RE: Face It Dale, And Apologize, If You Have The Spine, That Is!
sslund at adelphia.net
Fri May 27 10:00:12 PDT 2005
Dale "Charts, Pie Charts, Graphs, Statistics, Squiggly Up-and-Down Lines,
Data Extrapolation" AND "Mr. Moscow" Courtney all rolled into one wrote:
"The hit-count on Right-Mind is 604,333 since October 2004."
To which Ted responded:
"I know you know what "argument ad hominem" is! . . . I don't care how many
hits your web site gets."
Ah, Ted . . . I have a little confession to make. Not to worry about Dale's
hit-counter and his alleged popularity: you see, I've this group of friends
who live around the country (a few live outside it) which finds his blog a
real hoot :-) I admit it: I turned my friends onto it -- his lame
attempts at . . . whatever provide us with lots of private laughs. Given
that my little <g> group of friends is a fairly substantial number, you can
get an idea how inflated his sad little hit-counter is. And, I know I'm not
the only one who has passed the site around for laughs *and* sheer
astonishment value :-)
Excluding the "content" of the blog, one of the things we find so hilarious
is that he's posted an amazing 1700 (+/-) times (obviously, Dale is in love
with his own thoughts) yet has only received 2000 (+/-) comments. That's
pretty telling, particularly if the "comments" count includes his own which
are certainly plentiful ;-) Plus, it's pretty much the same people
commenting over & over & over again, ad nauseum. And, the comments, while
providing tons of entertainment value, aren't even particularly original.
About the most noteworthy thing about the bloated blog & comments is the
absolutely hateful tenor of them.
Just to be sure you . . . appreciate the flavor of Dale's little piece of
work, here are a couple of comments made with reference to a picture of Rose
Huskey & me Dale stole (yes, Dale, it's called STEALING when you take
something without permission that doesn't belong to you ) and posted on his
"that picture contains two very UGLY women!"
"Hoink, hoink, h-h-hoink! Two little piggies (actually, one is a big sow)"
The posts and comments are full of vitriol just like that, which is *really*
something to be proud of, huh? While Dale didn't make those two particular
comments, he's posted things just as hateful -- and worse -- on his blog,
which has created an atmosphere where that's the disgustingly low level of
discourse *expected*. I guess it says a lot not only about Dale, but also
about the folks with whom Dale chooses to associate.
Ya know, I've toyed with the idea of putting my own blog up, and I might
have some *great* party pictures, too :-))) I never cease to be amazed at
the quality a good telephoto lens can capture -- the detail can be truly
amazing :-) But, given that the pictures would be my own property since I
took them, I'd be missing out on the thrill Dale must get from posting stuff
that doesn't belong to him: I choose to strive to actually honor the Ten
Commandments, including the Seventh. I guess Dale has given up on them.
<sigh> Yet, I'm supposed to be one of the unchristian God-haters?! Go
As for the ad hominem attacks Dale & his ilk are so fond of . . . my guess
is that's the best they can do. While they seem to have mastered the art of
ad hominem attacks in slimy attempts to shift focus away from the *real*
issues, I suppose they think it's better to attack the people when there's
no reasonable response to questions posed. After all, charts, pie charts,
graphs, statistics, squiggly up-and-down lines, and data extrapolation can
only get one so far in life ;-)
Quite frankly, I'm glad Dale and his buddies took their toys and went home
when their name-calling, rhetoric, hatred, condescension, and bullying
didn't win them any converts here -- they were giving my beloved
Christianity a ***bad*** name and their tactics were tiresome. Obviously,
they never mastered the art of playing well with others, particularly with
those who *genuinely* value diversity.
If anyone is still reading this far, I apologize for the somewhat juvenile
tone of this post. While I personally got used to Wilson World's
name-calling, ad hominem attacks rather than civil discourse, hatred,
intolerance, stealing, bullying, and bigoted sanctimonious hogwash a long
time ago when I *dared* to ask questions, every once in awhile, I'm reminded
how ugly and far from my beloved Christianity and God their tactics really
are. Julie C's experience was one of those times.
And, that makes me remember the heartbreaking experiences of those within
the Wilson World fold -- both currently *and* in the past -- who dared to
simply ask questions. As awful as Wilson & Courtney & their cronies are to
us "outsiders," those experiences pale in comparison to those who have lost
their spiritual homes, been shunned from their insular community, had
private personal information broadcast from the pulpit & in church
newsletters, and had their economic livelihoods and reputations threatened
:-( All for asking questions :-(((
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2005 by Saundra Lund.
Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
without the express written permission of the author.*****
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of tbertruss at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 26 May 2005 6:54 PM
To: dmcourtn at moscow.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Face It Dale, And Apologize, If You Have The
Dale et. al.
So labeling someone you have never met as "paranoid" in bold type on your
web site as a response to a Vision2020 post where the individual you labeled
as "paranoid" merely posted the contents of an article with no comment
whatsoever is a response from you focusing on the "facts" of the issues
discussed in the article?
I have debated with you before on V2020 and found that you have a very
convenient style of debate. If someone makes a point that is difficult for
you refute, you just ignore it.
Like you have ignored my comments recently on V2020 about your blog
statement regarding my "paranoia." Maybe you responded on your web site,
but I don't waste my time monitoring your site. I want an apology from you
on V2020 so all my fellow "Intoleristas" on the list can read it.
Your statement regarding my "paranoia" added nothing whatsoever to a
rational fact based discussion of the issues in the article I posted to
V2020 that prompted you to post that statement on your web site.
I know you know what "argument ad hominem" is!
Face it, Dale, and apologize on V2020, that is if you have the spine for it!
You decided to insult me personally on your web site utilizing a lame
psychological slam implying any concerns I may have over the reliability or
potential for tampering of computerized voting systems is just "paranoia."
I don't care how many hits your web site gets. Since when is popularity a
sine qua non for truth or ethics?
More information about the Vision2020