truthseeker

A nice bit of circular logic there, "lady". You'll assert otherwise, but board admin. knows that I only have one account here, and that I'm only one person. You can believe whatever else the hell you want, but you'll be wrong. And I expect the moderator will verify this if he isn't already sick to death of this absurd little pageant. But again, Rees, you don't know what IP addresses anyone's using. With this last post of yours, it's becoming clear, in fact, that you don't really know what "IP Address" really MEANS.

If you're not going to "focus on the issues" on this board that quit wasting everyone's time by coming on here and bemoaning the fact that no one is focusing on the issues. Let the DCPages record show, then, that Rees - when asked to focus on the issues as he's advocated himself here so many times - categorically declined. Yet more visionary campaigning ;-) Good night, all.

Yep. Just as I predicted. When asked to "focus on the issues", as he's begun saying, he wriggled right out of it.

HA! Luke, please inform the "lady" that this is not the case. I've only EVER used one IP address on this forum and that's demonstrably true as I'm sure you'll see. And it's demonstrably not in Ca or Va, demonstrably NOT the same as anyone else who posts here and demonstrably not from a proxy. The same cannot be said for "her." In any case, where could you possibly be getting IP information for this board (let alone incorrect IP information?) Another sad attempt on your part, little man. Love, Not Brooks or Bfrank

Then go right ahead "M'am." I dare you. I DARE you to bring up an actual relevant Ward 3 issue in a substantive, civil and intelligent manner. Keep in mind that writing "Sam Brooks Is A Lazy Bum" or "Sam Brooks is Jealous" does NOT constitute "getting down to issues." And merely re-posting your attempted press releases here doesn't either, Rees. Let's see YOU stopname-calling and START discussing the "issues" as you see them. If you think you're doing a better job of it than Brooks, then prove it. Be a man, Rees. Let's see how what an intelligent visionary leader you'll REALLY make. Instead, I expect more cruel and pointless blather, more sloganeering and deceit, all of which will arrive by way of your fictional minions. Prove me wrong, "M'am." If you're capable of it.

Wrong. Simply wrong. He posted horrible, inflammatory things on DCist, Craigslist, DCDL and several Yahoogroups. He insulted his opponents, gay people, individual voters, Ward 3 voters in general, the moderators and users of all those boards, basically baiting everyone until they felt COMPELLED to fight back. Wait till the links get posted here. Fortunately, none but the ones You/Rees deleted yourselves (and the one's deleted by Craigs List staff and users) are all still in existence, with dates and times attached. This is the REAL "public record" you so often like to invoke. Rumors and vague assertions are not the public record....postings you've made on public forums are though. Love Always, Not Sam Brooks or BFrank

No, "M'aM," I do not. I think you/rees are FAR from a brilliant strategist. And you provide ample evidence of that with each new post. If that's a strategy, it's about as clever as those on which any number of Love Boat scripts have revolved. Transparent, vapid and utterly ineffectual. Don't flatter yourself. Meanwhile, real candidates are probably aware that littering the neighborhood with poorly constructed handbills almost a YEAR before the election is a rooky mistake. Making a pest of oneself should not be confused with merely getting a jump on the competition. But you'll find out, "M'am".

This is the most anaemic example of revisionist history I've EVER witnessed. "M'am." Sigh. I suppose one of us have to start compiling a timeline with actual quotes from Rees and his cyborgs to demonstrate this to the 3 people left alive on this planet to whom it's not already apparent. Rees did QUITE a lot more than merely "announce his candidacy" -- and, justifiably, brought out the critics.

To the two posters here who've sent me a couple of very interesting links - thanks! I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you, but I'm not replying via email (as you could, conceivably, be a certain habitual dissembler. I rather doubt it, but why take a chance... when I'm frankly a tad skeered of what I expect is a capacity for real evil.) Anyway, thanks and keep the faith. Also: Keep screen shots of everything you find...this stuff has a way of disappearing mysteriously, doesn't it?

You're as mistaken as you are transparent and amoral, "M'am".

B. Frank, you are ROCKIN MY WORLD, man! I salute you, whoever you may be, for continuing to ask questions and dig for the truth...despite the by now predictable schoolyard retaliation from He Whose Name(s) I Shall Not Speak. I await the day when actual working journalists start following your lead. Until then, you're doing us all a service and I for one thank you. The truth will out, as the great detective once said.

And finally, Brooks' rivals AREN'T attacking him. Look at this entire board. It's been reduced to nothing but Rees calling Brooks a "lazy bum" etc. The other posts are merely reactions to it, not attacks. Your slippery use of language rivals that of Karl Rove, dude.

So what you're saying is "I'm rubber, you're glue" etc. Very sophisticated, Rees. PS: Stop calling me "Sam Brooks". It's just plain incorrect, convenient though it may be for you to imagine.

That response is SO 2005, Rees. No one's buying it anymore.

Yes, someone please DO contact the Washington Post. Then, when they hear why you're asking, they'll likely start doing the long-overdue story exposing Rees' behavior and background. I'm beggin' ya people. Call and ask Mr. Weiss about the Fenty story and see what he says...after the laughter subsides.

Thanks for pointing that out (even though it's obvious to the, um, clearheaded among us.) Keep speaking truth to power, B, or at least truth to power wanna-be's. Love, Not Sam Brooks Not BFrank

And while you're there, be sure and check out Ree's hilarious "statements" on various "issues." They're a hoot! Love, Not Sam Brooks

At the hands of the Unnameable One.

Thank you Jonathan, for providing supporting evidence to my previous post. (Also? Me? SO not Sam Brooks.)

I, on the other hand, found it to be spot-on and engaging, and evidence that Brooks, at least, is capable of a level of discourse befitting a serious candidate for public office. A welcome change from the empty sloganeering and grandstanding one reads elsewhere, so reminiscent of a campaign for 8th Grade Class President.

I'm personally hoping for MORE of Mr. Frank's posts. And any posts by anyone dedicated to countering lies, malfeasance and propaganda. Until the press (and this boards moderator) starts doing it, it's up to the citizenry to challenge JR's campaign against reality with fact. He's not just embarassing himself, he's turning a very important campaign into a sideshow. Accusing people who disagree with your shabby tactics of being part of some cabal (belcher, Adler, Frank, Brooks, "a female lawyer", etc etc) is not just crazy, it's fascistic. As the old political bromide goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. Please take responsibility for your own actions, Rees, and stop inflicting this manic nonsense on the rest of us.

I'm sure it's obvious to all who "James Ray Smith" is. You're embarassing yourself, JR. As usual. Sure, try contacting WTOP or the WashPost. It's a wild goose chase, as this never happened. Repeating lies incessantly does not make them true. And never will.

Wow, everybody, Look! Another alter has appeared.

"Sexy?" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Don't bother, B. Obviously Cumes, MissGloverPark etc etc are, shall we say, two sides of the same coin (or two of the hydra's heads). Take the high road. Or at least the road that's not going to set off the crazyness. Unfortunately, intelligence and forthrightness are no match for mental illness, mean-spiritedness and a complete lack of ethics. I feel ya man...I wish it were possible to stop this guy from pulling the wool over everyone's eyes (not that I think anyone's falling for it.) But maybe you'll derive some satisfaction from knowing that at least one other person knows as well as you do what this dude's been up to. And now....I fully expect to be accused of being you, and/or Brooks, Belcher, some female lawyer or the fictional woman who was playing a prank or whoever is JR's bete noir du jour. Whatever, man, whatever