Mailvox: maybe I’m crying on the inside

TH writes belatedly:

Let me begin this note by saying that although the American political scene is interesting (and many times amusing) I do not spend a great deal of time reading the newest latest political doctrine nor do I spend hours and hours of my time pouring over the Internet doing research on each issue like many of my politically minded friends. However, this may soon change due to your article “Janeane Garafolo is a short, fat idiot.” And, by the way, Ms. Garafolo should thank you for that, as it is your article and others like it that have made me turn away from the GOP in disgust.

Tito, get me a hanky!

I have no intention of arguing each tiny issue point by point, as I admit that I am not an expert on each issue nor do I wish to be. But you do have to respect the person, be they Democrat or Republican or even Ms. Garafolo, that actually takes the time to read and digest the issues. And you especially have to respect Ms. Garafolo for having the courage to be willing to make herself a media target by publicly standing for her beliefs. (After all, there are those that may call her unflattering names simply because she speaks her mind politically as she is guaranteed by her American birthright. Can you imagine that?) I respect open discussion of valid, relevant issues. It’s difficult to believe that you would support that viewpoint when those who do not agree with you are termed as “short, fat idiots.”

One is wise not to argue on matters of which one is ignorant. But I call someone short when they are short. Fat when they are overweight. Idiots when they demonstrate that they have not only failed to digest the issues, but don’t have a clue of what they are talking about. In JG’s case, the title happened to fit very nicely. Perhaps you dole out your respect with all the reluctance of an intoxicated Tri-Delt, but mine must be earned; it is not freely given.

I realize that a title like “Janeane Garafolo is a short, fat idiot” brings the reader’s attention to your article; sure that tactic works, but it’s still a cheap shot. And in my opinion, undermines the more serious messages your article attempts to address.

Yes, this is the school of thought that suggests Ann Coulter would have more of an impact if she would only comport herself in a manner that would ensure no one read her books and columns. And what serious message? I wrote that article in 15 minutes. I can’t be forcing esoteric eschatology and economics down everyone’s throats every week.

Recently, in the midst of the Democratic National Convention, I have heard a lot of rhetoric and read a lot of articles about the Bush campaign and found that they operate like you; cheap shot name-calling tactics aimed at anyone who isn’t “one of them” as a substitute for valid discussion. In my opinion, these cheap tactics work best for politicians that have nothing to say and nothing to boast. They cannot champion their own ideals or successes because they have none. I’ve heard enough bashing by Bush, and I am waiting for substance……….and I’m still waiting……….

Yeah, well, don’t hold your breath. Even the platform will be substance-free, from what I hear – not that George Dole will read it. You’re not seriously suggesting that there was any substance at the Democratic convention, though, I hope. That wasn’t so much a lack of substance as it was anti-substance, which is to say, complete dishonesty. Whatever happened to that whole Senate career anyway, Jean-Francois?

Now, I’m always happy to discuss ideas, of course, the problem is that it’s a little difficult to discuss the impact of inflation with someone who’s never heard of the CPI, much less hedonic adjustment or the history of fiat money in France. But go ahead and throw down if you’ve got something to bring. If I wasn’t afraid to go head-to-head with the economist that Nelson Mandela flew in to advise him on the current South African constitution or to smack down the professor who wrote the Econ 101 book we were using my freshman year, I’m certainly not worried about you.