The Jewish Star on the Greenbaum Ruling

At left is the Jewish Star's article covering the Greenbaum lawsuit, which includes an interesting quote by Ms. Greenbaum herself: (click to enlarge):

I am disappointed with the decision,” she said, “to the extent that those who posted disingenuous comments about me will not be held accountable this time.
I hope that as this community moves forward, divisiveness, personal attacks and unthinking language will not be tolerated.

So where do I even begin. First of all, way to move the goalposts, Pam. You may have waited up until the judge emphatically ruled against you, but then it took you no time at all to go from calling the comments in question "defamatory" to calling them "disingenuous". Perhaps Ms. Greenbaum is looking to be a trailblazer in the emerging tort of "disingenuity lawsuits". And while she's at it, maybe she can innovate claims for unwarranted saracasm and poor hygiene. It's actually hard for me to believe that Ms. Greenbaum can justify wasting the court's time and the taxpayers' money over what she has just admitted to being nothing more than disingenuity. Regarding the second half of her comment: Hah. Ms. Greenbaum would have us believe that she is suddenly the poster child for a campaign to wipe out divisiveness in SD#15? That's amusing, considering Ms. Greenbaum's lawsuit seemed to have prodded this community into a fever pitch of divisiveness. The division between Pam supporters and Pam detractors in the wake of the lawsuit was as sharp a rift as I've ever seen in this district. And here we see Ms. Greenbaum preaching unity. Talk about disingenuity.

I also found this quote, from Paul Alan Levy, the attorney who so ably represented me in this case, to be quite interesting:

“Greenbaum's biggest problem is that she now has a judge's opinion that she perjured herself, so she's now in a worse place than when she started,” said Paul Alan Levy, an attorney for Public Citizen Litigation Group, who represented Orthomom pro bono. “The perjury argument was a cute idea — and it is defamatory to accuse someone of perjury, I suppose. The argument could be made that she was accusing her [Greenbaum] of false swearing. The problem is that it was false swearing.”

I guess Ms. Greenbaum should have considered being a little less sensitive to the criticisms of her policies as she saw them on these pages. It would seem to me that her attempts to muzzle me and my commenters from disagreeing with her actions as an elected official have potentially bought her a far bigger headache that any of the original comments in question may have brought on.

Also, I penned my own column for the paper in response to last week's ruling. Click here for an image of the piece.