[Vision2020] Keely chomps and foams
Carl Westberg
carlwestberg846 at hotmail.com
Tue Apr 17 17:52:54 PDT 2007
I envision a small town newspaper. A weekly. In a very small town, perhaps
the size of Colfax. In this paper is a bi-weekly recipe column written my
one Mrs. Iris Johansen, a life long resident of the community, beloved by
(nearly) everyone. Occasionally, a reader will respond to a particular
recipe with a comment that perhaps is somewhat like: "Iris, thank you for
that wonderful recipe! It brought back memories of my childhood, because
mother used to make the same dish. It was everyone's favorite. I seem to
remember, though, that mother used a full cup of sugar, and you only use
2/3. But I'll try it your way!" To which Iris responds, "Listen, you
little witch! I don't care if you don't like the way I cook. I'll print
any damn recipe I want. You can't stop me. You're so used to having it
your way in the kitchen. No more, sister. It's called the first amendment.
Deal with it. Best, Iris." Tony, I think we get it with the first
amendment thing. Carl Westberg Jr.
>From: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
>To: "keely emerinemix" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Keely chomps and foams
>Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:24:40 -0700
>
>Walter got a nasty smackdown from me, Keely, because he took the first
>shot, and anonymously at that. I am under no obligation to allow others to
>assault me without defending myself. You defend yourself whenever someone
>questions your judgment, why am I wrong for doing precisely the same thing?
>
>Fascinating!
>
>The bottom line Keely, is that you agree with Mr. Timid's political
>positions and disagree with mine. Won't you do us all a favor and dispense
>with this notion that it is my invective which has you upset, and be
>honest: there is plenty of invective on both sides on this list and that is
>not what has your panties in a twist. What you find unacceptable is that I
>would DARE to disagree with you, and that I do so persuasively. Face the
>fact that you smug leftists no longer have a stranglehold on this forum.
>The diversity that you so often claim to value, has come aboard, and you
>are in a snit because you view yourself as a member of the anointed, and
>anyone with the temerity to challenge you as just another hopelessly
>benighted rube.
>
>What would Jesus do, Keely? He'd tell you to pipe down and consider the
>possibility that you don't have all the answers. That perhaps you should
>encourage a diversity of views instead of smugly dismissing those with whom
>you disagree.
>
>What a phony Christian you are. You profess to follow Christ while
>condemning someone who disagrees with you as a chomping, foaming,
>hysterical chunk of cat shit. Judge not, unless you are the great Keely,
>in which case, heap on the scorn.
>
>Look Caligula, it is not me who espouses filth and hatred to be challenged.
> It is you who advocate for a woman's "right" to kill her children. I
>stand up for their right to live. Which side is more compassionate you
>barbarian? I stand against those who would blow woman and children to
>pieces with glazed-eyed glee. You defend these RAGHEAD murderers at every
>turn. It is therefore you, miss phony Christian, who enables and promotes
>hate, not me.
>
>Keeely, this morally superior posture you effect is really nauseating.
>Thomas Sowell was right about you controlling leftists. You really do feel
>you are superior to the masses and obligated to correct their inferior
>reasoning at every turn. You are quite simply a tyrant, but one with no
>power. An aspiring dictator without the power to subjugate anyone. You
>will live out the balance of your ineffectual little life without the
>satisfaction of tyrannizing anyone. Nor will you enjoy the license to
>blather on in defense of terrorists and baby killers without opposition.
>
>It's called the first amendment sister.
>
>Deal with it.
>
>-Tony
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: keely emerinemix
> To: Tony ; Walter Smith
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 5:20 PM
> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Parting shots, fired high
>
>
> Gee, and I was going to write to "walter" to thank him for at least
>giving us a shot. Now the tone of my letter changes; I find that I'm once
>again having to acknowledge, with sorrow, the existence of such a
>vitriol-spewing fellow correspondent as Tony.
>
> On behalf of the overwhelmingly kind, gracious members of the Vision
>2020, I'm sorry that your brief engagement resulted in the nasty smackdown
>you got from a true master of vituperation. For what it's worth, I hope
>you reconsider ending your active involvement on the list. I'm very glad
>you read Vision 2020 and I appreciate your thoughtful comments below and in
>your previous posts. Yours is a perspective we could all benefit from, and
>while I wish you felt you could post under your real name, I respect that
>you choose not to.
>
> I choose to use my name -- Keely -- and have been open about being THAT
>Keely that people may know from my marriage to Jeff, my former position on
>the school board, or my very public and passionate criticism of Christ
>Church. And so as Keely Emerine Mix, I've taken a lot of the same kind of
>hits as Debi R-S has (and, by the way, I consider her a friend and
>appreciate her gutsy approach to debate). If you feel that it would be
>unwise or uncomfortable to be a target, that's understandable -- more than
>one person has questioned my sanity for continuing to stay in the fray, and
>I periodically go through mini-fasts from this and other media to
>re-examine both my conduct and my motives.
>
> Unfortunately, there's a need to respond coherently and sensibly to
>Tony's special brand of bigotry and chomping, foaming hysteria. No other
>reasonable human being would consider "raghead" appropriate under any
>circumstances, and virtually no one would argue seriously that the "N" word
>is "just for gang-bangers" and thus not necessarily offensive, as you cite
>in your post. It's disingenuous and not terribly clever to parade "fag,"
>"gay," and other examples of English evolving to try to justify using
>contemptible epithets. (And woe be it to anyone whose epitaph read that he
>or she was a user of racial epithets . . . ). Ignoring Tony would be
>easy, I'll grant. But it's necessary that the filth and hatred contained
>in his words be exposed, be examined, and be challenged. You appear to
>be someone who can do that eloquently and with insight, Walter, and I'm
>sorry to lose you.
>
> And yes, I fully expect to be publicly excoriated by the erudite Mr.
>Simpson. I'd care more, but dang -- I have to sweep up cat litter now,
>knowing that what I find there is about as pleasant as hearing from Tony.
>
> keely
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: tonytime at clearwire.net
> To: don.nergal at gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:36:28 -0700
> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Parting shots, fired high
>
>
> Dear Mr. Timid, Thanks for acknowledging that my participation in this
>forum is not un-American after all. Glad we resolved that wrenching
>question. As to my determination to force my beliefs down other's throats,
>I simply feel that you do not have the right force your view down our
>throats: that innocent children should be ripped in pieces from their
>mother's womb. For Christ's sake, Mr. hide in the shadows, which view is
>more compassionate? Life for the innocent, or death at your whim? You
>people are utterly mad!
>
> Apparently unsatisfied to reveal yourself as an insensitive enabler of
>the culture of death, you then go on to accuse me of redefining racial
>"epitaphs." One wonders, surely you meant epithets? You cannot grasp how
>one could resent murderous bomb-throwers and then insult them without
>having ill will toward any race in particular. Why must one's use of
>RAGHEAD or any other term, for that matter, be viewed from one particular
>angle of meaning when the English language evolves regularly? Gay used to
>mean happy and carefree, now it means homosexual. Fag once referred to a
>cigarette, now, well.... You can see how the meaning of terms takes on
>different meanings over time. Why am I not allowed to participate in the
>evolution of language? You folks have been writing Newspeak for decades.
>What's the matter Mr. Timid? Can't take any of your own medicine?
>
> As for my comparison of Nick Gier to Josef Mengele: Given Gier's
>whacked out pronouncements which have consistently revealed him to be an
>intellectual mutant, devoid of a soul, I STAND FIRMLY BY MY CHARGE.
>
> And YOU sir, need to cope with the first amendment and GET OVER IT!
>
> With the courage to sign my name,
>
> TONY
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Walter Smith
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 9:46 AM
> Subject: [Vision2020] Parting shots
>
>
> First, I want to again say thank you to those willing to participate
>in this forum, and for the welcome I have received from most, despite the
>"drive-by posting" nature of my own recent semi-participation. Your taking
>part in this forum, despite the personal dangers, is courageous and
>demonstrates that there may still be hope for democracy. Thank you Debi, in
>particular, for staying with it, even after facing the indignities some on
>here are willing to hurl your way. Despite this, I do not believe I will
>actively participate, for a number of reasons. I do not feel comfortable
>posting here under my own name (nor do I believe it would be appropriate
>for me to do so, at this time), but I dislike anonymous bomb-throwing. My
>reason for posting here in the first place was anger, anger in particular
>at the recent treatment afforded Mr. Johnson and Mr. Butler. In all truth,
>the only reaction I have to much of what takes place on vision2020 is
>anger, and anger is not something I need to promote in myself. It isn't
>good for my blood pressure, nor for my soul. I may from time to time reply
>on here again, probably as some new Moscow-special-powder-keg blows up once
>more.
>
> I was going to post some of the more offensive responses to my
>initial joke as a sort of skin-thickness test; but decided not to, based in
>part on the fact that the authors did not decide to make them public
>themselves, and that while I would get some visceral pleasure watching the
>reactions, no real purpose would be served. I also avoid it, because while
>intended as a jab at over-sensitivity, I am about to display my own
>(perhaps over-) sensitivity on a particular matter, and the irony would
>simply be too much.
>
> On to that sensitivity...
>
> Mr. Simpson would like to know what exactly he said that I find
>"disgusting and un-American", and so I will respond to him here, once only.
>In truth, I mis-used the term "un-American," as there is really little that
>is more American than arguing politics, particularly with the vehemence Mr.
>Simpson demonstrates. What I meant by it is that his posts generally argue
>a position I find diametrically opposed to the true greatness of our
>American way. He consistently supports an administration that is
>undermining our basic freedoms, exemplified by the recent loss of habeas
>corpus, although there are many other examples. He supports the
>authoritarian imposition by government force of his own personal beliefs,
>such as denying women the right to make their own reproductive choices,
>denying due process to those accused of terrorism, and denying homosexuals
>the basic human dignity of marriage. He also seems to enjoy employing a
>favorite tactic of the white-supremacist, that being the tactic of
>attempting to redefine racial epitaphs. Tony says "raghead" only applies to
>terrorists, he has no problem with Arabs (while also being willfully
>ignorant of fact that his term actually targets entirely different groups);
>The vile hal turner says "nigger" only applies to gang-bangers, he has no
>problem with blacks; "spic" only applies to illegal immigrants, he has no
>problem with Mexicans; Yeah, right... More sick fantasies please. These are
>the things I find "un-American." While I would not attempt to stop them
>from saying what they will, their words do cost them my respect.
>
> Any right you would deprive others of without due process, is a
>right you yourself do not deserve. This is the same basic problem I have
>with what J Ford has been saying of late.
>
> As for what amongst Mr. Simpson's comments I find "disgusting",
>above and beyond what I have already said, and the fundamental reason I
>have little to no respect for the man: There is really only one thing, that
>being Mr. Simpson's comparison of Prof. Gier to mengele. I tend to agree
>with Godwin, that anytime a comparison to nazis is made, there is no longer
>any hope of a rational conversation. I do understand that in the heat of
>argument, inappropriate things will be said, and can certainly be forgiven,
>even something so base as a nazi comparison, even something so evil as a
>comparison to mengele. But Mr. Simpson did not seek forgiveness after
>cooling down, nor did he even recognize the evil he had committed (and yes,
>I do consider saying what he said to be an act of evil,) rather he decided
>to stand by his guns and reiterate his vile comparison. The things the
>nazis did are near always beyond compare, we have thankfully not seen the
>like for over half a century, and hopefully never will again (current
>events, particularly the actions of our current "leaders", do give me
>pause, however.) But the things mengele did go far beyond even typical nazi
>filth, he was one of the greatest evils this world has ever faced, and in
>my opinion far worse even than hitler himself. Short of the actual
>re-creation of his atrocities (may that such a thing never comes to pass,)
>nothing can compare. Any comparison to anything in our modern world is
>inappropriate, only diminishes our collective memory, and serves to
>legitimize mengele's deeds. Comparisons to serial killers, to terrorists,
>to dictators, to rapists, or to anything else, can only weaken our
>understanding and our rage. To make such a comparison to a person who
>simply supports a woman's right to make her own choices (even if one were
>to consider such a thing murder,) is beyond disgusting. Nick is not
>kidnapping women and vivisecting them in the name of science, nor is he
>even performing abortions, he is simply pro-choice. Mr. Simpson's words in
>actuality say nothing about Prof. Gier, but they do show grave disrespect
>to those who were tortured and died at mengele's hands, insult those who
>laid down their own lives to stop him, risk legitimizing his crimes (thus
>putting all our descendants futures at risk,) and reveal Mr. Simpson
>himself as a degenerate.
>
> Sincerely, and at least for now, finally,
> Anon
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All-in-one security and maintenance service for your PC. Get a free
>90-day trial!
>=======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Don’t quit your job – Take Classes Online and Earn your Degree in 1 year.
Start Today!
http://www.classesusa.com/clickcount.cfm?id=866146&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.classesusa.com%2Ffeaturedschools%2Fonlinedegreesmp%2Fform-dyn1.html%3Fsplovr%3D866144
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list