It is the story which won’t go away (which I really am not complaining about because it’s web traffic gold) … my posts criticizing the Pinellas Republican Executive Committee for inviting a controversial, anti-Islam professor to speak before its monthly meeting.
Since the PCREC cancelled, err, postponed the appearance by Dr. Jonathan Matusitz, my inbox has been inundated with emails from Tea Party loons critical of me not doing enough to “protect America from Sharia Law” and other such nonsense.
One loon in particular, Cathi-the-Contractor, responded this morning to my response yesterday to her, in which I unequivocally tell her I don’t care what she thinks. Obviously, Cathy did not get the message.
Her email:
“While I read your latest words that you: ‘really don’t care what your (my) opinion is. I guess I didn’t make that point clear in my earlier emails’ … those words really don’t resonate with me as they were not evidenced in your previous emails.”
(No, Cathi, I really don’t care what your opinion is, but I have no problem making fun of your opinion.)
And, the fact that you replied to “all” recipients in your earlier, bolder emails … I found it curious that the most recent email sent to me by you (below), not only omits all recipients from your address line, but appears as though you made a deliberate attempt to prevent me from “replying to all” email addresses that were referred to in both our previous emails by typing in some “code” symbols. Can we talk “transparency” here?
(Actually I hit “reply all” so everyone in Cathi’s original email knew that I thought she was a loon.)
Your 2nd statement reads: “While my objection to this speaker was for practical purposes, on a personal level, I did not want to hear from him, nor be around folks worried about some imaginary, AM radio-inspired threat”, says it all.
(Cathi and I are in agreement here. With this one line, I could not be clearer: I DON’T THINK A SPEECH AGAINST ISLAM IS APPROPRIATE FOR A LOCAL POLITICAL MEETING.)
#1: your personal opinion was put before your fellow patriots (very un-democratic), yet I’d really like to know what your “practical purposes” were; and #2: the fact that you think I and other like-minded-thinkers are “worried about…imaginary, AM radio-inspired threats” makes you sound more like a progressive spy than a Republic/Conservative political blogger.
(This line makes me laugh on so many levels: I mean, how dare I put my personal opinion before my “fellow patriots”, whoever the hell they are.)
Your 3rd statement reads: “No need for a last word. I promise you, I really don’t care what you have to say. Just go about with your business.” Sorry…I don’t give up my Constitutional right to the “last word” that easy.
(At this point, this letter has descended into a bad SNL sketch about who will get the last word. But wait, here’s the kicker…)
While I know very little about the world of blogging, Mr. Schorsch…you sir, are no Andrew Breitbart.
(I have been howling at this all morning! You’re right Cathi, I am no Breitbart.)
