The Mail: Palermo Polemics

On Jan. 1, I was walking along Roland Avenue when the Tom Palermo Memorial Bike Ride took place ("Tom Palmero Memorial Ride and Vigil in Photos," Galleries, Jan. 3). The large crowd of bike riders was overwhelming. It brought back memories for me. Unlike most, I know pretty much what Mr. Palermo experienced, minus death.

In August 2005, I was hit by a minivan traveling 70 mph from behind while riding my bike in Northern Baltimore County on a three-mile stretch of straight roadway in the middle of the day. I was hit three times—by the van's hood, windshield, and side door—and then ejected 85 feet into the air to land, luckily, on a bunch of horseshit in a pasture. The woman driving was some four feet off the road and speaking on a cellphone when she hit me. I was knocked unconscious for more than eight hours, it took me over a year to recover from multiple catastrophic injuries, some of which I am still recovering from, and the cop on the scene couldn't be bothered to come to court, so the lady ended up skating with no punishment whatsoever. But, I am grateful every day that I was not hurt even worse and left paralyzed.


Which brings me to biking in Maryland, where many seemingly inbred, hillbilly types believe bikers have no right to be on the road and are fair game for cars, an attitude which is not helped by a minority of bike riders who scoff at traffic laws themselves.

Specifically, how in the hell can you kill someone with a weapon—a moving car—and leave the scene of the crime, then return, and be treated with kid gloves by the police? I just don't get how the most minor domestic violence (sometimes false) 911 calls or throwing a blunt at a po-po gets you automatically thrown into Central Booking for the night, but that what happened to Palermo does not.


Here's hoping the same Tom Palermo Memorial Bike Riders organize again very soon, descend upon the Baltimore City State's Attorney's Office, and demand that the State step in and do that which the police should have done in this case immediately—seize the perpetrator's goddamned driver's license, arrest her, and charge her with the highest offense possible, which is what they do to every other criminal defendant in the "Greatest City in America." Who knows, if the lady had stuck around, Mr. Palermo might still be a living father and a husband!

William Bond


Dag, I tweet as Baltimorite, yet Dan Rodrick's hasn't blocked me, (yet) So what am I..chopped twitter?

—“Tom Kiefaber,” Jan 4

This blog is why City Paper is so important, and why Dan Rodricks is so not... Best lines here are the 'softball pitching machine' by Paul Gardner and the one by CP Editor Evan Serpick. Hey Serps, maybe you should accidentally jack him up against the Sun's elevator wall one day and tell him how liberals are supposed to be so tolerant and open to dialogue?

–“William Bond,” Jan. 4

Rodricks has always had a thin skin and brooks no dissent or disagreement. It's one of the reasons I stopped reading him.

–“MikeM_inMD,” Jan. 3

I was blocked by Dan awhile ago in the heat of Zimmo / Trayvon debacle. Couldn't handle an opposing view. Oh well. My funds are going to wtmd instead.

–“John Wynn,” Jan 4

Maybe it was the useless hit piece you ran on him because he choose to block a few tweeters in his Twitter. A non story that is entirety irrelevant to everyone in Baltimore other than those tweeters and the author of the story. Of all the things you could have done a story on, you ran one on the angst of being blocked by Dan Rodericks? Your readers should care about that other than your hurt egos why exactly?

–“Dave Marcoot,” Jan. 4

Because it depicts the fact that someone who makes money criticizing others as a columnist and commentator apparently is unable to deal with criticism himself, and is thus a hypocrite.

Now, granted, it's entirely possible that someone could be blocked by Rodricks and/or WYPR, or for that matter anyone else, simply for asinine, over-the-top, "crackpot" behavior--like barraging the accounts with obscene rants several times an hour for several days, for example. If so, that should be the response of the station. Now, of course, a great many people probably consider Rodricks a pompous, blowhard a**h*le as well, and therefore choose not to listen to him or WYPR or read the Sun in part because of that fact.

It's perfectly OK to not be willing to listen to or handle opposing viewpoints. Just don't call yourself a "journalist," or even intelligent, and just admit you're an activist instead.

–“Alexander Mitchell,” Jan. 4

Who gives a rat's ass?

–“Ryan Finnerin,” Jan. 4

I really don't understand how any reputable media outlet can employ someone so hostile to opposing viewpoints as a "journalist." It's totally laughable, except for the fact that lots of people listen to and read him, and judging by his online behavior, I have serious doubts about his ability to present any kind of story fairly. So if he can't be fair, why is he given such a prominent platform?

–“Erin Harty,” Jan. 4

Good to see that first-world problems are being addressed. Well done.

–“Rob Humphries,” Jan. 4

Dan respond? Ha! But it's a pretty serious malfeasance that WYPR let a petty tyrant like him play out his need for an echo chamber at the expense of their journalistic integrity.

 –“SebastianSassi,” Jan 4

I highly doubt they made the final call to run the story as is. The producer is the one who needs to be fired. These two should just be suspended and educated on what morals and ethics are.

–“Cristi Demnowicz,” Dec. 31

I have a friend who works for a different Sinclair station and tells of the directives they receive from higher up that they must regularly belittle the President and create false narratives. There's no way this decision was made at the crew level.

–“Michael Schryver,” Jan. 1

Individual reporters and producers are not, in the final analysis, responsible for what goes on the public airwaves. The license holder is. This license holder deserves to lose it; their action is in contradiction to a civil society and the public interest. Don't bitch about the details: go to the FCC website, file a formal complaint against WBFF (takes about 3 minutes), and move against this kind of biased journalism.

–“Al McKegg,” Jan. 2

There is more to this story, so let me fill you in. The news director, Mike Tomko, sent Melinda Roeder a link to a video and told her he wanted her to do a story on that video. He told her that it was a video calling for "killing cops". Ms Roeder was hesitant to use it, but was told by the ND that it was Ok to use. The link he sent her was the EDITED video, but she did not know that. She trusted her news director (as she should have been able to). When the "error" hit the fan, and it should have, the Station Manager, in order to protect the station, and because people who did not know the real story were calling for her to be fired, and they NEEDED a scape goat for FOX 45 (after all, God forbid they actually take responsibility) let her and the photographer who worked with her go for "released without cause" and then leaked it out that the 2 staffers were let go. They had nothing to do with editing the tape, the ND found it, sent it, assigned it to Ms Roeder, AND DID THE FINAL APPROVAL OF THE STORY AS IT WAS SEEN ON AIR.

Ms Roeder has the emails to prove this and has retained them in case this goes to court. Also, one of the phone conversations between Ms Roeder and the ND took place on speaker phone in the presence of 3 other staff members, who also verified this with the station manager and legal staff. Unfortunately, legal staff's priority was to protect the station. The public is blaming the wrong people. Blame the ND and the station manager for protecting him! They are both sitting there collecting their $100,000 + salaries while innocent people are sacrificed.

Ms. Roeder does not wish to ever work for FOX 45 again,(I can't blame her) (I don't know about the photog's wishes) but their names have been slandered and the truth needs to be known. This is SHAMEFUL !

–“nanajmr,” Jan. 2