A little while ago I wrote a piece about Theresa Heinz Kerry’s blow-up at a reporter. I included a bit of a snarky cheap shot at her expense, which nearly everyone focused on to the exclusion of the main point of my piece. I’ve been giving that a lot of thought, and I think I have found a solution for similar situations in the future.
If, in the future, someone questions or objects to what I say, I shall react in three phases:
1) First, I shall deny having said it.
B) Second, I shall assail the person who brings it up.
III) Finally, I shall terminate the conversation with that person abruptly and on my terms, by banning them from further comments.
This technique has been publicly tested, and it works. If past performance is any indicator, my use of this technique should win me wide praise as a strong, outspoken, opinionated, and forceful, and win me the respect and admiration of people far and wide. And if not, then they’re simply ignorant and bigoted.
(My thanks to Oliver for helping me properly discover this technique)
J.
Clarification: Oliver, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't banned me from commenting on his site. My inspiration remains Teresa Heinz Kerry's "Shove it" and storming off to a journalist who had the unmitigated gall to actually hear her words and ask for clarification. It was Oliver's comments to my earlier piece that drew me to readdress the issue, NOT any action he may or may not have taken. If that was misunderstood (and, judging by David and Oliver's comments, it clearly was), I accept the responsibility for that and apologize to Oliver, David, and anyone else who thought I was accusing Oliver of censorship. That was certainly not my intention.
As a matter of fact, I have engaged in several spirited arguments in the comments of both their respective blogs, and fully expect to do so again.
Clarification II: Crap, here I have a perfect opportunity to put my new policy into effect, and I blow it!
OK, consider the above statement no longer operative. The true response is:
David, Oliver, I never said any such things! Stop putting words in my mouth! Cram it, you two twits! When will you stop taking Soros' money and mouthing his words? You're never allowed to post here again!
(cue the praise for my "strong-willed, outspoken, forceful manner")
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Satire
Comments (15)
Admit it, JT. You're a Ramo... (Below threshold)1. Posted by TC-LeatherPenguin | July 31, 2004 7:17 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Admit it, JT. You're a Ramone.
1. Posted by TC-LeatherPenguin | July 31, 2004 7:17 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 07:17
2. Posted by Jay Tea | July 31, 2004 7:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
My ex took her screen name from the Ramones, TC. She was heartbroken over the passing of Joey and DeeDee. Them's fighting words...
J.
2. Posted by Jay Tea | July 31, 2004 7:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 07:27
3. Posted by Laurence Simon | July 31, 2004 8:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Make sure that part B includes unfounded accusations of racism.
3. Posted by Laurence Simon | July 31, 2004 8:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 08:06
4. Posted by -S- | July 31, 2004 9:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Ah, the ever refreshing retort of "the strong, opinionated woman..." by liberals, whenever someone ~displays questionable behavior~ among the left.
I also like the recent "Golden Boy" thing plastered upon Obama, with obvious mysterious messages, by Democrats.
We need some sort of seal (emblem, icon, not marine mammal bu that does give me an idea) that indicates the "(Teresa) Non-Apology" in use, when used. I'll work on something...
4. Posted by -S- | July 31, 2004 9:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 09:06
5. Posted by Senator PhilABuster | July 31, 2004 9:31 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Shouldn't there be a part where you enlist surrogates to question the timing of your critics?
5. Posted by Senator PhilABuster | July 31, 2004 9:31 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 09:31
6. Posted by Paul | July 31, 2004 10:04 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oliver cracks me up. His smug condescension is particularly ironic considering the nonsensicalness of most of his posts.
He rabidly bashes conservatives for days and then complains about "right wing hatred" guess he is too broke to afford a mirror. (But I'm sure he's broke because the white man won't let him make a living.)
The guy could not reason his way out of a paper bag if there were holes on both ends.
6. Posted by Paul | July 31, 2004 10:04 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 10:04
7. Posted by Joel | July 31, 2004 12:19 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What else could you expect from a Soros funded blogger?
7. Posted by Joel | July 31, 2004 12:19 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 12:19
8. Posted by David Anderson | July 31, 2004 1:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oliver did that? I am surprised to be honest. I dissagree with a lot of stuff from the right, but I will never ban anyone unless they get unduly personal, and I mean they would have to be real nasty. I thought what you said about Mrs. Kerry was tacky, becuase I felt you were calling her a gold digger, which has nothing to do with the political discourse, but that was my opinion.
8. Posted by David Anderson | July 31, 2004 1:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 13:43
9. Posted by Oliver | July 31, 2004 2:10 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
David, if you believe anything this guy writes, you're a bigger sucker than I.
9. Posted by Oliver | July 31, 2004 2:10 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 14:10
10. Posted by Tom | July 31, 2004 5:38 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You don't have to believe it to enjoy it.
10. Posted by Tom | July 31, 2004 5:38 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 17:38
11. Posted by David Anderson | July 31, 2004 5:45 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Right on Jay, thats the spirit. And you are welcome to debate on my Blog anytime.
11. Posted by David Anderson | July 31, 2004 5:45 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 17:45
12. Posted by Peter | July 31, 2004 11:55 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm wondering why Mrs. Heinz-Kerry is listened too at all. She has two accomplishments in her life, the marrying of a rich man and, after his death, the spending his money on causes that would horrify him. This is not to say she hasn't the right to speak, I simply question the judgement of those who would listen.
It's much like Oliver. I passionately defend his right to speak. More passionately yet I defend my right to ignore the punk.
12. Posted by Peter | July 31, 2004 11:55 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 31, 2004 23:55
13. Posted by David Anderson | August 1, 2004 12:11 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You had me nodding my head there Pete, right up to the point where you called Oliver a Punk. While I dont know enough about the politics of Senator Heinz to comment on that part. I heard that he was a moderate Republican, whatever that means. Anyway, I am not here to defend Oliver, I suspect he does a good enough job of that himself. But again I am forced to wonder whether all the namecalling that goes on would go on fact to face. I can tell you this, calling me a punk online has absolutely no effect on me whatsoever, doing in person will open a can of whup ass, and there are few on the left or right who would give me pause to worry about who the can would be opened on. I personally think all our points can be made without all the juvenile name calling and personalization of attacks.
I have found myself on many occassions dissagreeing with Oliver, but have never called him a name. And as for here, there are people whom I dissagree with daily, but you will not find ONE example of me calling them an idiot, wingnut, or any of the other names floating arround. Personally I find that it dilutes the discourse and tends to overshadow the things that have been said that I might have agreed with or at least respected.
13. Posted by David Anderson | August 1, 2004 12:11 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 1, 2004 00:11
14. Posted by Tom | August 1, 2004 3:33 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
David Anderson is right. The name calling just gets in the way of rational discourse. It's like "e-mail bravado" -- people say things in dashed-off e-mails, posts, and comments that they wouldn't say face-to-face. And it's not just a matter of avoiding an ass-whupping in a face-to-face discussion. It's a matter of seeing the face in front of you and thinking something like this: "Here's another human being. He or she is worthy of my respect until he or she proves otherwise." or "I was taught good manners as a child and I've found that good manners generally garner civility and a respectful hearing from others."
14. Posted by Tom | August 1, 2004 3:33 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 1, 2004 15:33
15. Posted by David Anderson | August 1, 2004 3:42 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Right On Tom. I think it is often a question of upbringing.
15. Posted by David Anderson | August 1, 2004 3:42 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 1, 2004 15:42