Like the conversation here?

Well, come on over to my Facebook page, 'like' the page, and you'll get all the latest conversations in your newsfeed. Do it, so you don't miss out!
Just click on the Facebook badge below, and you be taken straight there!

Sunday, August 1, 2010

I can’t even come up with a good title for this one

Wowzer! Did the Victoria Advocate really do it this time! Do you all remember last October when the Advocate was concerned with their credibility? They hosted a Town Hall meeting and everything, including a survey. I am thinking they completely forgot all of that when they published the hit piece on Matt Ocker this morning.

Yes, Matt Ocker has ‘history’. It is all explained for anyone who cares to read about it. I am not going to defend Matt’s history or his behavior. On the three occasions that I have had the opportunity to speak face to face with Matt, I have found him to be nothing but polite, knowledgeable and interesting to talk to. And for those who are wondering, he cleans up pretty well, too, if that sort of thing matters to you. I am not here to convince you to ignore the Advocate and vote for Matt Ocker if you weren’t already going to do so. I want to talk about the ethics of the article. Matt Ocker’s history is of no relevance for me at this point in time.

First, was this article really necessary? Are there really folks out there who are not aware of most of this? I am not sure that most folks don’t already know the high points of Matt’s history as that had been splayed out on the Advocate forum many times. Did we need the details? I don’t care if he is running for public office, did we need the details? I don’t really think so. I appreciate the fact that Pozzi’s criminal record was mentioned. He was arrested on a drunk driving charge, and was unlawfully carrying a weapon. The Advocate is worried about Matt’s temper and we have a drunk with a weapon?

Secondly, let’s look at the folks the Advocate asked for comments on the story. We have County Commissioner Gary Burns commenting and making this comment, “I do worry about his mental stability," said County Commissioner Gary Burns, a fellow Republican.” Well, if I wanted to guarantee a negative comment about Matt Ocker, I’d go straight to Gary Burns, too. Everyone in the county, including, probably my dead Aunt Pearl, knows that there is no love lost between Gary Burns and Matt Ocker. How fair was that? Then we have Matt’s ex-brother-in-law, Travis Eddleman. Another excellent choice, if I do say so.

Having ‘experts’ weigh in from various colleges lent absolutely no credibility to the article in my opinion. These folks were provided with who knows what information and we have no idea as to how they formed their opinion. Even though they are speaking generically, the fact that their opinion is attached to Matt will probably have the desired effect that the Advocate is seeking.

Last, let’s talk about the comments section being disabled. It was a nice gesture to offer folks the opportunity to write a letter to the editor. I’m sure we’ll see some of those. It was nice that both Matt Ocker and Don Pozzi were invited to submit columns in response. We might see that. But the clever offer, in my opinion, was to offer readers a chance to write a blog where folks could post. We’ve seen that. Advocate Blogger Bsspotter wrote a blog,, critical of the Advocate’s story.

Chris Cobler, editor of the Advocate, also posted a blog asking us to weigh in on the topic of restricting comments on stories. His blog is located at .  He has 35 comments already. Folks are being very vocal about this and many are speaking in favor of Matt Ocker, despite the information in the story. By the way, in the online poll, “Who will you vote for as Victoria County Judge?” Matt Ocker is leading with 133 votes to Pozzi’s 119.

Back in October, during all the ‘does the Advocate have a credibility issue’ debate, I looked at the Mission Statement of the Victoria Advocate. I’m reprinting it here for you to see. Read it and ask yourself if the Advocate has lived up to it’s Mission Statement with this particular article.

Mission Statement
We are our market’s dominant provider of relevant and compelling content.
We delivery timely and accurate information to consumers,
and we deliver targeted audiences to advertisers across multiple mediums.
We value honesty, fairness, respectfulness, and service to our community.

Was this article relevant? Was it fair and respectful and did it provide a service to our community? If you can answer yes to all of those questions without hesitation, then you should have no problem with the article. If you think the article was unfair and disrespectful, then you see where I am coming from. And where I am coming from is this: in the coming days, weeks, or months will we see this sort of article on District Attorney Stephen B. Tyler and his opponent, former Assistant District Attorney Deborah Branch? While it will not be a scrutiny of their criminal records, it could be one of their prosecution records. That would be relevant, compelling and certainly of a service to our community in as much as a prosecution record is usually what gets a DA elected.

Chris Cobler states, “We consider it part of our First Amendment duty to help inform the public about their candidates for public office.” I think there was a lapse, somewhat, in good judgment here, and that is a disappointment. I eagerly await the Tyler/Branch exposé.

So, until next time,
Edith Ann

"Live so that when your children think of fairness, caring, and integrity, they think of you." -- H. Jackson Brown, Jr.


Legion said...

Yes EA and the VA is getting defensive about their position on the subject see T. Martinez s comment to me tonight.

I restrained myself on CG s blog with my reply to Martinez, but CGs exchange with BS came awfully close to intimidation.

"Why wouldn't you want to step forward and identify yourself and your role in the campaign?

Because I know your role in the Ocker campaign,"

Mr. Cobler knows who BS is, so he suggests, and uses it as a debating point.

On a final note, let us please remember Mr. Martinez addendum of his comment to me....
As an addendum to my last post: We would reveal a commenter's name only if we were subpoenaed to do so. Other than that, never.

not securely anchored said...

The answers to your questions are yes, no, and yes.

Yes, this article was relevant. Judges' races are hard to vote because usually we have so little information on the candidates. I had no idea both of Victoria's candidates had records.

No, it wasn't fair. My first thought was hatchet job on Ocker. The Advocate should have displayed information on both candidates on the front page and provided a better balance of information.

Yes, it was a service to the voting community. See above.

About comments -- since the Advocate controls the delete button, maybe it's better that comments are posted in some other useful site, like yours.

TruthFerret said...

Well, at least we know the reason behind the "Bring your Boots" campaign; however, one should also bring your slickers to keep all the slung "mud" off your clothes.

Geeze, there was a post about the history of Cobbler (which was relevant) and that comment's expiration date happened VERY QUICKLY. I'm sure that the poster is long gone, too. If it's okay to know the history of politicians, wouldn't it be okay to know the history of the EDITOR reporting? Guess not.

You know there is a new mud pit area out on 59, for those wild four wheelers who like to sling dirt, but I think we have some editors on Constitution Street who get a kick out of it, too. Stand back, folks, and don't forget your slickers.

Anonymous said...

No, I've seen cobbler "out" several members in the past. One a grieving father.

But that he has no shame...

Anonymous said...

"eeze, there was a post about the history of Cobbler (which was relevant) and that comment's expiration date happened VERY QUICKLY."

Can we get a summary?

Edith Ann said...

not securely anchored—

As to the relevancy of the article and the service to the community, I can agree with you ONLY in the context of ‘this type of article will be available on EVERY candidate in the November election’. Otherwise, to single out one candidate—and they had to include Pozzi to give the impression of fairness—is, well, to single out one candidate. Trust me, if they had found very much more dirt on Pozzi, this article would have never appeared.


I think they anticipated a great deal of to-do over this, I am not sure they anticipated they’d be taking so much heat for it. But I don’t think they’d do anything differently.

As to the contents of the article, I am about 99.999% sure that I would have had no problem with citing candidates’ records/histories/boo-boos and such. A straight factual article is one thing. It is what it is. But to only include negative comments from folks known to not be in favor with the person profiled is nowhere near fair. To have folks who have never spoken with him comment as to the status of his mental health—is that the new norm? Can we expect to see more of this type of story?

I know there are folks who would have had nice things to say about Matt—where were those comments? The entire article was one-sided in that no positive comments about his platform, or from his supporters were presented.

This is not necessarily about ‘the Advocate was mean to Matt’, it is about what was their purpose in sharing all the superfluous stuff?


As to outing posters, I'm not aware of Cobler doing that. As to his history, I only know what I've read, and I see no need to go there. To do so would be the equivalent of what I feel the Advocate has done--attack the person because they can't attack his platform. Not at all productive.

Matt Ocker said...

I want to make something perfectly clear. I do not agree with this type of reporting. I no more wanted Pozzi's past to become the topic of debate than I did my own. One has to wonder - if I were squeaky clean and Pozzi's past were what it is, would they have run a story on it?

One question that no one has asked is where was this "investigative reporting" in 2002 qnd 2006? How do you think Pozzi would have fared against Kornfuehrer if the election would have been about character? But that's no the way things are done over at the Advocate. Pozzi was their horse, and Kornfuehrer was weak on the issues, so that is where they kept the dialogue.

One other important fact to note is that the VA uploaded 2 of Pozzi's arrest reports, yet they did not provide a link to them. Why did they provide a link for mine, but not his?

I also have been told by several "insiders" that Pozzi had 2 DWI convictions expunged in Jackson County. I wouldn't even begin to know how to dig that up. Does anyone know?

Anonymous said...

“This from an online legal site:

What is a "Record Expunction?"

Expunction (also known as expungement), is a District Court order to destroy all records associated with a criminal prosecution. Essentially, it is a lawsuit against the government to provide relief for those falsely accused or found not guilty. If you were not convicted, it's not fair that the information should be later held against you.

If you are found not guilty, or the prosecutor dismissed the charges, an expunction order requires law enforcement agencies, state agencies, and courts to eliminate all records of your arrest, mug shot, fingerprints, blood or breath samples, and any record of the traffic stop. This will restore your good name and clear your criminal history of any mention of this arrest.

Expunction is often misunderstood. Some Texas counties allow - or previously allowed - deferred adjudication for DWI. Many people who completed probation believe they have no criminal record, when in fact those records are on file and accessible to state and federal law enforcement agencies in Texas and beyond. A "deferred" sentence for DWI may still be considered a prior conviction for enhancement of penalties for a new offense of drunk driving.

What is a "Petition for Non-Disclosure?"

A conviction CAN NEVER be expunged. However, if you plead guilty and received a "Deferred Probation" then it may be possible for your deferred adjudication to be sealed from public view.

An order for non-disclosure enables law enforcement to retain records associated with an arrest or conviction, but shields the records from public view. This enables the person to apply for loans, college, jobs, or auto insurance without mentioning the DWI case and its disposition.”

BIGJ said...

Matt Ocker.

What the VicAd had done to you is wrong. However, Matt you bought this on yourself. That's right I said it. For the past two or three years you have been making insults.

Second How can you say you are not guilty, when you had pleded no contest? Which one is the lie, Matt?

Before I go let me leave with this…………
“Chickens coming home to roost never made me sad, it always made me glad.”

BIGJ said...

Edith Ann said...

I have a question for you BigJ:

Agreeing that you are not a Matt Ocker fan, if it were someone else, and not Matt, wanting the same things for our county, would you support that? Or are you okay with the current state of Victoria County government?

Think before you answer because I am asking about platforms, not persons.

I have kids a little younger than Matt, and as a dinosaur I see bouts of immature behavior and comments at times, but overall, is his message about our county government bad?

I have no way to predict the winner of the election, but I can say this--I for one am very happy to see some folks squirming and acting like Matt might have a chance. I do think Matt is a viable candidate. I think he has a chance. I am tired of the status quo. I'd like to see the last meeting of the Good Old Boys' Club actually happen. Only when we bring diversity to what we have can we ever truly know what the City and the County are capable of.

I mean, gee whiz, our Mayor has made it clear that his legacy will be the road to the airport, come hell or high water. It is pretty sad when they don't even hide their agendas anymore. True, I'd like transparency, but not when it is strictly self-serving.

BIGJ said...


Edith Ann.

If the candidate was someone else and not Matt Ocker. I wouldn’t care. That does not mean I support the Status quo.

Here is a question for you. WHAT ABOUT THE CONTENT OF CHARACTER ????????????????

I guess you forgot about that part, Edith Ann. It seems to me that you want me to SHUT UP and/or “RALLY” around the Ocker flag. Sorry, but that won’t fly with me. You are doing nothing but making excuses for him. Yet last fall you condemn someone because “he” had enough with the local mentality and choose to FIGHT BACK !!!!!!!!!!!

Here is a clue for you. The Democratic challenger to Rozzi even endorse Rozzi after the primary. Is he apart of the good ole boys? If so then why did the Democratic Challenger disagrees with the County Judge on many issues? Everyone knows Ocker is a nut job. He is Glenn Beck and Mel Gibson roll up in one. Unlike you and others, this isn’t about just the county and local politics. Ron Paul is in his 70’s and won’t be Congressman forever. It is time to nip it in the bud.

You said, “I think many folks, particularly the older crowd, can understand Matt's message, and are embracing it. They are a huge voting bloc“. After you said, Only when we bring diversity to what we have can we ever truly know what the City and the County are capable of. “

It was the OLDER CROWD who maintain the conservative status quo. It was the older crowd who elects State Rep. Geanie Morrison, the mayor of Victoria, Rick Perry, and others of the crossroad area. It is the OLDER CROWD who discourages DIVERSITY in the first place. The Older Crowd as you put it has itself to blame.

Edith Ann said...

Good Morning BigJ—

While my first impulse is to just ignore you because you have missed my point, I’m going to go ahead and make another attempt at discussing this with you.

If you read my blog carefully, you will see that I acknowledged Matt Ocker has history, and I never, not once, defended any or all of it. I never asked anyone to rally around Matt and I certainly never indicated that anyone should shut up about this.

In fact, between here and the Advocate forum, most folks should be able to see that MY issue with this story was this: will we see this type of story done on all the other political candidates between now and the November elections? I asked that question several times, in fact.

If you believe that I, Edith Ann, have made excuses for Matt, please be specific so I can clear that misconception up.

You are correct that Ron Reyna did publicly endorse Don Pozzi after the primary. That is typically what folks of the same party do. That would have only been news if Ron had crossed party lines and endorsed Matt.

As to your comment about Ron Paul, I am supporting Robert Pruett in that race. What else do you think I should do? I know you don’t live here in Victoria, but I do, and there are a whole bunch of elections taking place here this fall that do concern me. Why would I ignore the local stuff?

As to the older crowd and Matt, I stand by what I said. He is discussing money issues with senior citizens on fixed incomes, and they are listening. I’ve personally witnessed that. Are they actually going to vote for him? I cannot predict that. But I can tell you thisà Matt is the republican candidate, in a republican county (2 to 1) where a lot of the voters like to pull a single lever. Those are facts. But that is countered by the fact that much of Pozzi’s base if local republicans. So, who knows?

I am not happy with the status quo in this community. I do think the local politics needs to be shaken up a bit. Does Matt have a place in all of this? Well, as the official candidate on the republican ticket, he does for now. Will he continue to have a place in this? Only the voters who vote in November know that.

BigJ, I do think that character counts. I certainly do. But, again, I ask you, would you like to see one of your favorites treated the way Matt was? I think the Advocate has set a precedent as to the ‘treatment’ of candidates in their paper. The next time Gary Burns runs for County Commissioner, will we have some of his former tenants being quoted in the paper telling us what kind of landlord he is? I doubt it. I think the Advocate would like to think that most of us have short-term memory issues, and come November we will forget that all candidates were not scrutinized the way Matt was. If their claim is that it is their right to do so, and their belief that we need to know this to make informed decisions when we vote, then they have no choice but to apply this policy equally.

I do not speak for anyone but ME. For ME, this is an issue of equality. I never said the Advocate was wrong for doing this. I said it was questionable, but I never said wrong.
I have the ability to take Matt out of the issue, and to look at ‘what ifs’ if it were any one else. Can you do that?

Keep in mind that you have done your share of angry outbursts on the Advocate. Your posting history doesn’t lend credence to your position.

Anonymous said...

"Your posting history doesn’t lend credence to your position."

Amen. Let's not not even touch his sprellang or glammer.

At some point in his life, BIGJ became convinced that black = democrat. No turning back now. It's embarrassing to see young folks like J played in such a manner, so easily and readily duped.

It just goes to show that allowing yourself to be blinded by hatred only leaves you blind.

Anonymous said...

Proposed County Budget in the Red?

And what solution does the Victoria Advocate offer? Raising taxes...

Karl Marx once said that democracy is the road to socialism. Well, I think we're all familiar with Cobbler, et. al.'s affinity for democracy.

Should this come as any surprise?

Was the Matt Ocker story preemptive damage control?

BTW, thanks J, glad to see your guys are still hard at work!

Matt Ocker said...

I can't remember if I have already asked this question or not, so please forgive my repetition if I have:
If, according to a professor that was only given one side of the story, my placement on the ballot is "suspect", then why wasn't Pozzi's Placement on the 2002, 2006, and 2010 ballots "suspect"?
Why was Pozzi's past not printed in 2002 or 2006? Was it because Susan Kornfuehrer was squeaky-clean? The Advocate allowed the 2006 election to be about the issues, which was to Pozzi's benefit. Now that the issues may sink their chosen candidate, they want to steer the voting public away from that topic.

One need look no further than the article in today's edition of the Advocate. We already have a county budget that lands us nearly $1 million in the red. This comes after 2 straight years of deficit spending, totaling $3.3 million. And let us not forget about the "record county debt" that was issued this March.

When you add all this up, if I were in Pozzi's camp, I would not want this election to be about the issues either. We will see what the voters think in November.

BIGJ said...

Anonymous (Or should I say DDHERRING or Pilot).

You said something so stupid. I do not know where to begin. What does race have to do with this? NOT A DAMN THING !!!!!!!! You do not know a damn thing about me or what I think. You are trying to start what you can't finish.

My guys? Who are my "guys". I can't stand Chirs Cobbler and some of those in the VICAD.

BIGJ said...


What other lie you are going to make this time?

BIGJ said...

Edith Ann.

Where should I start on your reply? I am going to reply bit by bit to your comment.

You said: “You are correct that Ron Reyna did publicly endorse Don Pozzi after the primary. That is typically what folks of the same party do. That would have only been news if Ron had crossed party lines and endorsed Matt.”

My answer: Ron Reyna’s candidacy means his own dislike of Rozzi’s policies. Reyna’s platform was closer to Ocker. Even if my own platform or ideas was closer to Occker, I STILL wouldn’t allow Ocker to win.

You said: “As to your comment about Ron Paul, I am supporting Robert Pruett in that race. What else do you think I should do? I know you don’t live here in Victoria, but I do, and there are a whole bunch of elections taking place here this fall that do concern me. Why would I ignore the local stuff?”

My answer: Where in my comment did I say anything about ingoing local stuff? Where Edith Ann? Please do not put words in my mouth. I have a feeling that Ocker will use his postion as County Judge to be Ron Paul’s replacement within the next three election cycle. I do not want that man to be a congressman either. Btw since the White House is in Democratic Control I would like to some balance in our congressional districts and end gerrymandering in Texas.

Second. Whenever Victoria sneezes, the outer counties (Dewitt, Lavaca, Jackson, & Goliad) catches a cold.

You said: “But, again, I ask you, would you like to see one of your favorites treated the way Matt was? “

My answer: I guess you hadn’t been reading the Opinion Page for the past two or three years. You know…….“He’s not citizen, He’s a Socailist, He’s a racist!!!!!!!!!”

You said: “I have the ability to take Matt out of the issue, and to look at ‘what ifs’ if it were any one else. Can you do that?”

My answer: Yes I can. It is questionable and in my opinion wrong for what Chris Clober and Victoria Advocate did. However, you must admit Ocker bought it on himself !!!!!

You said: “Keep in mind that you have done your share of angry outbursts on the Advocate. Your posting history doesn’t lend credence to your position.”

My Answer: I have ever right to blast people for their own ill will bias, prejudice, and ignorance. Say what you want. You can go back to February 2007 when it all started. Did you have your outburst on nut jobs like Kenneth, Victore, and the like?

Edith Ann said...


I’ll honor you with a reply, but I am pretty sure I’m done answering your rants after this. Okay?

As to Ron Reyna, have you spoken with Ron Reyna about his endorsement of Don Pozzi? I think folks would have been very surprised if the PRESIDENT of the local Democrats Club did not support the Democrat candidate, don’t you? Of course Ron Reyna disagreed with Pozzi’s administration of the County. I think that is usually the main reason someone challenges the incumbent, isn’t it? And just for the record, if you are going to complain about this and include the current County Judge in this discussion, please get his name right. It’s POZZI, not ROZZI.

I was not putting words in your mouth. At the risk of seeming to attack your ability to communicate, let’s be honest here. Most of the time I have to decipher what you write in an attempt to figure out what you mean. You have to admit, that is not always an easy task. I do think it is very interesting that you think (a) Ron Paul will still be serving in three more election cycles, and that (b) Matt will be in a position to replace him. I don’t speak for Matt, but I bet he is very pleased with this endorsement from you.

You cannot separate the person from the issue at hand. You said: “My answer: Yes I can. It is questionable and in my opinion wrong for what Chris Clober and Victoria Advocate did. However, you must admit Ocker bought it on himself !!!!!”

You are right. You have the right to “blast people for their own ill will bias, prejudice, and ignorance.” When the Advocate tires of you doing this, they will ban you once again.

I am not interested in debating minor points with you. If you have something constructive to add to the conversation, please do. If you want to just continue your broken record rant, then you’re done here.

Anonymous said...

"My Answer: I have ever right to blast people for their own ill will bias, prejudice, and ignorance. "

...and yet you blast Matt Ocker for doing the same to you.

What's good for the goose, son, is good for the gander.

BIGJ said...


What is your problem? I'm your not F'ing son. Then you talk to me like I am stupid or "duped" because I do not think like the majority, have to same minsdest, or my age. Matt Ocker had no business calling me or anyone else stupid, UnAmerican, and Socalist.

You better find yourself a hobby because what you are talking about has no legs.

Maybe you need read what he said to Don Mader on the Vicad. Don Mader is a sixty plus year old conservative Republican.

BIGJ said...

Edith Ann.

Here is a Question. What do you want me to say? Please tell me. I do not know what you want me to say to please you. I do not see what I said is deciphered. I can not bring myself to firmly stand in your corner. You can call my statements rants all you want, but I stand by them especially of the person -in-question. No I hadn’t spoken to Ron Reyna or anyone of the Victoria County Democratic Party nor I care to. I’m politically educated to know that Ron Paul is up in age and that a replacement is need in 2012, 2014, or in 2016. As for the Victoria Advocate banning me again, I say let them. I mostly post on Roland S. Martin’s page more than Vicad where it is more friendlier. It only proves that they (Victoria Advocate) are hypocrites and cowards for allowing trash being written by Wm. Paul Tasin and others crying to moon.

Anonymous said...

"Then you talk to me like I am stupid or "duped" because I do not think like the majority, have to same minsdest, or my age. "

"Have to same minsdest..." enough said.

Thanks again, BigJ.

BIGJ said...

Thanks for what? For saying.......

Then you talk to me like I am stupid or "duped" because I do not think like the majority, have the same minsdest, or my age???????

Anonymous said...

A jellyfish stings, yet is spineless, much like C. Cobler.

Mr. Edward Post.

Great site.

Anonymous said...

Yet you find many washed ashore, the victim of prevailing tides. A storm is brewing.

Ed Post 2010

Anonymous said...

How's this for pattern?

Donald Day, Chairman of Citizens Medical Center & VEDC, has been sued, not once, but twice.

USA/Traco v. Donald Day
Violation of Miller Act

Gaalla et al v. Citizens Medical Center Board

Is this the type of behavior (remember, accusation = fact) we want from a man appointed to influence the allocation of public funds and make decisions for our public hospital? An honest person should be able to avoid this kind of trouble, right? If past is prologue, this man will only be in more trouble in the future, especially since he's insulated from public scrutiny.

I wonder what other dirty secrets are floating around out there on our "chosen ones".

Anonymous said...

That is pretty interesting. I noticed the difference between the Ocker and Citizens articles as well. I think the Victoria Advocate just galvanized support for Matt Ocker.

Anonymous said...

I've noticed a bit of a VicAd blackout on that case. It seems in other cases of this magnitude they publish any detail they can. Since their first & only article on the lawsuit, there's been a motion to dismiss (6/8/10), granting the motion (6/29/10), and a subsequent appeal. Perhaps I missed their coverage.

Legion said...

Well, since I wouldn't pony up the fee to subscribe to the site, all I can gather from the 3/30/06 Traco lawsuit, is that Donald Day as owner of Texas Glass and Tinting, being either the contractor or sub-contractor on a public financed construction project failed to ....

Secure a surety bond equal to the amount of the contract required under the Miller Act. or

Failed to pay his suppliers or sub- contractors within 90 days as required under the Miller Act.

The Miller Act applies to publicly financed project of over $100,000.

Anonymous said...

USA/Traco v. Donald Day:

Edith Ann said...

Please knock it off. If you want to tilt at every one who doesn’t completely agree with you, take it to YOUR blog.

As I live and breathe, you found your way over here! Well, welcome!

Appreciate the info. I guess the difference is that Donald Day doesn’t get elected to those positions. Personally, I’m a bit more concerned that he is the chair of VEDC and CMC board.

Interesting info there, too.

And thanks, Anonymous for the link.

I guess if we all hunted around, in this age of the internet, we can find out stuff on most anyone, from any source, good and bad.

I am still of the opinion that doing this type of article sets a very questionable precedent. Just to be PERFECTLY clear, for me this is not about publishing someone’s history; a person’s history is what it is. It is a matter of intent, and I think the intent was to insulate one of the good old boys.

Now, if they want to do this sort of work up on the movers and shakers of Victoria, I don’t think there’s be enough hair straightener on the planet to handle the kind of information that would be revealed with that!

Anonymous said...


Donald Day is the Chairman of the Board of a County hospital with hundreds of millions of dollars running through it plus a cash account that could pay the County budget twice over. He's also the Chair of the VEDC which receives $300k+ from local government. I believe this burdens him with major responsibility to the citizens of Victoria. His business dealings and "deviations" should be under intense scrutiny at all times. Two lawsuits in four years doesn't look too good. Again, accusation is fact.

Anonymous said...


Sounds like it's time for a blog over at the victoria advocate.

"Hiding (with a record)"

Anonymous said...


I'll leave that up to the pros. Good title, though.


Anonymous said...

Ocker deemed a solid constitutionalist:

Anonymous said...

Most people today don't know the first thing about the Constitution. I like the idea of Matt Ocker being a constitutionalist but I just wish it mattered to more people.

BIGJ said...

Edith Ann.

Knock what off? Saying what I mean??

Why won't address that to Ed Post? I ask you a question and you still didn't answer it. I longer care about the issue, but don't ask why oh why the new leadership are so bad.

Edith Ann said...


I really do not mind you reading and posting over here at Edith Ann, but I confess—I have this mental image of you standing there, chest puffed out, screaming at the rest of us.

You are always welcome to participate, but knock off the repeated jabs at my posters. You’re free to disagree with any or all of them, but to continue to harp and pester gets old and obnoxious very quickly, and I think you may not realize that you no longer contribute to the conversation here.

I don’t know how else to say that. State your points and position and add to the dialogue here. Stop baiting folks to get an argument. You have your own blog where you can do that.

I could respond to this—“I longer care about the issue, but don't ask why oh why the new leadership are so bad.”—if I only knew what you meant.

Matt Ocker said...

If I sent you a blog in response to Sunday's "article", would you consider posting it here on your site?

Edith Ann said...

You are welcomed to post a response here.

Legion said...

Umm, BigJ has stole comments off this site to use as comments on his.

Legion said...

Click the comments on his latest blog, I tell ya, borrowing comments and re posting them on his own blog?

I don't know,something is very wrong with that.

Legion said...

What a reversal of his last VicAd blog.

Anonymous said...

Edith Ann. You got it . . . Post it

ed 2010

victorianbybirth said...

Wouldn't Donald Days ties to both entities be considered a conflict of interest & he should resign one of the positions? He seems to be in charge of way too much pulic money & who knows with how much oversight. I do believe the Board of the County Hospital should be published as well as their backgrounds & the minutes of the meetings. How does one get appointed to that Board?

Yes, EA, every candidates background as well as platform should be published in the paper. Not only criminal, if applicable, but also work/business. Do they or have they run a successful business, have they ever filed bankruptcy, etc....Once you throw your hat into the ring, your life becomes an open book, nothing should be sacred.

Lastly, I did not agree with the way the Advocate brought in all those "experts" & others, they should have left that out completely. Bringing in "experts", who have never laid eyes on the person, to weigh in is what tabloid papers & magazines do, not what a reputable newspaper should do. Print the record & let the people make up their own minds. Leave out what the ex family & random others have to say, unless it can be backed up by facts & also throw some supporters into the mix, that would be fair & balanced reporting.

Matt, I would have to agree with you on the timing, it did kinda deflect from the budget issue. Those waskely wabbits running the county, the city & their cohorts at the Advocate tried to pull a fast one but I think it backfired.

Matt Ocker said...

It is difficult to know where to begin, in response to the hit piece the Victoria Advocate did on me in their August 1st publication. I will preface my comments with the statement that the Advocate did not report anything that was outright false, but they were definitely derelict in their duty to surround the “facts” with unbiased commentary and explanation.
1999 Arrest
This arrest was already explained in great detail during my Advocate Q&A back in January, but I guess I will have to go over it again. Instead of boring everyone with the details, I will just hit the high points. The “victim” decided he wanted to physically engage me; I obliged him, and an arrest and no contest plea led to a deferred adjudication upon successful completion of one year’s probation. As a result, there is no conviction on my record. The long and short of the story is that I did it, I admitted it, and I accepted my punishment. I make no excuses for what happened, but I would like for everyone to think seriously for a moment how many people would be in my same position if law enforcement viewed these matters the same in times gone by as they do today. I have a feeling there are very few men out there that have never been in a fistfight. I would also remind everyone that this fight was mutual. It is not as though I went and beat up on someone just walking down the street.
2000 Arrest
This incident occurred outside a local night club, and was precipitated by a fellow that was angry over his ex-girlfriend’s interest in me. I am not sure what the obscenities claim is, so I have no way to address it. On the racial remarks, I was a bit miffed that was included in the report. In short, the arresting officer lied.
What really happened is that the officer was talking to both me and the other gentleman, and the other gentleman reached across the officer and pushed me. I asked the officer if he was going to do anything about it, and he responded that he was only interested in what I was doing. In response to that, I began walking toward the other gentleman. It was then that he arrested me. I asked the officer if he was related to the other gentleman. I guess he took that as racial, and decided to take some literary license with his report. Am I the only one wondering why the officer never even got the other guy’s name? But after all, we all know that cops never lie, right?

Matt Ocker said...

Criminal Trespass Warnings
This is one of the areas where the Advocate went above and beyond the call of duty to destroy my reputation. Instead of explaining what a CTW is, they simply reported that 3 CTW’s had been filed against me. If they had been responsible in their reporting, they would have included the fact that I have obtained several CTW’s and the same people, regarding my property. A CTW can be placed on anyone, and it does not even matter whether you have ever been to the property in question, or not. To put this in perspective, I can go down to the VCSO tomorrow morning and have a CTW placed on John Roberts, Kay McHaney, and Chris Cobler. Law enforcement has no choice but to grant them. To explore the matter further, the Advocate also failed to mention that none of the CTW’s against me are even in effect any longer.
911 Call
On Sunday, December 6, 2010, I was at home, enjoying time with my family. At Approximately noon, there was a knock at the door. My girlfriend answered it, and it wasn’t until several minutes passed that I realized it was a CPS case worker. My girlfriend became upset, since this was about the tenth CPS case that had been opened against either myself or my girlfriend. She asked the case worker to leave, and I entered the room. It was then that I realized there were Sheriff’s Deputies in my home. They had not been invited in, and their presence in my home was not appreciated.
As the CPS caseworker was attempting to get back to her vehicle, I noticed there were actually 3 deputies on my property, all in separate cars. I went outside and reminded them that their presence on my property was not welcome without a warrant. It is here that I will break from the details, because there is supposedly an open investigation of the behavior of two of the deputies that day. It is noteworthy though that I made a formal complaint on December 7th, accompanied by a sworn affidavit from a witness, and yet no action has been taken, and no information about the investigation has been provided to me. I have made no less than seven inquiries into the matter, both in person and by telephone. Funny that the Advocate provided a link to the 911 call, as well as accusatory documents aimed at me, but mentioned nothing of my formal complaint.
It should also be noted that the call was made in December, yet charges were only recently pursued. Why do you think that is? The Advocate also did not mention that the charges were dropped only after a judge reviewed the case.
I will address the other issues raised by the smear article in my next installment. I am confident that this amount of information will more than suffice as a conversation stimulator.

Anonymous said...


Will you submit a guest column to VicAd?

Matt Ocker said...

Probably not. I called to inquire about that, and was told that doing so would burn my only opportunity. The VA is allowing every candidate to write a guest column, and I would rather mine be issues-oriented. If the VA would allow me to write one on this issue, I would do it.

Anonymous said...

Ah, there's always a catch. They made it out to sound like they were extending you an opportunity to write a column in response to the article, but all along they were talking about the one they afford all candidates. That's chickenshit!

Edith Ann said...

I think that is a wise choice Matt.

Matt Ocker said...

Thank you Edith Ann.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of chicken scraps, for those of you that don't know, I wrote an article about Chris Cobbler, and Dan Easton graciously told me that the reason was my article was old news, I replied to Cobler's blog exactly Mr. Easton's comments. My simple post was again deleted. Another call to Mr. Easton as to why such a simple comment was removed, and all of a sudden I am attacking editor Cobler, and everybody is watching my posts. I mean please, they can sure dish it out but they can't take it. Here's my article in once removed. It was never meant as an attack on Editor Cobler, it's obviously old news. Got some interesting Emails to share to from the editor.

Glass House By Ed Post

Journalism proves a double edged sword cuts both ways. The Victoria Advocate published "Running with a record" last Sunday and the words character assassination take on a new meaning. Of particular interest was that the comment section on the bottom of the article was removed. I have never seen this feature disabled before. I am sure it has been, but the word nefarious tickles my mind.
Analytical reasoning portends this was done for a reason, but what reason? The Republican candidate was subjected to a litany of hearsay and independent comments by individuals with biased opinions from both a family and political perspective. Not exactly stellar journalism nor is it eminently fair. A little research unfolds that the person attacked is a banned blogger. So in fairness since he can't respond in a timely manner in which it was distributed on an internet based forum online, was fairness intended or absently conveyed by shutting everyone else out too? I don't think so.

Anonymous said...

In this age of information, a little legwork followed by phone calls reveals a motivation by Chris Cobler, editor of The Victoria Advocate, that I bring into question. A phone call to Kevin Darst, a reporter who had been employed at the time for the Coloradoan in Aspen, Colorado was more than happy to talk with me and he remembered breaking the story, Darst wrote the story titled "Newspaper acknowledges ethical lapse, Greeley Tribune admits to copying AP stories". The article hints at plagiarism, you be the judge. Simply google Kevin Darst and Chris Cobler and you will immediately be linked to the story in The Aspen Times. A well written story that has passed the smell test still stands for public viewing just as Republican candidate Ocker's remains public information. It is not flattering to Cobler, and it coincides with his abrupt exit. Darst stands one hundred percent by his story. It is not a flattering expose'.
Read the story and draw your own conclusions, after all it's journalism, reading between the lines for reasons not specific, Cobler packed his bags and raced to Florida, uncertainty followed but was assuaged by letters of recommendation. Many in the business call it the long kiss goodbye, sarcastic overtones blend homogenously. I find it interesting Editor Cobler's choice of reporter for the front page headline "Running with a record." Obviously they’re not one of the Advocate's more seasoned reporters, yet who could be more accommodating to be the fall guy, other than the new person.
Since a sitting county commissioner can provide opinions of other candidates, I too will voice mine expressing mistrust of Editor Cobler, political manipulation by Editor Cobler, and use of VicAd's emails to push a political agenda that does not sit well with the community. Funny what crawls out of the woodwork when questions arise, the old adage of not throwing rocks while encircled with glass stands time's test.
I hold in my hand emails circulated by Editor Cobler, where he takes the time to thank a whistleblower for information he can use against Republican candidates at election time. He also contends that DWI convictions and expulsions are hardly the same as candidate Ocker's dalliances with law enforcement. Need I remind you the difference between conviction and non conviction? Mothers Against Drunk Drivers Executive Director Jennifer Northway would beg to differ with Editor Cobler. She seems to think that DWI convictions are a serious matter. Let alone holding back emails to smear Republican candidates before election time.

Anonymous said...

I find his conduct abhorrent, unethical, and undeserving of an editor of The Victoria Advocate. A pattern stands centerfold here. I would ask that he respectfully pack his bags, or clean up his act. For it is a true shame that with all the in house talent and tenure in the Advocate that they chose not to promote from within but rather from the outside. Thomas Martinez recently answered an Editor Cobler blog, stating that if one were requested to not respond to a posted blog, that he should not. I agree. I respectfully request that Editor Cobler remain vacant from this blog. He may contact me personally instead.
There may be more than a few good stories hiding in plain view that the next Victoria Advocate editor might pursue. A short jaunt down to Sheriff O'Connor's office could net a relevant story that this community can sink their teeth into. For example, our Sheriff's varied efforts to help stem the problematic tide resulting from lack of border security. Investigative reporting efforts to delve into the ramifications and consequences associated with the Health Care Bill, such as tax liabilities tied to the sale of real estate. Rumor has it that taxes on a home sale will almost equal the commission paid to a real estate broker.
Editor Cobler, I take you to task on this.
Good for the Goose .. .. .. Good for the Cobler.
Journalism's a double edge sword.
I stand by my story one hundred percent.

Anonymous said...

I simply asked Mr. Easton to repost my article, I explained my views and also some of editor Cobbler's email which I found to be disturbing. I told him all I wanted was my blog reinstated, he said no. I simply told him I will find another avenue for them, So now in his exact words I am blackmailing him, I mean please. Cancelled my subscription on the spot

Matt Ocker said...

The reactions I received from early and absentee voters this evening in Bell Tower were interesting. About a quarter of them made mention of it, and not a single one had a good thing to say about the Victoria Advocate. The people whose houses I visited were those that voted early or absentee in both the Republican and Democrat primaries earlier this year. These are typically your most serious and politically-engaged voters. For them to laugh at what the Advocate printed about me was very uplifting.

I guess the Advocate has never heard of the concept of martyrdom. Thank you VA for the free advertising. I could have never afforded a front-page ad.

Anonymous said...

Matt, that's good to hear. I think the average reader was already aware of the Advocate's nature and could interpret that article for what it was. I bet the folks in Bell Tower have had enough of those "flat tax rate" tax increases, huh.

It's good to see this hasn't slowed you down. Keep fightin' for us.

-Big Jim Slade

BIGJ said...

Edith ann.

Tell you the truth, I do want to yell at some of you. Like I said earlier, I have no longer care for this. Vicad, Chris Cobler, and miss crybaby teenybop Aprill Brandon had ensure the election for the Republican Candidate.

Anonymous said...

I need an interpreter for this, any takers.

Anonymous said...

I'm not even going to try and decipher BigJ s last post. I might get it wrong and be accused of being a high them high soccer mom with a penchant for oxbows.

Or just a racists.

Matt Ocker said...

It has now been 2 weeks since the Advocate did their best to ruin my reputation. On several occasions, Editor Cobler extended an invitation to people to write a letter to the editor about the story. As of today, only one letter has been printed. I know of at least 5 other letters that were written on the matter, but it appears they will never be published.

Editor Cobler should be ashamed of himself. Lying to the general public, in print, expresses to me that this man has no integrity. Lucky for me that most Victorians stopped believing the Advocate long ago.