Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Overcoming Second And Third Thoughts

When I read this, I had a definite reaction.

But then I thought I should deny myself my temptation to say something, on the theory "if you can't say anything nice...."

Then I thought, "Why bother?" You won't miss him, and the blogosphere will be cleansed of yet another pseudonymous coward who arrogantly attacks others while secreting associations and biases which would reveal much.

But when it came right down to it, I couldn't resist.

Good riddance to bad garbage.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

You suck

James Young said...

And you swallow. We all have our crosses to bear.

mom said...

Alas, it will be difficult to replace that pompous blowtoad as another of that caliber of arrogance is not likely to exist in the blogosphere although still common at most partners meetings.

James Young said...

"Blowtoad"? I like that.

Actually, he reminds me of the old saw about the man eulogized for his great humility, with good cause to be humble.

I suspect that the same theory applies to his pseudonymity. "Arrogance" backed by achievement may not be arrogance. "Arrogance" backed by the pure wind which was "NoVA Scout" is arrogance indeed.

mom said...

Would have to agree with regard to the arrogance but will differ on the double-edged sword that is pseudonymity/anonymity.

Although it provides cover for those of the genus "Bufo Blowtoadius", it also serves those who have issues pending before local and/or state officials. Although I have not been shy about lambasting certain PWC representatives (past and present) in public forums and indeed in their own meetings, given the nature of some of the issues I have interest in, my "pseudonymity" in forums such as this, TC and the increasingly bizarro world that is BVBL serves my interests by keeping them guessing with regard to my aims, real or feigned, strategy, actual or contrived.

"The enemy must not know where I intend to give battle. For if he does not know where I intend to give battle he must prepare in a great many places. And when he prepares in a great many places, those I have to fight in any one place will be few."

Charles said...

OK, this was funny:
Two blondes are at the top of the empire state building. The first looks down, and asks the other, "how long do you think it would take to hit the ground if I jumped?"

The second blonde looks over the edge, and with a thoughtful pause, says "well, it took a while to get up here, and we had an elevator -- maybe two weeks?"

The first blonde contemplates this information, and responds:
"Well, do you think I would survive the jump"?

The second blonde answers without hesitation this time: "No way. You wouldn't make it through the first week without food and water!!"

Charles said...

But I think we'll manage to limp along without our NovaScout posting over at TooConservative.

Still, I give him the best of wishes, on the expectation that he won't be able to not come over and read this thread.

Dean Settle said...

Gosh,

Methinks that two or three of you don't know what arrogance is (as you display it regularly) anymore than a few Republicans in Loudoun actually understand what "conflict of interest" means.
Or "ethics". Or even "hypocrite".
Looks like all of you should get a dictionary out and read the particular definition of all of the above before you shoot off your typing and end up looking like a disgruntled old bunch of has-beens...

Remember, "it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool"

James Young said...

That's an oh-so-touching accusation, Dean, but it would be fascinating if you could provide us with an example, rather than a self-serving, unsupported slur.

mom said...

Arrogance requires some measure of pretension, a commodity not lacking in many of your posts (not that I particularly disagree with your take on some Loundoun supervisors but rather view your numerous posts as redundant, BTW lay off the coffee you're too easy to get excited).

The difference, IMHO, between what I (and again IMHO by and large Charles and JY) and certain "Blowtoads" pen is that it is not based on arrogance or idol worship but rather a reasoned, objective interpretation of the facts at hand. Is that arrogant, only if you're wrong and to date no one has proven me wrong. Provide a factual basis to refute an arguement (a commodity that is scarce on TC or BVBL) and I might be willing to change my view. The key is documentation. Many who post have proven capable of wild (albeit potentially correct) accusations, but precious few have proven capable of supporting them. You (or someone posting under your name) have frequently made accusations about the dealings of the "Builder Board" but have provided little in terms of hard evidence. If you really want to make your point, support it. It's not that hard given that County government and officials have an unhealthy habit in that they put almost everything into an e-mail. Go do the research, FOIA some communications or county documents. You really want to have some fun, look into the administration of Federal and state grants by local county administrators, there's a tale that should be told in the WAPO.