Allegation: People who use exclamation points or write in capitals "have difficulty formulating a convincing argument."
Rebuttal: The premise is...PATENTLY ABSURD! Capitals, exclamation points and bolded fonts are common and acceptable literary devices used for emphasis or to demonstrate intensity.
Allegation: Mr. Cohen and Mr. Monroe were unfairly criticized because of their "well written and thought out" letters.
Rebuttal: That is revisionist history. Neither individual was an innocent victim of unprovoked attacks. In fact, they both instigated the conflict. Mr. Monroe oxymoronically equated the Tea Party movement with anarchy. He provided no factual basis or logic to support his indefensible statement. Mr. Cohen knowingly and persistently uses an insulting and offensive slur in his references to the Tea Party. Not everyone is willing to turn the other cheek.
When you decide to impose rules of discourse, please insure that liberal contributors follow the same rules of engagement. You ask for "intelligent debate" and fear Mr. Mann and Dr. Bellrose will be subjected to criticism. Did you note that Mr. Mann in his criticisms of the Tea Party said "Their hero is Sarah Palin, who is poorly educated and uninformed but believes herself fit for the presidency." Do you support or oppose his unsupported, inaccurate and elitist statement?
For the record, after working and paying her way through college, Sarah Palin was elected to city council, elected for two terms as the youngest mayor/city manager of her hometown, elected to serve as president of the council of mayors, appointed to serve on the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, elected to serve as chair, subsequently chaired the U.S. Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, elected as Governor of Alaska after taking on corruption in her own party, accomplished 95% of her policy initiatives including taking on and defeating Big Oil within three years, maintained an 80% approval rating and improved a state budget that was six times larger than the budget of Arkansas when Bill Clinton was Governor. She subsequently received the GOP nomination for Vice President, only the second woman to achieve these heights. All the while, she was raising five children and helping run the family's small business. Since then she has written a national best seller, penned numerous op-ed pieces for major metropolitan newspapers, become a Fox News analyst and is a much in demand speaker represented by the prestigious Washington Speakers Bureau.
You stated "So if you want to discuss the constitutionality of something, then by all means specifically quote the part of the Constitution or the amendment that you are referring to." Dr. Bellrose in her lengthy criticism of the Tea Party and things in general said "The Constitution is a document with many amendments--can someone provide me with more detail?" Does that meet your expectation of the requisite specificity and detail? Now if she wants to know why I think the unconstitutional expansion and interpretation of the Commerce Clause by the current legislature and its continually expanding interpretation of General Welfare would render the limited and enumerated powers of the Federal government nonsensical, we could have that discussion.
Until such time as liberal and/or leftist contributors live up to your stated expectations, don't expect unilateral disarmament. Don't expect a date certain for withdrawal. Don't expect the nuclear option to be taken off the table. I reserve my right to respond to various subject matter that I deem appropriate in the manner, in the style that I choose to employ, at the time of my choosing.
Sincerely,
William L. Garvin
No comments:
Post a Comment