Local Posts #35 (Part One)

2009-9-15 03:15:00

  

Note: I made this first post because "Foreignoregonian" and many others were making very short multiple posts. Some thought I had some type of special privilege because it seemed to them I was allowed more words per post than they were. When "Foreignoregonian" made nine posts in a row of a sentence or two each i thought I would make a helpful suggestion. I was surprised at how negatively this was received and many responded with the most negative attacks. I responded to some but you had to be there that day to read them all and appreciate the overwhelming negativity the group showed toward me. Oh, well, just do your best and move forward I say.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I see that "Foreignoregonian" and others often make many posts with only a small amount of information in each. This is unnecessary and some consider it clutter.

All nine of his posts added up to 1875 characters and you are allowed to have 1000 characters per post. This means that he could have placed all his comments in two posts instead of nine. This would have saved space and made his posts easier to read.

Just trying to be helpful here.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #1

"Graymatter" wrote:

"Who do you think you are to tell people how many characters to post."

JJ:

Wow. Talk about going to an extreme in order to find something to criticize, especially, as I said, I was making an attempt to be helpful. I was NOT telling anyone how many characters to post but explaining how many they CAN post. Quite a few people seem unaware that they can post a 1000 characters and some have asked how I seem to be able to post more characters than they do. This confusion is the reason some make short posts.

I personally would rather read one long post than thoughts chopped up into many posts and am sure others would also so I thought I'd make foreignoregoneon aware that he could have accomplished his posting goal in two posts.

"Graymatter":

"And who do you think you are to dictate how many times they should post comments to express themselves?"

JJ:

I dictate nothing. You need to criticize me for what I do say, not what I do not say.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #3

JJ:

Hypocrisy of the Highest Order.

In the past a number of my political opponents here have criticized me for using too many paragraphs and ordered me to combine them. Even today "Savvy" writes that I need to reduce my posts to 100 characters.

Now I make a post, not ordering anyone, but letting them know that they can combine their short posts into larger posts making them more convenient to read.

Combining paragraphs or combining posts -- what's the difference?

The difference is that one complaint came from the Left and the Left does not criticize its own. The Left attacks with great insults anything that comes from the Right, even something harmless like this.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #4

"Grandjester" then writes:

"Joseph, more than once I have pointed out that your "style" (and I use that word loosely) of the you and/or me point counterpoint and your obsessive compulsive need to respond to multiple letters to the ed at once is jarring, arrogant and annoying."

JJ:

Look! "Grandjester" (GJ) is doing to me (much more rudely) than what the bunch here is saying I did to foreignoregonion. (See Post #1.)

Where's all that criticism of him from the Left?

Silence.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #5

"Savvy" then writes:

"GJ said nothing about how many characters you should use or how many times you should post."

JJ:

To demonize me, you keep making things up. What is wrong with you?

I never said anything about how many times anyone should post. On the other hand GJ tried to dictate how many letters I could comment on which is a similar thing to your accusation.

"Savvy":

"Your grandiosity has pushed you into the realm of a thought disorder that you have influence over this site in deciding how we should comment...."

JJ:

Completely fabricated.

"Savvy":

"When we should comment...."

JJ:

Completely fabricated.

"Savvy":

"How many times to comment...."

JJ:

Completely fabricated.

"Savvy":

"And what those comments should actually look like...."

JJ:

Completely fabricated.

Prove even one of your irrational accusations.

"Savvy":

"Petty, like the thought police."

JJ:

You are the thought police. You're attempting to read my mind and fabricate and demonize my thoughts and attempting to control what I post here.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #6

On a different subject, Mr. Stiles writes:

"In the midst of this crisis, we face another one. The health care system in this country is managed by people of the same ilk as those who just brought us down. Why in the world would we ever trust that group of people to manage anything? People often say that they would not trust the government. Then whom can you trust?"

JJ:

Wow. This may be the most naive statement I ever heard. First, it was the government that created this financial crisis to begin with by insisting lenders make loans with 100% financing to people who cannot pay back. Private enterprise on its own would never do anything this insane.

Secondly, anything the government touches that involves money it devastates. It has spent us into over $12 trillion in debt. The Post Office, Amtrak, Social Security, Medicare, etc., are all going bankrupt.

If your greatest entity of trust is the government then I have a shopping center to sell you at Bodo.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #7

Mr. Wolfe writes:

"It seems that the Army National Guard in the Pensacola [Florida, USA] area is in need of, get this: 'Corrections Officer Internment and/or Resettlement Specialist.'"

JJ:

I've heard rumors of resettlement camps for forty years. Conspiracy people say the government is going to use them for dissidents like the town hall people.

Glenn Beck [Fox News pundit] did some research into one of these supposed camps and found it had nothing sinister behind it.

But now if the government is actually placing an ad for resettlement specialists it makes you wonder. Someone should check this out.

Open minded people should check everything out from the birth certificate allegations to 911 conspiracies to this. There is no people easier to sink into tyranny than those with their heads in the sand.

  

Aug 19, 2009 -- Post #8

JJ:

Good observation "Larnewoman." Indeed there were a number of factors at play but if the lenders would have just stayed with insisting on a reasonable down payment and that those getting loans be financially qualified then this crisis would have been avoided. Government pressure, also allowing lenders to divorce themselves from responsibility for their loans and the creation of Credit Default Swaps (basically a Ponsie scheme) exacerbated the problem.

Lenders need only one main regulation and that is to make sure the lender makes a large enough down payment and has the financial resources to pay the loan. The last I heard a poor guy can still get a loan worth 105% the value of a home. When will they learn their lesson?

  

-- End Of Part One --

  

[Compiler's Note: The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog which can be read online at Idaho Statesman Letters To The Editor. These exchanges were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey to The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group prior to being archived here.]

  

Go to:

Next article in series:  Local Posts #35, Part Two