The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age

    My recent missive to Our Fearless Leader

    By nothere on Thu, 10/27/2011 - 6:37pm |

    I have been rankled ever since I heard Captain Obama mention OWS and the tea party in the same breath. I restrained myself after Tony Bologna's use of pepper spray; but after Scott Olsen I really could not restrain myself.

    So I surfed on over to whitehouse.gov/contact and this is what I put into Captain Obama's inbox:

    =======================================================

    This touches on so many issues that a single subject will not suffice.

    So you pick one.

    In a nutshell:

    Marine Scott Olsen is deployed twice; comes home injured; joins peace movement; participates in Occupy Oakland; gets shot in head by tear gas canister; currently in critical condition. People who gathered around him as he was unconscious in the street were hit with a flash bang grenade; which means that American cops used the wounded as bait.

    Tea Party members bring loaded weapons to political meetings which you attended. They were not pepper sprayed, they were not subject to tear gas attacks nor flash bang grenades.

    Then, Mr. Obama, there is you: comparing the Occupy 99 percent to the Tea Party.

    Way to support your base.

    I'd call you a rude name, but given your emphasis on establishing comity with the Republicans and your inability to actually fight with them, I suspect it might hurt your feelings.

    So I won't do that.

    HAND.

    Comments

    The Tea Party did not fire the gas canister. And Obama didn't mention the Oakland Police, who did, in the same breath as OWS.

    Your fury with those police is completely understandable.  But by transitioning from that to an attack on  Obama for acknowledging some resemblence between the Tea Party and the OWS you create impression  that Obama was somehow justifying that police outrage.


    by Flavius on Fri, 10/28/2011 - 9:35am

    You wrote:

    "The Tea Party did not fire the gas canister. And Obama didn't mention the Oakland Police, who did, in the same breath as OWS."

    I'm not sure why it did not occur to you that these two sentences are at best "Duh; so?" sentences.

    You wrote: "Your fury..."

    See, right there you actually do run off the tracks. As far as I can tell, the reason you think I'm furious is that I used the word rankled. The two words are not the same. The sole thing you know about my emotional state is what is contained in that word: rankled. You transition from that word to something I won't bother to try to understand.

    Anytime someone tries to read minds across the internet is the time to stop reading that person's post.

     


    by nothere on Sun, 10/30/2011 - 9:40pm

    You sent the President an incoherent rant?


    by tmccarthy0 on Fri, 10/28/2011 - 10:11am

    No, for both incoherent and rant.

     

    First of all, ranting is hard to do correctly. I avoid it.

    Second, if I do decide to rant, I definitely proofread: spelling and grammar, certainly. It's just trolling to not, because calling someone a grammar or spelling nazi is not really fun; neither is ridiculing someone for a grammar flame that contains its own incorrect spellings.

    But more importantly, I check for wit and sarcasm. They are really required for something to be a rant.

    Nice try, I suppose. But speaking for myself, I find that sort of terse question to be indicative of boredom. And why waste my time saying "I'm bored!"? But hey, drop by anytime, get bored, and say so!


    by nothere on Sun, 10/30/2011 - 9:52pm