Name-calling season

Not to make too much of it, but did anyone notice what happened, or what I think happened, between Ladyburg and me in the previous set of comments, when I tried to play nice?  

Maybe not, but the conclusion I choose to jump to is that she figured out I was a liberal and lost interest.

callsigntourist:

Virgil said it best: Varium et mutabile semper Femina!

Ergo, don't let her mess with your mind. In the end, stoicism prevails!

Toadsly:

Thanks, but don’t worry.  I’m over her.  In fact, I can’t imagine what I was thinking.  All she does is drop in from time to time to shout about liberals-this and liberals-that.  I don’t know where the sudden urge to find a starting point, build on it, share where we were each coming from, and eventually, you know, maybe discuss one or two small matters of substance on their merits, came from.  

I let myself get distracted.

Change of subject (oh, yeah!):

The world still thinks we can do it.  

Can we?

I welcome the name-callers.  Keep it up, Ladyburgh, Titan Lee, Mr Reply and all the others.  Don't back down.  Stay here with us and get it all off your collective chests.  We can take the names, the puns, the trash-talking.  It's all good.  There's no need to change your schtick.  Maybe eventually, folks who used to vote Republican (back when the GOP had, you know, actual ideas) will come round.  Keep calling us communists, socialists, defeatocrats, lamestreamers, nazis, whatever Rush, Hannity, and Beck decide is the dog-whistle of the day and we're sure to see the light.  Yeah, yeah that's the ticket-- more trash-mouth slogans.  Go GOP!  Go GOP!

Reg Henry recently asked me why I was on this humorous(?) blog of his.  He asked if I was "lost".  Indeed I was.  I would not "intrude" into his realm anymore, until today.  But I thought that his "Name-calling season" begged for my words.

As I have opined in the past, I had never been on a blog before.  Folks had warned me that blogs were mean, biased, and downright ugly.  But this was the Post-Gazette, a paper I read all my adult life, and for the most part had enjoyed.  I had wanted a place where I could talk with other people about the everyday problems - both political and practical.

I had read the terms of this site and was assured by these terms that "personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity, or ethnic slurs" would not  be tolerated.

"Language that threatens, harasses or encourages illegal or criminal acts" would not be tolerated.

And yet it is stated that, "Your comments will not be screened or edited before they appear on our Web site.  We will, however, monitor and review your postings.  We reserve the righ to remove any comment that the community(?) reports as abusive or the staff at the post-gazette.com determines is inappropriate, offensive or in any way violates our Terms of Use.  

I would imagine the "community" is the people on the blog.  So let me see if I understand this - all I would have had to say, is that a blogger's reply offended and it would have been deleted?  Somehow I don't think that would have happened, for over the seven months that I have been part of this site I have witnessed the most vile language,  personal attacks, vulgarity, ethnic and racial slurs.  But not one was deleted by the PG staff.  Instead they deleted my reply about "free speech".

Even our host Reg Henry on this site, says he is a "middle-y" and goes on to say that, "By the way, we middle-ys are happy to call people names if the deserve it. As Joe Pulitizer long ago said, the job of those who work for a newspaper is to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted".  But why is it that he and others like him, get to decide who and what names would be tolerated. And indeed Mr. Henry did - day after day.  But the funny thing was that he always posted and ran - never intering into a conversatiion/rebuttle/debate with those he called names and made fun of.  Of course, he looked at making fun of people as "humorous".  I ask that question of him, and he attacked.  It seems "humorous" excuses all the borish behavior on this site.

Very early on, I had posted that I thought I could make a difference on this site.  I would leave the ugliness to others and try to bring a bit of humanity here.  Even Reg Henry admits to that.  I wanted to bring heart to a space that was attack, data blurbs, truths and untruths.  And believe me, I tried.  

But the attacks came early and rudely.  For awhile I chose not to come down to that low level.  But it's odd, even while you know that it doesn't matter, the urge sometime overshadowed my better half, and I threw barbs with the rudest of them.  They didn't like that.  Oh no, it was okay if they acted like unruley children - it was first ammendment rights for them, but heaven forbid - no rights for me!  

Yesterday, the PG and Susan Manella responded to questions that I and two other bloggers on this site had about late postings of letters and a clock, that to this date, has not been corrected.  I had asked this question over many weeks, and not once did the staff of the PG answer my questions.  And then came a snide reply from Ms. Manella on my "personal" email account.  I would have thought nothing of it (except for the snide part) had she not posted the same thing on the blog the following day (except for the snide part).  Now why do you suppose she felt she had to violate my personal email site when she was posting it on the web site anyway?  And since I had asked that question many times before why not answer me then?  So many questions, so little answers.

Now, to my point of this letter.  I was stunned by the beating of the young man in Chicago recently.  I couldn't imagine how any human being could beat and kill another in such an inhumane fashion.  But yesterday I got my answer.  The group mentality.  The blood letting on this site was fast and furious - it was like the shark in blood infested waters.  The people on this site could not get enough venom - it was extrordinary!  I'm sure it will go on today.  I was the target.  

I'm sorry that it has come to this.  Over time I had gotten comfortable with most of the personalities on this site, and thought they had with me.  I was woefully wrong.

Will the PG and Reg Henry print this letter.  It is not offensive, nor does it go against any "terms of use" by the PG.  

Yes, it is long, I apologize for that.  But it is something I needed to say - something that needed said.

myreply -

fwiw, I'm glad that you didn't take your ball and bat and go home.

Really.

Now, can I tousle your hair? You *do* still have hair, right?

scarlet:

As long as you treat me with respect, you can be assured I will treat you with respect.  I will no longer tolerate boorish, rude or ugly behavior.

And no - I don't have enough hair to tousle.

I am new to this site, but found it interesting. Wow, name calling is ok. Well not exactly, only if you are attacking a conservative.  If you call a lib a name you are "boorish".  No one ever "splained" that to me before.  Now I get it.  This has been a very enlightening experience.