Oct. 28, 2014 09:05 PM

Actually he's not, but in this age of say anything, which the Harson campaign has perfected, we thought, What the hell?'

Look at him, all socialist-y in this photo illustration!

As many of you probably know, the Mike Harson campaign blocked me from commenting on its Facebook page after I pointed out a couple of weeks ago that a quote critical of Vermilion Parish voters that it attributed to opponent Keith Stutes was in fact uttered by an anonymous source and not by Stutes. Camp Harson was willfully deceiving the public in an effort to make Stutes look bad to voters in Vermilion, but my comment correcting Harson's misrepresentation was removed from Facebook and I was subsequently blocked from commenting. But they did leave the deceptive attribution up and I wrote about it last week.

Today I returned to Harson's Facebook page to have a look around and found what suggests two things: the Harson campaign badly needs an editor and ... I can't think of the other thing but it's something unflattering. Whatever. See below the screen grab for more.

Since I can no longer comment on Harson's Facebook, I'll answer its latest salvo here, point by point.

"Anonymous Source" = Keith Stutes?: "And we know how Vermilion is: the most clannish, parochial, provincial and paranoid grouping of people, and Harson has the clans - all of them."
No, anonymous source does not equal Keith Stutes, who is quoted in the story by name. An anonymous source is just that - anonymous.

Now, will you allow others to freely write in the IND to correct your "willful deception[s]?
Everyone is free to comment on IND stories. We get more than our share of criticism and have pretty thick skins around here.

1. Why on Earth would the Independent want to start a controversy that drives more traffic to this page? . . . thanks for the extra free traffic. Walter, making an issue of this doesn't help your candidate.
Um ... you're welcome. Keith Stutes, by the way, isn't my candidate.

2. So, since this was the only item worthy of criticism, apparently our critic is in full agreement with everything else on this page?
What does that even mean?

3. Does anyone at the Independent have a journalism degree? We are told by a credible "anonymous" source that the answer is "no." But, our apologies if this is inaccurate. Is it false attribution to claim you are a "journalist" if you do not have a journalism degree?
Editorial Director Leslie Turk has a journalism degree. Calendar Editor Wynce Nolley does too. I have a master's degree in English. Staff Writer Patrick Flanagan has a master's in history. Photo Editor Robin May has an art history degree. I could go on, but really, if you do journalism for money you're a journalist right?

4. Why does Keith Stutes follow Mike around at public events? It's creepy.
That does sound creepy. Maybe Keith likes the scent of your Aqua Velva, Mike. Makes my eyes water, but to each his own.

So, this source is anonymous, right? . . . and, the Independent would never acknowledge it was their boy Stutes, even if it was, right? . . . so it could be Stutes then, right? It also could just as easily be the "journalist" right? It just says "in Vermilion," not "lives in Vermilion." It could be they just so happen to have been "in Vermilion" when it was said, right? The Independent Monthly and Stutes are one in the same, right? After all they recruited Stutes to run out of the publisher's vendetta for an embarrassing incident a few years ago, right?
Yes, no, no, no, no, no and no.


Introducing The Current