Showing posts with label Pittgirl. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pittgirl. Show all posts

September 11, 2014

Some Things To Think About If You're Planning On Watching Steelers-Ravens Tonight

Keith:


About 5 minutes in:
And lastly I accuse us.  All of us - executives, players, fans, reporters - of failing to draw a line in the sand when one was needed most.  Any games played by Baltimore without its executives, and the commissioner having been dismissed and without Ray Rice being permanently banned by the National Football League must be fully boycotted by all of us.  If not, we become accessories after the fact.
And Ginny - who may not be boycotting only tonight's game.

July 3, 2012

And Finally, THEY MEET!


Hey, who's the balding dork next to PittGirl?  It's me!

In case you just came on-line yestiddy OR you've been living under a rock for years, the woman in the above picture is Virginia Montanez, aka PittGirl, aka JanePitt, aka the blogger over at Thatschurch.com.

Even though I've been a Pittsburgh blogger since 2004 and she's been a Pittsburgh blogger since 2005, we've never met.  And so finally meeting Ginny was way cool.  I can't say it was like the first time Carole King met James Taylor - it was more like the first time Carole King met the balding dork the next town over who also wrote songs, only not as well.

Nice to have FINALLY met you, Ginny.

September 16, 2011

Congratulations

Congratulations to all the winners of the "CBS Pittsburgh's Most Valuable Blogger Awards" for 2011 including The Pittsburgh Comet and The Burgh, Exposed for "Local Affairs" and YaJagoff! and That's Church for "Everything Else" (the category we were in).

April 20, 2011

Pittsburgh Magazine Reader Poll!

Hey, I just saw this on the Macyapper's blog.

Every year Pittsburgh Magazine does this poll, right? Well this year they've included the category "Best Local Blogger."

Yes, I want you to vote for me.

And no, I don't expect to win (shouldn't we all just congratulate Ginny now and get it over with??)

;-)

Here's the link.

April 7, 2011

In Which I Defend Ginny...Sort Of

Let me start with my comment at Ginny's blog and work backwards:
For the record…

I have nothing to say about Ginny’s party affiliation or self-identification as a conservative.

My blog post only questioned the quotation marks that Ginny used around the phrase “war criminal”. In itself that’s neither a left/right, Democratic Party/Republican Party issue. Torture’s a human rights issue and the fact that it happened in this country should forever disgrace the president who allowed it and the political party that supported that him.

For the record.
For those few, those happy few, unacquainted with the story, I'll try to sum it up in a nutshell.
  • Virginia Montanez, aka Pittgirl, admits to being a republican (and a conservative) here.
  • There's something of a loud response from her many (MANY!) fans (250+ comments in the comments section of that blog post).
  • I question what looked to me like the irony quotes around the phrase "war criminal" she used in describing George W Bush - more on that in a bit.
  • Sue Kerr responds quite positively on her blog with this, And gets a short, teary-eyed thank you from Ginny herself.
  • The comment on my blog post was neither short nor teary-eyed.
That's about where things stand now.

Let me reiterate what I said in my comment on Ginny's post: I have nothing substantial to say about her political or party affiliations. We live in a free society (we're still free, right? The Koch Brothers haven't bought out the entire political process yet, have they? Just checking.). Each of us is free to believe what we want to believe; politically, religiously, morally, and so on. And so it's rather disappointing to learn of Ginny's now-former fans who, in a fit of anger, decide not to read her very funny (if mostly non-political) blog on account of these up until now mostly unacknowledged politics. The two have little if anything to do with each other.

If, on the other hand, they want to avoid her site because of her conservative politics so be it. They loose the giggle but gain...I am not sure what. But that's not for me to say anyway.

However, while we are free to believe what we want to believe, we also have to acknowledge that by labeling ourselves as a member of a group (in this case a political group), we have to accept that that comes with a certain amount of baggage. When the group does something good we have the right swell with pride at our membership. But we also have to accept some responsibility when the group does something not so good. That's the baggage of membership.

If you don't want the baggage, leave the group - especially if you don't agree with it.

That being said, Ginny walks back the irony quotes. From her comment:
Sorry I missed all the drama. Because my quotation marks around "war criminal" seem to be what has irked so many, let me explain.

I wrote that post in under ten minutes, didn't proof it, posted it. I had no motive behind any of my punctuation. I put quotes around war criminal not to be ironic, but because, and I mean this honestly, I was quoting the reader who said that. Honestly.

Do I think that those that view George Bush as a war criminal have a valid opinion. Of course I do. That day that I came out was honestly one of the hardest days of my life and to have people suddenly jump on me for voting for Bush, write about how I voted for a war criminal, etc. on top of all the other shit that happened that day, honestly was unexpected.
I'll take her at her word that she didn't intend any irony. I am not sure that gets her off the hook, though. Here's what she wrote:
This resulted in some uproar from readers who were shocked I ever voted for a “war criminal.” Yes. WAR CRIMINAL. I voted for him because as you already know ME LOVE KILLING! GRRRRR.
Not sure I'd want to make a joke minimizing either torture or the deaths of 4500+ American servicemen and women (not to mention the countless Iraqis who died). Deaths, let's all remember, that were a direct result of the actions and decisions of the man who won the 2004 election.

I'd not want to make that joke - but that's just me.

My question at the end of my blog post, however, is still valid. If the quotation isn't ironic, then why the vote for the war criminal?

March 29, 2011

But Ginny, He IS A War Criminal

My friend Ginny wrote yesterday:
The very day I outed myself as Virginia Montanez instead of PittGirl, Chad Hermann at the Radical Middle latched on to this letter to the editor I wrote when George Bush was re-elected, wondering how my readers were going to like me knowing I was a Republican. This resulted in some uproar from readers who were shocked I ever voted for a “war criminal.” Yes. WAR CRIMINAL. I voted for him because as you already know ME LOVE KILLING! GRRRRR.
But Ginny, why the use of the ironic quotation marks? Bush IS a war criminal and he was when you voted for him in 2004. He approved the waterboarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed and KSM (as he's known in intelligence circles) was waterboarded in 2003 - well before the 2004 election.

I don't think I need to spell out (again) how waterboarding is torture and how torture is against international and US law and how torture is a war crime, do I?

Even without the Bush-approved torture, the case could be made for war criminal by the invasion of Iraq itself and the dishonesty he used to support it - where were the connections to al-Qaeda? the sale of uranium in Niger? the WMD? They were no where to be found. The foundations for the war were fraudulent even if the war resulted in halting Saddam Hussein's murderous regime. Bottom line is that all that blood (American, Iraqi, British, etc) IS on Dubya's hands.

Whatever else belongs in your otherwise thoughtful and nuanced blog post, the irony quotes don't.

Perhaps I misunderstood (and if I did, then I apologize in advance) and you DO think that Bush is a war criminal and you were merely quoting one or more readers with your use of the quotation marks.

If that's the case, then why the vote for the war criminal?

February 17, 2010

Ravenstahl-Gate

Potter (as usual, damn him) has some interesting things to point out at the Slag Heap:
After considerable confusion as to his whereabouts today, Mayor Luke Ravenstahl emerged at a late-afternoon press conference. He'd gone incommunicado the rest of the day, he told reporters, "just to kind of prove a point: that you all need to be more responsible."
Ravenstahl railed about rumors that he had traipsed off to Mardi Gras, and confirmed what his press spokesperson had said previously: He'd been in the city all day.

I find this behavior so utterly baffling that I can't decide what's worse: the possibility that this is a weird excuse to cover for his absence, or the possibility that Ravenstahl is telling the truth.
But then he peeks behind the curtain:
But I will say this: If I were Luke Ravenstahl -- and thank God I'm not -- I too would suspect some members of the press of reckless behavior. One reason is Virginia Montanez's post about the mayor's disappearance.
Here's Pittgirl's post. Potter again:
I mean, there's a weird phenomenon going on here, especially where Montanez is considered. More than a year ago, I noted that local media outlets were willing to bend all kinds of rules for her. Back then, of course, Montanez was anonymous, blogging under the name "PittGirl." And reporters indulged that to a surprising extent:

I can't think of too many cases in which the Post-Gazette has done a 600-word Q&A -- plus prominent mention in multiple follow-up pieces -- with someone whose identity it refused to disclose. And it's not because nobody over there knows who she is. I know of at least one reasonably high-ranking Post-Gazette editor who has met PittGirl for lunch.

In fact, this may be PittGirl's most impressive accomplishment: Her popularity was such that she got some of the city's most prominent media outlets to play by the blogosphere's rules.


And so it seems to be. Now it's reporters who are being accorded anonymity by the blogger.
As always, Potter's insight is keen.

October 16, 2009

A Free Speech Message To Luke Ravenstahl

(H/T to Pittgirl and Marty Levine)

Marty Levine sets the stage:
The city is facing the possibility of civil suits stemming from arrests and other police activity during the G-20. Criminal hearings involving accused protesters -- many of whom are students at Oakland universities -- are still pending.
And what does Mayor Luke do at "Off The Record"? Levine, again:

And according to several witnesses who contacted us after the fact, Ravenstahl used his moment on stage to send a message to ACLU state legal director Vic Walczak, who has sharply criticized the city's handling of G-20 protesters. According to multiple sources, Ravenstahl said something like this: "I heard we're going to face a free-speech lawsuit. Well, I have some free speech for you -- fuck you, Vic Walczak."

Pittgirl reacts:
My view is this, Lukey went too far. Actually, he didn’t just go too far, he saw the line, laughed at the line, erased the line, then got in his spaceship and zoomed to the planet Visuviusium six galaxies away and then kept the hell on going like a fleet of starfighters was on his ass. THAT’S how far he went.
The Mayor is SUCH A CLASSY GUY! How many weeks have passed since the tear gas? Since the rubber bullets and bean bags? And THIS is how the mayor jokes?

Hey, I got some free speech for you, Mr Mayor.

Are you there, Mr Mayor? Maybe Yarone can read it to you.

Fuck you, Luke.

August 20, 2009

PittGirl Fired

Well this sucks but is not totally unexpected.

From KDKA:
Virginia Montanez, also known as PittGirl, was the marketing director for the Pittsburgh-based scholarship program NEED.

Montanez revealed her identity in an interview with KDKA's Jim Lokay on Wednesday.

She said she was fired this morning.
You can read her take on it at her blog.

And some people wonder why so many bloggers remain anonymous . . .

[sigh]
.

August 19, 2009

Pitt Girl: Anonymous No More

At her blog (which has been renamed "That's Church") she gives up some info:
1. My name is Virginia Montanez. My friends and family call me Ginny, but you can continue to call me Your Majesty, because I’ve grown accustomed.
Now that her name's out of the way, I'll paraphrase the other stuff. She's married, two kids ("HOLY SHIT, PITTGIRL IS A MOM!"), four sisters and she still hates pigeons.

Nice to meet you, Virginia. Good to have you back.

August 3, 2009

Not Sure What This Means...

I stumbled across this while stumbling through facebook this morning.

Bram of the Pittsburgh Comet posted a link to THE BURGHBLOG.

There's new content on it.

Now if we can only get 2PJ listed on Pittgirl's blogroll.

[Pause for dramatic effect]

I mean she's on our blogroll.

[Another pause.]

C'mon, Jane. Can you help a blogger out?