I suppose it is time to respond to this post. I have to say my interest in answering is for my own benefit; I’ll like myself better if I do. I have no illusions about being "heard".

(I have to admit at first glance it’s a bit hard to take seriously any post which starts out regarding the content of this board as being, overall, politically moderate. The person who sees this content as “moderate” is so far to the right as to lack credibility as an evaluator.)

However, on the issue of my arrogance the author is absolutely correct!! I have to admit that started out as an exercise. I wondered what would happen if I presented a series of facts in a manner which was unflattering to the Right and told the Board they would be “spun”, interpreted in a manner which wasn’t not stated by those facts. It was a very provocative post.

I was completely surprised when the facts, obvious as each was, were denied. Intellectual honesty requires demonstrable facts be treated as such. The interpretations of those facts are certainly open, but not the facts.

When the air cleared a bit I went for what seemed to me to be the next logical step. It think intellectual honesty requires an admission of a mistake when one is made. So, I requested that. However, I did so in a manner which I telegraphed would make it hard for people to admit the truth of the facts. Lo and behold, there were no admissions of error about denial of facts. Really surprised me, to be honest with you.

What happened was that because I presented things in an obnoxious manner people were willing to become intellectually dishonest in an attempt to refute me. I thought that was fascinating. It validates the premise that in normal circumstances the person who initiates an exchange controls the tone of that exchange, even when people are told what is happening.

In a like manner was my offer to prove a matter involving Ashcroft. The most intellectually honest (in my opinion) of the right-wing on this Board wasn’t willing to admit that, even if I could prove it, Ashcroft wasn’t abusing his office in spite of his avowed duty to uphold the law.

Again, it was because of the way I had presented material. Even when I backed off into as objective a stance as I could muster, because of my previous obnoxious manner that offer couldn’t be accepted. Even after I said that I was presenting it in a way which would make it hard or impossible to accept, it was not taken up.

There was (is) a pony beneath all that horse manure, and all people could see was the manure.

And it’s hard to take seriously people who deny facts and can’t admit when they are wrong. I don’t think that is arrogance, by the way. I don’t think any of us do take those folks seriously.

Arrogant – yep, in spades. Obnoxious – again, in spades. Am I really that “bad”? Doesn’t matter, I presented the material in that manner. Did anyone go past that to the issues? Nope, people got bogged down in intellectually dishonest ways. (I would use a less inflammatory term than “intellectually dishonest” if I could think of one. That will probably impetus for some folks to say that denying facts and not admitting mistakes is not “intellectually dishonest”.)

Now, were people obnoxious back? In my opinion worse that I. At least I was honest about it. People were attacking me for things I didn’t say, for instance, and even accusing me of falacious arguments when I had not presented any argument.

As far as insults go, I think what bothers you is that I don’t take yours personally. They aren’t personal. Insults don’t really say anything about the insulted – they say volumes about the insulter.

Have I insulted folks – yep. Does it bother ‘em. I doubt it, and I don’t know. (eb is shameless.) Have I given as good as I got? I think better, but that’s up for grabs. Is there a double standard on these Boards? I hope so. I would hope that if eb called anyone else a child pornographer he would be taken to task for it. I hope that the people here have some standards, beyond which they will not willing go. I truly think that’s so.

Because it was me, though, the Board stands silent except for the much vilified Lindy. It would have taken a bit of courage to step out of the mob and disagree and she was the only one with the “cojones”.

Have I called anyone an “asshole”? Nope, but it’s all right if it’s done to me, because I was arrogant. Do I care? Guess. But again that is the mentality of lynch mobs.

Do people lie about me? Your post does.

As for my identity, as long as there are eb’s on these pages, do you think I would be so simple as to reveal anything much? Why would I? I think it’s naïve to ask questions and expect honest answers, and in that matter I will either be honest or not. To expect anything else is folly.

There are a few folks around here who have been instructed in the matter of divulging information. I have, and I’ve taught “Theory and Practice of Confidentiality”. No information. None. At best that means no info. Sometimes out of necessity it is answering negatives in a dishonest and/or inconsistent manner. It involves censoring your material so as to control the directions the hints flow. What little information I have provided I have I think I’ve been familiar with and have been willing to do so. I have also been inconsistent about that. And, I have hinted at matters which aren’t at all true. (And, I suspect, I could be found. Would I deny it? Dunno, might lie, might not.)

So, a reasonable and prudent person would continue as I have. (Information: in what field is the term “reasonable and prudent” a recognized standard?)

So, this may not be the response your post deserves, and it’s the one it gets. And as far as being arrogant, obnoxious I have been. And, in my humble opinion, while your post is factually correct about my attitudes, it is as arrogant as I have been and eggregiously erroneous in addition. In content, not tone. Mine were arrogant in tone, not content. Congratulations!!!! Ya done good.

Arf