A Hostile Response To PYY Post Examined

On 9-2-05, this author published a piece entitled, It's Bush's Fault. It was a plug to read Danielle Crittenden's recent post on the Huffington Post and (as is usually the case) it included a little commentary, from me.

It seems that a commenter, who calls himself Gene took exception to it. Here is what he wrote. Now let's break this down a little, shall we?

If you think Danielle Crittenden is "sensible" you need to get whatever it is sloshing around in your skull examined.

What is sloshing around in my brain is 47 years worth of experience, full of worldly experiences, and knowledge accumulated from reading hundreds of books and thousands of articles ( I will match my library with his, anyday). And, not all material was written by conservatives.

I have lived in opposite sides of the earth and have been to 30+ states (living in nine of them), I have seen things that many people will only see, as a picture in a book. I didn't just visit Europe, I lived there. Also, I have worked in local, state, and federal levels of government and have a pretty good understanding of how it ought to work, which often is a stark contrast of how it does work. By the time I was 22, I was responsible for millions of dollars in equipment and 11 personnel that operated it.

She's a talentless hack, the least-funny "humorist" I've ever read, and her attempts to defend her conservative views are feeble. Based on her most recent column about putting Martha Stewart in charge of cleaning up after Karina, she's also an utterly loathesome human being. And a coward, too--they pulled the comments option on that post because people who lost loved ones and their homes to the floods were ripping her head off.

Now we are getting to the meat of the hostility, it really wasn't about me, now was it? Has she hit a nerve with this person before? Has she deflated a weak and feeble argument of his, in the past? Did she spurn his advances? Who knows?

But one thing is certain, the hostility displayed is not healthy. Maybe he should get in touch with his true inner feelings and explore why his bitterness leads him to any random blog that may share some of the same views as his arch-nemesis, Danielle Crittenden (and then attack me for it). I think the psychological term here is, displaced anger.

So you're a conservative. Congratulations, and good luck with that.

Actually, I am more of a moderate than most people that read this blog. If he had read some of my previous postings, he would know that. He picks one post that happens to contain something on a person that is the object of his disdain, and presumes to know me or what I believe in?

He could have at least had the good sense to go back and read the following:

What Is A Centrist?

Here, I describe the different kinds of centrists and describe how I arrive at the conclusions that I do.


Some Thoughts On Some Complex Issues

Here I speak of two issues (in addition to Terry Schiavo), abortion and the death penalty. I also take positions on both that many that read this blog on a regular basis, would consider liberal.


Was An Innocent Man Executed?

More death penalty.


The Truth About Hillary: My Perspective

Here, I actually defend Hillary (kind of).


Televangelist Robertson Calls For Assassination Of Chavez

Here I condemn Pat Robertson.

But if you're going to waste your breath defending the likes of Danielle Crittenden you're in for it.

I wasn't aware I was defending anyone. I thought this was a post that was merely calling attention, to hers. My only crime from your standpoint, was liking what she had written and wanting to share it with my readers. But more importantly, just what the hell am I in for, anyway?

You won't catch me defending Deepak Chopra or Jane Fonda--I know nonsense when I see it.

Sure. (Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge) He has already demonstrated the same nasty temperament. What makes us think that he doesn't assign validity to what they say. If I had the time (or the inclination), I bet I could find him on leftist blogs, singing the wonderful praises of role models like Barbara Boxer, Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, et al. But just so we are all clear, I really don't care who he defends or likes.

But let's just see what Gene's blog looks like. Mean Gene

Here is what it says under his title banner:

Pittsburgh's most decorated poker blogger, which I admit is like being the best shortstop in Greenland

So there we have it. Gene is a poker expert. And by his own admission, it doesn't mean much. So with all of this in mind, can anyone help me understand how that makes him so much more open minded, than me or my readers? How does that make him any more of an expert on anything in the world, besides poker?

I can't tell you for sure, but here is what I can say with some sense of confidence. He found my site by searching for Ms. Crittenden and the search led him to mine. After seeing that I liked her post, he launched into his characteristically left-wing tirade. So, I guess we can say (for whatever reason) he is obssessed with her.

Some people are just lonely, I guess.