You know, when I write posts I wonder what impact they have on the reader-at this point in time I get a decent amount of readers but not too many commentators-I have just a few regulars who comment-mostly Tom Brown, of course, A little less often there's Greg--Nanute is too busy enjoying retirement to comment too often these days-LOL.
So of course I appreciate readers first and foremost, but comments are good too. If you can't think of anything else to say just say thanks for the piece-if you liked it. Or whatever . You can say 'Hi Mike' or even 'nice weather' though that's not a great one. When people say that I never know how to respond.
I mean the weather is the weather. What difference does talking about it make?
Now looking at a comment I got on my piece about Andy Grewal yesterday shows that there are times when I even appreciate a negative comment.
Grewal is the one who made that tweet where he acted incredulous that Hillary used 9/11 as an explanation for her Wall Street donations. Right away the Very Serious Pundits erupted as if this was the most shocking answer they've ever heard-I guess they've never watched a GOP debate-or even listened to a Ben Carson press conference.
So I had a piece on Grewal that simply looked at his background. Who is he? He made it sound like he was jut a bloke who on Twitter and he just happened to be shocked by such a shocking answer.
But I smelled a rat-you can't tell me that he wasn't a Hillary hater going in. So I looked into him a little and yes, he's a Rubio Republican who belongs to the Federalist Society.
That just shows this is selective outrage-I'd be shocked if the FS wants to end Citizen's United. In pointing this out, I made Anonymous very unhappy.
"Obviously, a HRC supporter. The article is totally irrelevant because of your extreme liberal bias. It comes out in every snarky sentence you write - it's leaking out of your pores. If someone like Andy Grewal can't ask a simple question of a Presidential candidate without being berated by the likes of you, this just proves how messed up the liberal media is. Totally ridiculous. You'll stand behind a candidate even though she's a hair's breadth away from being indicted and question someone else political leanings? You should have your head checked. Liberalism is a mental disorder."
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/11/so-who-is-andy-grewal.html
Well, I appreciate the mental health diagnosis from someone like Anon who isn't the slightest bit unhinged!
I'm a Hillary supporter and certainly haven't done anything to hide this. But if that makes me ineligible to have an opinion that renders Anon the same as he's a Hillary basher. We either both have a right to our opinion or neither of us do.
But he wasn't able to tackle the substance of my point any more than Grewal was. When I tweeted him and pointed out that his outrage about HRC's donations is pretty selective: Grewal blocked me on Twitter.
Looks like Grewal can dish it out but can't take it.
As for Anon, it actually gives me the opportunity to quote Dan Quayle: I wear their scorn like a badge of honor!
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/10/us/1992-campaign-quayle-attacks-cultural-elite-saying-it-mocks-nation-s-values.html
So of course I appreciate readers first and foremost, but comments are good too. If you can't think of anything else to say just say thanks for the piece-if you liked it. Or whatever . You can say 'Hi Mike' or even 'nice weather' though that's not a great one. When people say that I never know how to respond.
I mean the weather is the weather. What difference does talking about it make?
Now looking at a comment I got on my piece about Andy Grewal yesterday shows that there are times when I even appreciate a negative comment.
Grewal is the one who made that tweet where he acted incredulous that Hillary used 9/11 as an explanation for her Wall Street donations. Right away the Very Serious Pundits erupted as if this was the most shocking answer they've ever heard-I guess they've never watched a GOP debate-or even listened to a Ben Carson press conference.
So I had a piece on Grewal that simply looked at his background. Who is he? He made it sound like he was jut a bloke who on Twitter and he just happened to be shocked by such a shocking answer.
But I smelled a rat-you can't tell me that he wasn't a Hillary hater going in. So I looked into him a little and yes, he's a Rubio Republican who belongs to the Federalist Society.
That just shows this is selective outrage-I'd be shocked if the FS wants to end Citizen's United. In pointing this out, I made Anonymous very unhappy.
"Obviously, a HRC supporter. The article is totally irrelevant because of your extreme liberal bias. It comes out in every snarky sentence you write - it's leaking out of your pores. If someone like Andy Grewal can't ask a simple question of a Presidential candidate without being berated by the likes of you, this just proves how messed up the liberal media is. Totally ridiculous. You'll stand behind a candidate even though she's a hair's breadth away from being indicted and question someone else political leanings? You should have your head checked. Liberalism is a mental disorder."
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/11/so-who-is-andy-grewal.html
Well, I appreciate the mental health diagnosis from someone like Anon who isn't the slightest bit unhinged!
I'm a Hillary supporter and certainly haven't done anything to hide this. But if that makes me ineligible to have an opinion that renders Anon the same as he's a Hillary basher. We either both have a right to our opinion or neither of us do.
But he wasn't able to tackle the substance of my point any more than Grewal was. When I tweeted him and pointed out that his outrage about HRC's donations is pretty selective: Grewal blocked me on Twitter.
Looks like Grewal can dish it out but can't take it.
As for Anon, it actually gives me the opportunity to quote Dan Quayle: I wear their scorn like a badge of honor!
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/10/us/1992-campaign-quayle-attacks-cultural-elite-saying-it-mocks-nation-s-values.html
No comments:
Post a Comment