December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Feckless Libertarians | Main | Stray Dog's Got It Made »

March 07, 2004

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

heh You can't make an omlett without breaking a few eggs. It is disapointing that they had such thin shells, though.

They can't take a yolk? You did ask for it.

Speaking of Philadelphia bloggers...

...I'm one. I've had a few famous rows with "The Pej" in the past, and despite that, the little megalomaniac still links my page (under my old alias, "Doubting Thomas"). I'm notoriously lazy and only post once in a while, but I'm not a bad scribbler when I'm motivated.

I'm impressed you've been banned by a few of the warblogging wackos. For some reason, despite the fact I trashed a few of them back in '02 when I started blogging (check out my parodies "The Warblogger Hall of Honor" or "War Stories" in my archives), some of them still link me. Weird.

Keep up the good work.

If I could have two bloggers add a comments option, I'd have to pick Glenn Reynolds and Andrew Sullivan - it is incredibly frustrating that they are able to post such idiocy unchecked. Well, Sullivan does, every so often, get it right, although I wish he'd get over his whining that his church and party hate him - (gee, I don't generally associate myself with people who hate me!) And to be fair, Glenn Reynolds will respond to email responses (not that they provide any additional enlightenment or intellectual substance).

But it would be handy to be able to expose their idiotic proclomations to their readers.

Actually, what I said was that you could come back, but that I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't continue to misrepresent my positions. Everyone's tough in cyberspace, though, as I can see from your nicely nuanced insult. Do you have any arguments available that don't involve epithets, or would that undermine your tough guy self-image?

Me? Tough? I'd shit my pants if someone shot at me. No, I'm just obnoxious. And from Philly. Same thing, I know.

I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't continue to misrepresent my positions.

Why? Characterizing others' opinions is a big part of argument. If I'm incorrect, show me up - wouldn't that be more effective anyway? So your requirement seems more like an invitation to argue with one arm tied behind my back. Pass. (Isn't that neat - it's both a response and an example.)

By the way, I don't think you're a bad guy, for a conservative. Just a little blinkered and prissy.

I'm in full agreement about not banning people under normal circumstances - not that many of my readers leave comments. Either they are factually correct and I need to make a correction or I should be able to argue them to at least a draw, probably learning something I didn't know before in the process. As a rule I generally ignore the trolls.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog


Philadelphia Bloggers