Wrapping up

I'm sure everyone is bored of this by now, but in the interest of closing the topic, I'll post Doug's response to my email 2 posts below this.

The fact that you sent this e-mail to me is important. Honestly, I normally don't mind "trolls" because I love a good debate, and I a very staunch on my positions. However, the analogy I used regarding calling my blog "my house" was accurate. When you first appeared I had two regular readers send me e-mails saying that they would continue to read my blog, but would no longer leave comments. Last week I received three more of those, and a person of which I am on a number of blogrolls with kicked me off of his blogrolls because he felt I was losing control of my blog with yours, and Dan's and Mudkittys, presence. I allow Mudkitty to continue because though misguided, she tries to be respectful, and considerate, even though sometimes she even irritates me. Normally, I am a tolerant person, but when a large number of conservative readers start abandoning ship because of one or two liberal voices in my house, the action needed is obvious.

I have a person on one of my other blogs that shows up that calls himself a secular conservative. Conservatism doesn't have to be driven by Christianity, but Christian values are usually at least recognized by non-Christian conservatives as being an important driving force behind the political ideology. The secular conservative, though conservative, for some reason loathes Christians, and sometimes pops up on that blog to through a little anti-Christian rhetoric around. I haven't driven him away yet, but I haven't lost readers as a result yet either.

I know that you are probably as unlikely to change your stance (and by reading your blog on rare occassion I noted your viewpoints that did not surface in your comments) as I am to change mine, but rather than always striking out, give the alternatives to your position a thought. If this Christian thing is bogus as you think, both you and I will be nothing but worm food someday. But if it holds some water, I will be in good shape. You? That's between you and God. Just a thought.

And rather than try to disrupt, perhaps you could actually stimulate the debates rather than kill them.

As for your top 5% income position, I noticed your post about taxes you paid. If one must tell everyone that they are wealthy, it tends to mean that the person is not so wealthy in another part of their life. Honestly, I have a taste of both wealth and the blue collar world. I won't go into how, or what I am worth, but trust me, I understand all ends of the spectrum be it from the high value to low, non-Christian to Christian, Democrat to Republican, Liberal to Conservative. I didn't reach my views lightly.

Take care hanging out under the next bridge you find, but don't be upset if your hand is run over as you try to collect a toll.

You are invited to continue to read my blog if you so desire, but for the sake of me retaining my longtime readers, I would like you not to comment anymore.

Doug

And I wrote back thus;

Sure thing, that's not a problem. I'll check in to see what you're up to, but if I feel an irresistible urge to say something, I'll just send you an email or whatever. That's not a problem at all.

I honestly did try to keep just to the point of correcting what I felt where your mis-statements in the characterization of liberal viewpoints, plus the fact checking stuff, and like I said, I got off track after the heat came my way. I will always keep that in mind going forward wherever I end up next. It's a big blogworld out there. What you call trolling, some call debate, and I happen to be really good at it.

I do find it odd that some of your readers felt compelled to stop posting comments, and one kicking you off their blogroll because of their perceptions about the way you run your blog, is an extreme over-reaction on their part. It does fit the pattern of being control obsessed though. The only time I've ever censored anything on mine is when it came to posts that were just insulting with no substance at all.. and I've only had one do that.. an Englishman from Rightwingguymn's blog of all places.

And yes, I refrained from posting some of my view points on religion on your blog because that wouldn't have gone over well at all, obviously. I have a different style that fits with the 80 some-odd people that read me daily, but they're not the shy sort of folks at all. I didn't mis-lead in any way in the comments I posted to yours - they were truly what I thought - but discretion on the religion thing seemed the better part of valor.

And for what it's worth... I'm not an atheist. I'm just not a Christian, nor do I subscribe to any particular organized faith group... however I do think atheists are just as likely to be "right" about the whole religion thing as anybody else. Remember, there is no majority religion in the world, so the majority of people have picked the wrong religion if only one of them can be "right".

I don't see any reason to cast my lot with a religious group "just in case" they might be right. If God is as many people believe him to be, that whole "many paths" thing, then what I believe is irrelevant, and I think I'd be in good shape also by the way I conduct myself in this life.

As for the money issue.. I don't have to brag about it, and that wasn't my point, but I do believe in full disclosure as it relates to the topic at hand. When I debate tax policy, people should know what my position is as it relates to my point of view. For example, if somebody super rich is advocating tax cuts for the wealthy, then there is an obvious conflict of interest that should be disclosed. That seems only common sense. So, when I advocate for rolling back the Bush tax cuts, people know that I'm advocating my taxes go up. That's credibility.

And for the record, you and I both know I didn't initiate the name calling. I knew I was having an effect on people just be being straight forward with my comments, and that made some people very angry. Like I said - my mistake for responding in kind, but I do find it revealing. Your interviewee, Bushwhack, went absolutely apeshit on my blog, but I loved it, and featured his comments in my posts. When you posted about how liberals are "emotional" and lack logical thought, and then in the interview he said "Most of my writings are emotionally based and are more rants than logical thought", I actually laughed out loud. That was a good one. That's the sort of inconsistency I hone in on and harp about constantly, and it makes people crazy.

I don't think you're a bad guy Doug by any means. I know you believe you're doing the right thing, just as I am. And in a weird sort of way I think we could throw back some beers and argue politics, but you are correct that it appears neither of us are going to change our point of view much - that is, unless somebody can present a rational viewpoint that is superior to mine and then of course I'll reconsider and adopt the superior position. That's another one of those "gothcha" things I caught about you, and that Dan highlighted in the Julius Streicher quote. I hammer those sorts of things relentlessly, until I get the heave-ho. If you ever ran for political office, that would be something I'd give your opponent to use. Politics can be harsh that way, but as we've seen with the nitpicking that happens to candidates, that's the way it goes. I never write anything without carefully considering what I say, and the implications that it may have for the future. I also did a similar thing to Rightwingguymn. On several occasions he made claims about his not being eligible to enlist, about his pregnant "girlfriend", about then being able to enlist, and then not enlisting months later.. It went on and on for months, and I collected all those things in a little file that I'd use later.. much later even. He hated it because it exposed him for being full of it, and he started deleting my comments without response.

There's "gotcha" politics, and there's "gotcha" blogging - and some may consider it trolling. Me, I think it simply highlights hypocrisy and flat out lying... and I constantly invite my critics to review the 2+ years, and million+ words I've written to check my consistency. But that's just me, I don't bs the blogposts.

And ya.. I'm sure I'll get banned from the next blog I land on (while being very careful not to retort insults this time), because many on the right consider correcting the record, exposing straw man arguments , fact checking, and simple contradictory points of view to be trolling. Frankly, it's fun. That, in itself, is very revealing about your political movement as well.

Thank you for your email. I enjoyed reading it. Do you mind if I post it to my blog? I promise to quote the whole thing, and not take anything out of context.


Tom

And finally...

You may post it. I never harbor bad feelings. However, what one recognizes as inconsistencies or contradictions another recognizes as those exceptions in life. My mother has a problem with the divorce rate being high, but divorced my father when I was a child. That's not a contradiction, that is someone who went through a tough time in life, but agrees that for the most part, divorce tends to be nothing more than a selfish dissolution of a contract that was supposed to last a lifetime. I, myself, have been married 22 and a half years, I am a military veteran (service connected partial disability), self-reliant (despite the difficulties on my physical body to work, I refuse to accept government handouts aside from some medical care in regards to my incurred injuries at the VA), and a Christian (not to be confused with Catholicism, or any of the religions that think they are Christian, but are not). I stand firm on my beliefs, allow my faith to drive my value system, and I would have no reason getting together to throw back some beers (though I would be drinking Dr. Pepper instead). I debate politics often, after all, I live in Southern California, and find myself a member of the minority here in the state heavily influenced by Hollyweird and San Francisco. Thanks for the e-mail, thanks for the time, and though I believe you are as misguided as you believe I am, I have to respect your due-diligence. Take care, and you may post this one too, if you want, but I am done with fighting with extreme lefties on my site, so you might want to also let your readers know that if they visit my site and leave a comment, the comment will probably be deleted. Not because I have a problem with freedom of speech, but because that is my house, and I prefer that my guests not make my longtime guests uncomfortable.

Doug