Defending Against Ignorance
Once again the local paper has allowed another reader to attack me personally because of my letter that knocked the "Birthers" who questioned the native citizenship of our president. I wrote this defense which I hope they publish.
Dear editor:
It is interesting to read a letter from Ray Kingsley in the American Press (August 17, 2009,) dealing with a writing of mine, wherein he states “this is not a personal attack on Sam Schoolsky,” continues about my constitutional right to have an opinion different than his, and then proceeds to do that very thing he claims not to be doing. Sadly he doesn’t know the difference.
Mr. Kingsley writes about my bringing up items that have been “rehashed ad nauseum” and what his grammar school teacher called “stirring the pot.” If the gentleman wasn’t so busy attacking me personally he would realize that bringing up all of these items (right wing religious radicals, denying evolution, the Holocaust, etc) when discussing the bigotry and ignorance of the “Birthers” who try to ridiculously disprove the native citizenship of our president, he would come to realize that what he is reading is actually proving a point by showing “pattern.” It is used all the time by attorneys, and in this case very appropriately.
And in so far as my writing or not writing on subjects he claims I have ignored, let me tell him that there are enough people who write and want to see failure in this president and his administration no matter how much it might hurt our country. I’ll choose my own subjects thank you. Perhaps he should write about his views on subjects he disagrees with me on instead of just attacking me. I would welcome that and maybe so should the American Press.
By the way, only my friends call me Sam.
Dear editor:
It is interesting to read a letter from Ray Kingsley in the American Press (August 17, 2009,) dealing with a writing of mine, wherein he states “this is not a personal attack on Sam Schoolsky,” continues about my constitutional right to have an opinion different than his, and then proceeds to do that very thing he claims not to be doing. Sadly he doesn’t know the difference.
Mr. Kingsley writes about my bringing up items that have been “rehashed ad nauseum” and what his grammar school teacher called “stirring the pot.” If the gentleman wasn’t so busy attacking me personally he would realize that bringing up all of these items (right wing religious radicals, denying evolution, the Holocaust, etc) when discussing the bigotry and ignorance of the “Birthers” who try to ridiculously disprove the native citizenship of our president, he would come to realize that what he is reading is actually proving a point by showing “pattern.” It is used all the time by attorneys, and in this case very appropriately.
And in so far as my writing or not writing on subjects he claims I have ignored, let me tell him that there are enough people who write and want to see failure in this president and his administration no matter how much it might hurt our country. I’ll choose my own subjects thank you. Perhaps he should write about his views on subjects he disagrees with me on instead of just attacking me. I would welcome that and maybe so should the American Press.
By the way, only my friends call me Sam.
posted by Sam Schoolsky | 12:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home