HomeSatireA non-apology A non-apology Jay Tea July 31, 2004 Satire 15 Comments A little while ago I wrote a piece about Theresa Heinz Kerry Wizbang RNC Stalker Election - News Babes Youthful indiscretions Share this:FacebookTwitterRedditEmailMoreLinkedInPinterestPrintTumblrPocket Related Posts The Money Hole Obama to Consult Magic 8 Ball for Afghanistan Strategy Obama RIPs the American Family About The Author Jay Tea 15 Comments TC-LeatherPenguin July 31, 2004 Admit it, JT. You’re a Ramone. Jay Tea July 31, 2004 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. Laurence Simon July 31, 2004 Make sure that part B includes unfounded accusations of racism. -S- July 31, 2004 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… Senator PhilABuster July 31, 2004 Shouldn’t there be a part where you enlist surrogates to question the timing of your critics? Paul July 31, 2004 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. Joel July 31, 2004 What else could you expect from a Soros funded blogger? David Anderson July 31, 2004 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. Oliver July 31, 2004 David, if you believe anything this guy writes, you’re a bigger sucker than I. Tom July 31, 2004 You don’t have to believe it to enjoy it. David Anderson July 31, 2004 Right on Jay, thats the spirit. And you are welcome to debate on my Blog anytime. Peter July 31, 2004 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. David Anderson August 1, 2004 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. Tom August 1, 2004 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.” David Anderson August 1, 2004 Right On Tom. I think it is often a question of upbringing.