Reply to a comment

I don't get your point frankly. I don't cry about any criticism, I correct it. Am I not to stand up for myself? Give me an example of my crying about something. Again, perhaps you mistake correction for "crying".

I admit that responding to the true idiots really does not accomplish much, but I will not let outright lies stand. Name calling is alright. It only makes the writer look weak....and yes I have been guilty of that as well.

I do not believe myself to be viscous. I can be sarcastic as hell, but not viscous. My comments at the top of all of this were not "viscous". You might read them that way (perhaps I use capitals too much...but they don't allow for simple underlining), but I attack the statements, not the author...unless the author prefers to attack me. I cannot help it if they take personal offense to arguments....as Monte OBVIOUSLY did with Kelly in this article.....and Ms. Tenney is simply not telling the truth about denying Ms. Cleary's requests.

At any rate, I am going to be more careful with framing my arguments and I have no problem with you or any one else criticizing them. You might even find that I will apologize if and when I make an error in fact...but not opinion. It my be nice if Lisa Douglass were a little more specific as to her disagreements with me. She rants and raves but there is no substance. Nothing but personal attack....ever.

It is just too easy for so many to say nasty things from behind a curtain of anonymity, don't you think? I would guess that these comment sections would be considerably more civil if stood up for your convictions by putting your name to them.

ENOUGH, I am even boring myself. I appreciate the conversation. I do....and I would not waste everyone's time on this if you simply allowed private messages as I do, but you don't.