And a special word of contempt for anonymous posts: if you don't have the guts to put your name on it, you probably shouldn't have said it. That's particularly true of comments insulting your host. Doing so is not only craven and cowardly; it's dishonorable. Don't expect me to just take it, and don't expect to be able to read it here for long. If you want to attack me, get your own "I Hate Jim Young" blog. There's certainly room in the blogosphere for it.
But just for grins, I thought I'd go ahead and put the post here. After all, this commentator is so gutsy that he or she lacks the courage to attach his or her name to the post. What courage! What fortitude! Someone who calls me names, but lacks the guts to attach his or her own. There are names for that, too: coward; craven; pathetic. It's funny, because it sounds a lot like Jim Cech, the Harold Stassen of Montclair. Or maybe little Krissie Nohe, wife of Connaughton pissboy Marty Nohe (RINO - Coles). Anyway, here it is.
Wow. You really are a sad and pathetic man aren't you? Many people have feelings that are just as strong as yours and yet they take the time to politley respond to items they may agree with you on. You however sir feel the need to be a self-agrandizing ass that chooses to attack someones character as opposed to participating in a lively discussion on the issues.Where to start with this contributor? There's the name calling ("You ... are a sad and pathetic man"; "You however sir feel the need to be a self-agrandizing ass"). There's the lack of ability to spell, punctuate, and/or edit ("politley"; "kool aide"; "signifigance"; "someones"; "self-agrandizing"; "Mr Stuart and Mr Stirrup").
Democracy and freedom are built upon open discussion amongst people who respect one another. An ideological close minded system is developed by people that chose not to respect others and their opinions, but rather feel the need to attack those who differ with them simply to make themselves feel better.
You sir are the latter. Your inability to have an open discourse with people that do not share your opinion is the exact reason why you and all of your fellow kool aide drinkers will never come into any position of signifigance within Prince William.
And FYI- The two people in your group that have (Mr Stuart and Mr Stirrup) both BARELY won their seats, ran to Sean Connaughton to carry them across the finish line, and were beat by Mr. Connaughton by almost 20% in the 2003 elections. You sir are a dying breed.
So get off your soapbox. Stop putting others down. Stop spreading propaganda. Get a life.
Then there's just the plain old lies which are symptomatic of the far Left.
1. The anonymous author accuses me of "choos[ing] to attack someones character as opposed to participating in a lively discussion on the issues." Of course, it's just a charge. Nowhere are the particulars given and, of course, nowhere do I attack anyone's character.
2. The anonymous author attributes significance to the fact that "Mr Stuart and Mr Stirrup ... both BARELY won their seats, ran to Sean Connaughton to carry them across the finish line, and were beat by Mr. Connaughton by almost 20% in the 2003 elections." Well, first, they weren't running against Mr. Connaughton (though I'm glad to see the author finally discovered that "Mr." requires punctuation). Second, Corey and John (I'll use their first names because they're friends) didn't have buffoons as opponents, explaining their close races. Corey ran against a credible Democrat and a credible Libertarian, and was attacked by the Republican incumbent before Election Day. John was running against the GOP incumbent (who opted out of the primary after requiring it) and a credible Democrat. And third, Sean was running against a buffoon, explaining his runaway victory.
3. The anonymous author claims that I "feel the need to attack those who differ with them simply to make themselves feel better. " No, I attack ideas. Perhaps what my anonymous critic objects to is the fact that I attach the appropriate identities to those who espouse those ideas, and have a keen memory for their records. You know, that illicit and discredited Conservative tactic of holding a far Lefty's own words and record against him.
But let us consider what my anonymous critic considers "open discussion amongst people who respect one another." Apparently it is calling a Conservative, i.e., me, "a sad and pathetic man," "a self-agrandizing ass," a "kool aide drinker [who] will never come into any position of signifigance within Prince William" (probably significance as defined by my cowardly critic; and it's funny, because I've already assumed a substantial "position of significance in Prince William, as one of the County's opinion leaders), and "a dying breed" (failing to appreciate the signficance of "dying" and "murdered"). Apparently, for my anonymous critic, "open discussion amongst people who respect one another" and "a lively discussion of the issues" is telling your opponent to "Get a life." 'Guess that's why he lacked the guts to put his or her name on his or her post.
It'll really be a genuine pleasure to see these arrogant, asinine, hypocritical, sanctimonious fools get their comeuppance when Chairman Sean gets the thrashing he so richly deserves on Primary Day.