An Ongoing Conversation

This started out as a comment on a previous post, but in my usual verbose manner, I exceeded the length limit for a comment.

That was a first!

So my response to one of my commentors has to become a post in its own right. Here it is:

*****

Hey Jo Joe - Thanks for stopping by.

You might notice some differences from what you're used to.

For instance, I'm not going to delete any of your posts.

The fact that you don't agree with me poses no threat to me. Your opinions aren't anything I feel compelled to protect my visitors from.

In the best American tradition, my visitors are free to come here and say whatever they want. I enjoy a lively discussion.

Now, point by point:

#1 You haven't been banned. Some of your ugly, offensive comments have been deleted.

The only reason I am not actually "banned" in the traditional definition of denying access is because blogger doesn't allow you a technological means of doing so.

But when you say "You are hereby permanently disinvited to this blog for two irrevocable reasons: 1) You are crass and slimy and 2) I don't want you here...ALL future correspondence from you will be deleted...period."

That's pretty much banning me for all practical purposes.

But again, you are free to come into my home and say whatever you like. And you always will be. You are not a threat to me. Why do you view me as such a threat to you?

#2 You don't have the facts, but that does not slow you or your friends down a bit...you just say what you want to say when you want to say it without regard for truth...ever.

What "facts" don't I have? Enlighten me. This is a typical Fox News tactic. Make a statement without any supporting evidence, but do so in a forceful, authoritative manner as if stating something that everyone knows is true, and then quickly "move on".

That don't make it so. What "facts" do I not have? Supply them. Educate us.

#3 I paid into the system before you were born, Social Security with my first job and Medicare since it's inception.

First of all, I'm 53 years old. If you have been paying social security taxes, which are payroll deduction taxes, since before I was born, that would make you about 70. Seriously, Jo Joe?

Second of all, you demonstrate once again that you clearly have no idea how Social Security and Medicare actually work.

You were never "paying into the system" like it was some sort of retirement account. Every dime you "paid in" was immediately paid back out to people who needed it at the time. You were participating in what you would consider to be a socialist system.

Your payments were not put in a reserve account for your future need.

You are now happily and greedily sucking from the socialist tit with no shame whatsoever.

I am paying for your your current need.

I am paying for that Social Security check you get every month.

I paid for that care you got at the first hospital.

I paid for your transportation to the fancy hospital.

I paid for the extra special care that you received there.

I paid real money out of my paycheck, from my job, to keep you alive.

And I'm OK with that. I'm glad you're still alive. I'd rather spend my money to save your life than to kill people in other countries that don't pose any threat to me.

You, on the other hand, seem to begrudge every single penny taken from you to benefit your fellow man. I don't understand how your stinginess reflects any of your Christian values.

#4 I have always done everything I can to be productive at times working 3 full time jobs.

OK. Good for you. A full time job is 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.

So 3 full time jobs is 24 hours a day, 5 days a week. Only sleeping on weekends? You want to re-characterize your productivity?

#5 I did not choose the hospital I went to. It was a long way from home and (except for the fact that it saved my life...which you obviously don't care a whit about...thank you very much for your compassion), I would not have chosen it.

I know you didn't choose it. But you also didn't say "I'm not entitled to that level of care because I can't pay for it. I refuse."

As I said before, I'm, glad you had access to life saving care. I think every American should have access to the very best health care that American science can provide.

The difference is, I'm willing to pay for your health care, but you aren't willing to pay for your fellow American's health care.

Do you, as a recent recipient of my hard earned money, not see any level of hypocrisy in your position?

#6. Your offense was your abject insensitivity to another human being's plight. Maybe you'll have one some day and someone will be insensitive to it. Thought you guys were all about sensitivity and all...guess I was wrong about that one.

Again, can you not see the hypocrisy in your own comments? You expect me to be sensitive to your health care crises while you and the rest of the right wing conservatives are completely insensitive to the health care crises faced by under-insured Americans.

You expect something from me that you aren't willing to extend to me.

#7 IBIKR: "Every post, and he posts daily." That's a lie. But you wrote it so it must be true...right?

That's between you and IBIKR. I don't have a dog in that fight.

But I hope, Jo Joe, that you see how this concept of democracy and open discourse works.

You express your ideas. I express my ideas. And people reading the exchange between us will be able to make up their own minds as to what they believe to be true.

Nothing needs to be deleted. Nobody needs to be banned from anything.

It's just a conversation. It's nothing to be afraid of.