An Open Letter Response to Dr. Tragle with an Emphasis on Exploring the Codependant Relationships of an Egomanic


With all due respect to the Dr, who from what I see is an upstanding gentleman (Aside from the fact that I don’t get your point: She wasn’t running scared from Albero, so an Order of Protection was completely unwarranted? And with all due to respect, what were you doing with Albero in the zoo, the same place he was banned by law, on the day he was allowed back in? You would think that a normal grown man would take a little more tactful approach to re-integrating himself into the zoo again, instead of barging right into said place the moment he was allowed. That action, in and of itself is an extremely disrespectful, antagonistic, and immature move. On second thought, maybe your integrity and judgment needs to come into question.)-

Why does everyone continue to make excuses for this man?

Well, he was concerned about the animals, so he should be allowed to threaten his wife's coworkers and boss.

"Well, he is a little 'abrasive' but he has given the Mayor a hard time and I don’t like the Mayor, so he is a benefit to the community."

This man surrounds himself with co-dependants who allow his ego to get bigger and more unchecked.

He has alienated every single major group in the area, but there are still people that continue to stick up for him. Who out there besides, the two dissenting councilwomen and a handful of Camden Avenue malcontents still support him? How desperate for affirmation is this group that they must associate with Joey?

He is a bully. I’ve gotten in scuffles and disagreements and have rubbed plenty of people the wrong way. From drunk frat boys, to ex-girlfriends, ex-girlfriend’s boyfriends, co-workers, family, etc. I have never had even a fraction of the problems that he seems to have, much less go so far. And as most people that read these blogs can tell, I can be a very unagreeable person and am never without strong opinions and convictions. How can I be bullheaded, Joey can be bullheaded, but how does he have significantly more brushes with the law?

Maybe I am wise and mature beyond my young years(contrary to what my parents, most of my friends, and every old girlfriend has ever said) but I cannot imagine these socialization problems with adults going half as far as Little Joey takes them.

Oh, this is just the Jones incident. Oh, this is just the Chief incident. Oh, this is just the Rapp incident. Oh, this is just the Jannace incident. Oh, this is just the Robinson incident. Oh, this is just the Mayor incident. These have been all out battles, not just tiffs. I have heard excuses for all of them and it pisses me off. These are not singular incidents, these are an interconnected string of events, show a pattern of anti-social behavior that is increasingly erratic and antagonistic. Luckily on these sites we have are able to construct a timeline of events that shows an out of control man on the verge of snapping any day at the slightest provocation due constant excuse making by those around him like his family and the doctor.

Practicing What I Preach


Not to come off too holier than thou, I have noticed that amongst these blogs, the participants have gotten a little carried away in attacking Little Joey for every little thing that he does and it is starting to resemble his one-sided attacks against the city. Joey is allowed to have his opinions and occasionally he is right about one or two things. It should not be our job to attack every opinion or correct his every mistake and to act as if his opinion is any more important or valid than the other bloggers. We have come along way in bringing to light the true nature of Little Joey’s blog. It is when his opinions are so patently absurd or abusive towards innocent people that we should be stepping in. Stick to the facts and issues and prove that we are better than him and his sycophants and do not have to stoop down to their level of personal attacks to get our point across.

There is a great story in the paper today about Council President Smith’s decision to implement a new policy for council members to request information from the various departments in the city. There was good and bad news in reading the comments in the StoryChat section.

The good news is that I was able to correctly guess the tone and lame personal attacks with no real point or basis in fact. Yay me. The bad news is that once again the first response, and often the only response, was completely devoid of intelligent thought.

Nobody compared and contrasted how legislators handle information requests at the Federal of State level with how information is requested at the county level and currently in the city. I would be surprised if anyone even knew or was curious to know about the policies of other Departments who handle legislative requests. I would also venture that they could care less about implementing the correct policy for this level of government.

Where are the pros and cons of this policy? Does it provide greater accountability to make sure that the requests are filled? Does this come at the expense of a timely response? It has been insinuated that the various departments are inundated with requests by the two dissenting councilwomen for information. How will that burden be addressed without having to provide extra monetary resources or extra staffers without compromising their ability to represent their constituents? Is this the best use of their constituent’s resources?

These are the questions that need to be asked. What doesn’t need to be asked is whether or not the Council President’s uncle is proud of her. If I were a man of great ego who claims to bring news to Salisbury and well as trying to improve the whole city and not just embarrass those who run the city, I would try to get to the bottom of this. I would not promote a snarky, although kinda funny, (and evidently two years later, completely false) email from the offending party.