Sunday, February 22, 2004

Try to have a constructive conversation ...

Jonathan Alter writes for Newsweek. I stumbled upon an article of his last week (which I cannot link in, sorry - Newsweek charges for such a privilege on archived articles). In the article he discussed whether W could fill the presidency as Reagan did. I found the comparison humorous in light of the mainstream media's relentless assault against Reagan's intellect while in office.

So I wrote to Mr. Alter:

Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 12:26 PM
To: jonathan.alter@newsweek.com
Subject: W

Dear Jon,

Wow. Only after President Reagan was out of office for years did the press recognize him as a great person. Now you write as if the mainstream media recognized it at the time. You tormented the man, claimed he was stupid, treating the presidency as another Hollywood role, slept through meetings … then, most cruelly of all, when his illness became known, you murmured, “ah, that explains a lot.”

I will enjoy reading the praise of the press in several years about W and his relentless attack against terrorism, how it changed the course of history, how a strong man was needed for a challenging time. I cringe to think of Mr. Gore standing in front of the UN stomping his feet and sobbing “puh-please” as the French and Russians, both with monetary reasons to allow Saddam to stay in power, exercise their Security Council vetoes. “Vladimir, you veto it this time.” “No, no, how gracious of you, Jacques, but, really, it is your turn.” “Well, if you insist … NO!”

Enjoy your day, Jon, and weep come November as you see your diatribe result in a second term for W, and expanded majorities in the House and Senate. Will you then take a quiet moment and reassess your blind devotion to present-day liberalism, which left issues behind when Bobby was killed and slowly but now wholly is consumed with simply defeating conservatives?

And he wrote back:

From: Alter, Jonathan [mailto:Jonathan.Alter@Newsweek.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 6:22 PM
To: 'Clyde Middleton'
Subject: RE: W

thanks for writing, clyde. i'm flattered that you think my diatribe could result in W being elected. i didn't know i had such power!!

So I wrote to him again:

Dear Jon, I appreciate the sophomoric response!!! It is consistent, wouldn’t you agree, that the liberal bias in the media perpetuates itself by showing indignation over some issues and merely changing the topic of discussion over others? You skip over the factual observation of the media’s treatment of Reagan and glibly isolate a poorly structured sentence.

Others may not, Jon, but I want you know that I appreciate your consistency. And in that vein, thank you for concurring with me that your writings are nothing more than diatribe!!!!

Enjoy your day, Clyde

But now I am surfing the net to see where my name is being used or misused and I find this posting by my friend Jon:

The whole post is here, BUT ... here is what he posted under the heading, "Jonathan, You Ignorant Slut!"

“Enjoy your day, Jon, and weep come November as you see your diatribe result in a second term for W, and expanded majorities in the House and Senate. Will you then take a quiet moment and reassess your blind devotion to present-day liberalism?” Clyde Middleton, Sacramento, Calif.

Thanks for writing, Clyde. I’m honored and humbled that you think my “diatribe” could “result” in W. being reelected. That makes me almost as powerful as Justice Scalia!

Now maybe I am being sensitive, but the crack about Scalia was shared on the net, but Jonny seemed to lack the directness to include it in the e he sent to me. Silly on his part. But is that how liberals work? They say a little to your face and a lot behind your back? Oh, well. Enjoy your day, Jon - I mean it.

No comments:

Post a Comment