[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?
>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.
>   ----- 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 
>       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! 

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list