someone who obviously dangerous to the city.

And no problem with the long posts, I am enjoying the opportunity to expand on my idea and that I am not spouting conspiracy theories that are one step removed in believability from little green men. I just wish you would stick to the topic at hand and explain why the Councilwomen’s relationship with Little Joey continues and how deep it goes.

The Final Frontier said...

Ok, this will be my last post on this topic, just because I'm sure everyone is getting a little bored with it. But here goes. You say I keep avoiding addressing how deep the councilwomen's relationship with Joe goes, but I've said it over and over--you just don't believe me, and that's ok. I wish I could say more, but I don't want to drag other people into this, to be honest with you. Here's the thing about Joe--he's upfront with his faults, everyone knows what they are even if he doesn't always acknowledge them. C&C have been upfront (I know you disagree), and have put their budgets out there well in advance and in public to get shredded. The SAPOA guys (and their administration buds) are not upfront (some of them are good folks, I hasten to add--2 of the 3 main landlords in my neighborhood are awesome). They are cutting sweatheart deals left and right, with the blessing of the administration. I know, I've seen them. Richard Insley is the Dick Cheney of Salisbury, without question. Aahh . . . the stories I could tell. Here's one: when C&C first proposed their budget, which does call for an increase in landlord fees, a major member of SAPOA who shall remain nameless (but whose name is known to me, in case he is reading this) told one of the C&C's that he just might put a bunch of "blacks and hispanics" in the neighborhood as retaliation. Well, that shows you what kind of guy we are dealing with here. To him, that was a threat. To C&C, all that was is an opportunity to get more families in neighborhoods zoned for families. Yet Shanie wants to play the race card on them? Please. I don't think C&C are perfect, I don't doubt that personal animosity towards the mayor, Comegys, and Smith play at least some role in what has happened, but 2,500+ people signed a petition. The anger is not limited to a tiny cabal. I keep going back to this--had the council adopted Cohen's compromise suggestion at the first budget meeting, none of this would be happening. The zoo would have virtually all of its funding (so there goes the theory that they've had it in for the zoo from the beginning due to Joe's mysterious influence)and the petition drive would not have existed. The administration overplayed its position, believed that since they had a veto-proof majority they didn't have to listen at all to C&C, and completely miscalculated. The fault for this particular mess should rest squarely on the shoulders of Tilghman, Comegys, Smith, and Shields. Here's hoping (against hope) that all of the politicians are humbled by this experience, set their egos aside, and COMPROMISE! Play nice!

Historical Wit said...

You guys are kickin great debate here. Rock on. and great debate aint borin...

Idiot! said...

Alright, I can read between the lines, so I will let you off the hook, but I do not believe they are off the hook.

What you say about the budget makes sense and the fact that they have put it out there in advance is admirable. The fact is that they are not just making cuts but dismantling. But giving them the benefit of the doubt on this issue is not too much to ask.

What is too much too ask is to assume that they are keeping Little Joey at arms length and that they actually agree with the level-headed amongst us in the community. This isn’t about having them state their relationship and their feelings about every negative blogger, but about a specificially distructive blogger.

I do not care about their feelings on Duvall and his racist comments or Outraged Richard and his uptightness. This is about one man who they are affliated with who just so happens to be providing a service that benefits them contantly. That service happens to be digusting and gutter-based.

That doesn’t mean that they have to piss him off and never talk to him again. The can treat him just as many other politicians appear to- the Sheriff, Pollitt, Mathias, the Governor, etc.

To continue such a close relationship should be a reflection of their character.

And yes, SAPOA has bad people. They are businessmen. Businessmen only care about money. That’s one of the bigger reasons I am a Democrat, because I don’t trust those men. But once again, you know what you are getting with SAPOA. They said something horrible like that because they know that is what will bother the residents the most and that should give you a glipse into everyone’s character. I have heard just as many stories about the residents and their reaction to the renters moving into their area. More so I am sure. Discriminating based on race and age.So much so that I no longer feel bad when I discriminate against an older person merely because they are older on a regular basis.

Everybody only sees the bad people on their side and nobody wants to admit that maybe the other side is right now and then. Its politics people, not science; there are no right answers.

But yeah, its my sight and we can continue a boring conversation as long as I want. But I think that there are a lot of people that read this beyond just the Joey-bashers that comment and I think we were able to get the word out and some different ideas out to the normal people reading the blogs. You had some good insight into the majority over-playing their hand. It is good to see that there can be neutral debate between people with no agendas. Little Joey is good at bringing people together- against him.

But just to make my Joey-bashers happy- Little Joey licks balls.

The Final Frontier said...

It's been fun, keep up the fighting! I gotta take a break from teh blogs before I get an ulcer . . .

Historical Wit said...