Insults

The editor of the local newspaper and I have reached an agreement. He will continue to publish letters he receives from people who feel name-calling is an appropriate method of registering dissent, and I will see my responses that point out their folly printed in his paper.

For instance, readers have not been subjected to the vitriol of Jorge Smirnoff since 2/22 (see my blog of 2/18), when I made sport of him. If he was appropriately embarrassed, it will probably soon wear off, however, because people who don't know what they're talking about eventually revert to name-calling to cover their ignorance.

In a few days, my letter admonishing a certain Douglas W. Hamett for calling "Republicans" lunatics, and, of course, taking my name in vain (again), will be published. I suppose he believes his "clever" epithet destroys the reputation of everyone with whom he disagrees. What a fool. (That's an observation, not an insult.)

I did not react to his paragraph excoriating Sarah Palin, because, in my mind, the jury is still out on her. Of course, neither she nor anyone else deserves to be subjected to name-calling; nonetheless, since her Vice-Presidential adventure, not much she has done has enhanced her reputation.

The gist of my remarks to Mr. Hamett was that he should guard against repeating lies and embracing hatred, and begin respecting liberty and personal responsibility. I also further fed his fear that those "Republicans" could soon be returning to public service to reverse the gravy train full of all those undeserved entitlements for which he longs.

#700