A follow up to a post I wrote on January 17th. (A note on how checking the facts can lead to interesting results.)

I have recently taken a lot of heat for a post that I wrote about a 99% protestor. A good portion of that heat came from the person pictured in this post and the friends that he brought over from his blog and his own facebook page.


Under normal circumstances I would have had no problem dealing with each argument and commenter individually, however I woke up to nearly 20 comments the morning after he posted the link to my blog and as I read through them I came across one that shook me.

I’ve been insulted and made fun of because of my beliefs, both in comments and emails related to this blog, and occasionally in real life as well. I have never before received a death threat from a commenter though and that, even though the threat was mostly implied, made me take a step back and assess how I was going to deal with the situation. I contacted my friends, spoke to them, some of whom have experienced death threats and threats of physical violence before as well because of their political ideals. I left my own place of residence and went to stay with my parents, because the idea of being in a house with people who both have loaded guns and know how to use them, was much more appealing than being by myself at the time.

The threat itself, is visible on the comments of the original blog. The IP address it was sent from was and it was sent to the blog after the blogger in question posted links to my article (and my photo) on his blog and facebook.

Granted we can’t be held responsible for the actions of all of our followers, I do not know all of my followers and readers personally, but I promise you if any one of my readers ever threatened the life of someone I was in an argument with, and I was made aware of it, I would condemn then in harshest possible terms and do whatever I could to see them prosecuted for making such threat. What the 99% blogger in question will do is up to them…but if you choose silence please refrain from ever taking the moral high ground.


I spent several days assessing my situation and going over both the original blog entry and the comments that I received. My conclusion was this, I stand by the contents of my article.

Though perhaps calling him a liar was too far, but from the facts given he did seem to be lying based on reality. Perhaps I will change my comment to “he is clearly a very poor communicator”.  Either that, or he intentionally used half-truths and cherry picked his facts to change what the situation sounds like…which, according to my family’s house rules, is lying.

The commenters on that post are right, I do not know the life story of the man in question. I do not know him, I do not know where he lives, what he currently does for a living, nor do I honestly care. The content of what he wrote was what I was analyzing and he did not give all the facts, in fact he worded (intentionally or unintentionally) his words in a way that did not give all facts about his situation. And then he criticizes me for not including certain facts in my analyses, when those facts themselves were not included in the information he gave.

That is not my fault.

My analyses, based on the information given, was perfectly sound. Even the incomparable Sherlock Holmes could not deduce something correctly without all the information. “Data, data, data, I cannot make bricks without clay.”




Some of the commenters complained that I glossed over the facts of my own neurological condition, some saying that my glossing over the details meant that I had been cured and knew nothing of living with long term health concerns. I would first like to point out that I have, on several occasions, spoken about my health concerns on this blog and that there was no need to go over them again as MY health issues were not what the blog was about.

I will say here that I have not been cured. There is, in fact, no known cause or cure for my disorder. I suffer from Pseudo-tumor Cerebri, which basically means that (unless it stops on its own) I will be one at least two medications, every day, for the rest of my life. The increased intracranial pressure could have damaged my eyesight permanently or damaged my brain, if it had not been discoverd. If I do not take the medication I suffer from debilitating migraines, which before I was diagnosed, kept me from working more and more as the situation grew worse. The pain was so bad that I was forced to lay in the dark, with no noise, no interaction, for hours at a time. I would go to work and leave halfway through the day after throwing up multiple times because the pain was so intense.

I am not telling you this to gain your sympathy, merely to answer your questions, I don’t want your sympathy, nor do I need it. I have friends who care about me and they are my friends because they are people of character. As to the defenders of the 99%, please don’t feel sorry for me or my medical condition.

Others questioned if my neurological disorder had damaged my brain, affecting my ability to think and hurt my intelligence. I assure you that my friends, family, neurologist, and MRIs can tell you that this is not the case. That is the only response you will get to that accusation.

Other commenters addressed my compassion, or lack thereof. Compassion has nothing to do with facts, compassion does not alter facts. Compassion is not an advantage in analyzing the facts.

Others commented on my grammar and spelling. Yes, I will admit that I do not always edit my posts as well as I should. I also do not always have my posts proofread before posting them. My brain, unfortunately, usually runs faster than my hands can type and on occasion that means that I will skip words, use homophones, or get letters out of order or missing entirely. It is a flaw that I am continuously trying to break myself of, but it does not always happen. However my spelling and grammar have absolutely no bearing on my actual facts or arguments.

Those of you who know this man personally have every right to defend him on a personal level, but you must understand that he did not give all the facts in the first place and those facts that he did give, did not connect with reality. While my post may have lacked for style and compassion, his lacked facts, who committed the greater offense?

The post has been taken off its private settings and all the comments, even the one that gave me pause about the situation, have been approved. I will not be replying to the comments, as this reply is a blanket one covering the issues that I felt needed to be addressed.


Lastly, I would like to thank my friends and family for both supporting me and going over the situation with me, to analyze the issues. I would also like to thank one of my very best friends for writing a post that addresses some issues of the 99% movement that I have not addressed and far more eloquently than I could.



  1. Just finished reading the comments he and his bully squad left, they seem like a real intellectual bunch of classy people. Can’t wait for the claims that they have nothing to do with the guy who added that truly peaceful comment, let’s just ignore that it came in with the slew of their comments. Coincidence I’m sure.

    • You are one of those “intellectual, classy people” yourself for stooping to something you’re not happy with in someone else. He didn’t have a bully squad. It’s clearly made aware that he was upset about the article, posted it to his personal facebook page, and several people who cared a great deal for this man came over to read, and then got very upset at the snide bullshit that was going on in the comments section and also about the content of the article. Please, before you get on a high horse about yourself, look to see if you’re doing the very same thing. You look like a jerk just as much as the people you are addressing look like jerks to you. If that offends you I truly apologize, but you are literally doing just what you’re looking down on others for doing.

      Many of the other people here are doing the same thing. They’re treating “conservatives” as perfect and godly while attacking any “liberal” who dares to post. Well, that’s not right. It’s not good human behavior. You’re saying you all attack the message and not the person or their beliefs, but no, you really aren’t. The second post alone speaks volumes. It’s a lovely catchphrase that is invalidated by the very act of saying it. Everyone here is just too eager to look down on someone while standing on their own pedestal, and quite frankly it’s sickening. You know what I saw? I did see politeness. I saw many people standing up for their friend. I also saw many people slinging mud against anyone who came in that wasn’t a regular on this blog or immediately claiming conservative. Don’t ignore the actions of your own kind to make a point against the other side. Owning up to your own shortcomings is the only way to gain that next step, unless you’re only interested in having people exactly like you sit and applaud you while you join together to push those others down.

      To the writer of this blog: I’m not sure why you feel you got a death threat. An angry message about you being a cunt, from a made up email about killing cunts, and this is the internet. With the sort of dialogue you allow to be posted in your comments section alone, you should be familiar enough with how anger works on the internet to not think someone was seriously threatening your life. But well, maybe you did, I suppose you must have. And that is your right, though I personally would not have called that alone a death threat.

      Maybe if they showed any knowledge of how to reach you in real life, or said more than that one tiny comment that you can easily trace by IP and find them personally, then I would have taken it more seriously. I think that you probably are just more used to people that agree with you without questioning your words reading your blog (which I would assume is true of most blogs, I don’t generally read blogs I don’t enjoy) and so it got you upset. What I’m trying to say is that I’m not invalidating your feelings about the event, but that I don’t think you have to actually worry that you are under threat of death by anyone.

      I think that leaving your house to stay at a place full of guns is really a bit overkill, but perhaps you disagree, and that’s why you did it. But these people who you are lambasting were protecting someone very important to them who you attacked personally, and then allowed others to attack in the comments section. I also want to note that you should not assume that everyone who thought your article was cruel and wrong was “sent here” by that guy. It’s the internet and word travels, and people find blogs through many means. Maybe people thought you were “a cunt” because you were sort of acting like a jerk.

      It’s one thing to post something, it’s entirely another issue to post it with certain attitudes toward yourself and the other party dripping off of it. You cannot get through that article without noticing how sickened you felt by him, and what “he was doing” by “omitting the truth” (wording mine). And that in turn will make others who agree with you act that condescending way as well, or those who disagree with you act angry and defensive. It’s basic human nature. You as the moderator should at least use the decency given to you at birth to not allow hate filled rhetoric based on political parties and personal beliefs to be spread through your blog, because that makes it a part of your blog, and not speaking is nearly akin to agreeing. If that’s how you do business, I’m glad I don’t know you personally.

      As to the original post, it was not this man’s job to write every fact about his situation down. He also did not likely sit for hours concocting a perfect way to say everything ‘just so’ and probably just wrote out his facts, keeping his personal anonymity as best he could considering his face was in it and it was likely to go the entire rounds of the internet, and while it’s your right to speculate and pick it apart, it’s not entirely fair to say that if he wants you to think he’s not a liar he should write a better way. That’s fine, don’t believe him. But he didn’t write the note to falsify ideas or attack you, he wrote his situation as it was and added his voice to those that felt oppressed. You are, as I said, perfectly within your rights to try to break down pieces of it that you think are not accurate, but to state that those are fact based on the information he was willing to share with the entire world, and to state that he was lying and purposely making things look other than they were, is just appalling.

      I think I read somewhere that you fancy yourself a journalist, and no journalist would behave this way. I think you should have more pride in the message and the way it’s sent out, and you should also try to look at why you allow people to angrily attack others in your comments. Is that something that you personally stand for and abide by? Because from here, it looks like you do. I know that if I posted something and got people responding that way I would choose to reply with something telling them it’s unacceptable behavior- whether it was coming from those who agree with me, or those who I think are incorrect. Just because we aren’t all on the same side of the political field doesn’t give us any reason to act like total blatant assholes to each other. It’s shameful that you promote such activity by not standing out against it. And yes, on your own blog that you personally control, that is something that you can do. If you’re okay with this, then you are not the kind of person I’d ever want to get to know closer, no matter what your ideals are. Ps, I have friends who are religious, fundamental conservatives, liberals, hippies, socialists, communists, don’t-really-careists, and everywhere in between. Not because their ideals match with mine, not because they don’t, but because they’re good people. Your message means nothing if you allow it to be sullied with this sort of nasty behavior, both in the article and below it.

      Thank you for allowing me the chance to speak my piece. I know it’s long and I don’t even care if you post this, I just wanted you to read it and the other day I couldn’t find a way to email you. Have a good evening.

  2. I see a total of one comment that was worse than your article and in no way could be construed as a death threat. I question it’s veracity and your intentions. The large majority of commentors were overly polite. If loyalty to a friend is a negative thing, then you are definitely on the wrong side of the argument.

    Crisap, my response was 100% real but there was no reply to it, only false victim ragewhine over being confronted.

    20 comments?! OMG!

    • Well of course you see nothing wrong with your friend defending lies, you hold no stock in fact. We, the thinking people go by that old adage “”Plato is my friend— Aristotle is my friend— but my greatest friend is truth.”

      If that’s your definition for polite, I hate to see rude.

      No your response is as with all your statements a mishmass of half-truths, deliberate omissions and out right lies.

      And as she said can choose to repudiate that statement, which you did not. Anything that follows from you should be taken in light of the fact that you wanted to downplay a vicious misogynist who threatens people. You must be a great guy to know in real life.

    • Confronted? Protoguy, I’m sorry that you’ve been dealing with what you’ve dealt with but you called your own lie out in the comments. The sign you held in that picture claims that you worked ONE job, part-time at minimum wage and you still got denied for AHCCCS. You (intentionally or not) admitted to a lie by omission when you commented that you had actually been working TWO jobs.

      I certainly hope you don’t honestly believe you made a valid point with that remark.

      I didn’t get to finish college. I’m hoping to soon. I learned, however, quite some time ago, that working dead-end jobs (such as food service) was never going to give me a decent life. I made the choice to do something about it. i’m working two jobs, too, one as a fraud investigator and the other as an EMT. I only need insurance from one, and it’s great. I had to work my way up to it but I did it – and I don’t have to worry about hospitalization. I had to have emergency surgery last year and my insurance saved my patoose.

      If you make the conscious decision to do that kind of work for two decades, then that is your decision – nobody else made it for you. It’s not like the government forced you into that line of work and then refused to take care of you. It absolutely sucks that you ended up in that situation; I wouldn’t belittle the experience at all. When my best friend was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma several years ago, despite his VERY poor prognosis our church came through for his family in a major way. He died in the end, and the church still took care of his family afterwards. I will tell you what I tell all of my younger friends who agree with this 99% crap: you make your own choices and then you live with them. Nobody else should be expected to pay out for you. I believe wholeheartedly in charity, but not when it is forced at the hands of the government. That’s no longer charity – it’s socialism. You cannot be free with that hanging over you.

      • Again, if you bothered to read before you call me a liar, you’d see that I replied that I had to quit my second job well before I was diagnosed or applied for welfare.

        I worked TWO dead end jobs because there was a little thing called a recession that feels more like a depression. I had a real job. I lost it.

        Again, read the message. You’re too busily desperately trying to defend this person you’re not even interested in knowing the truth, merely parroting her lies.

        I had friends and co-workers who came through for me. My church, however, said they couldn’t help. So did the other two large churches I went to in desperation. So no, your friend’s church didn’t pay for his hospital bills. They may have helped with rent or other bills, but they didn’t shell out $100,000 for Lymphoma treatments.

  3. Again, if you’re not going to point out where I “lied”, what’s the point. I laid out facts. If there is anything you would like to know, I’d be more than happy to answer any question. If you’re just going to do as Meredith did and call me a liar with no evidence or proof, which is libel, by the way, what’s the point? It’s just making you look foolish.

    I don’t know who wrote that post. I don’t condone that sort of thing. Trying to pin it to me is childish.

  4. “Can’t wait for the claims that they have nothing to do with the guy who added that truly peaceful comment,”

    You won’t get any. Nearly every one of them said right up front that they were my friend or that they knew me. I don’t speak with their voice and they don’t speak with mine, but they are my friends, online and offline. I didn’t coerce them to come here. I posted my reply on my own blog, since it seemed clear that Meredith wasn’t going to allow my response to be posted and they, knowing my story, knowing me and knowing I’m not “a liar”. My post is still there, unedited.

    • I had an extremely good reason for not posting the responses at the time. I wanted to talk to the police about the death threat (in what world does the phrase “Stupid Cunt” connected with the email address “ikillstupidcunts” and the name “kill cunts” not a death threat I ask you?) before I posted or did anything else. After a lot of thought I realized that people who make threats like that are, 99% of the time, cowards who would do nothing in real life.

  5. *I’ll try my best to come across as polite in writing as I mean to be. I’ve been told I tend to come across as bitter, angry and/or condescending in print. I assure you that this is not my intention*

    The problem with your original article is that you make a whole lot of assumptions and then base your conclusions on those assumptions. For instance, you assume Guy only worked one part time job. You assume he made a certain wage (IE assuming he made less than minimum wage because he delivered pizza). You assume he has no family. You assume that aid from churches and private nonprofits is easy to come by. You assume he didn’t try these avenues of aid.

    You even admit to not knowing all the facts. Several times. So claiming that your article was “fact checking” is dubious at best. You did no research. You merely compared your anecdotal experience with his and claimed yours as truth. I certainly hope your college demands a more rigorous approach.

    • And I explain exactly where those assumptions come from. You will realize that in my original post I said that, given the information on the poster, I was saying he worked a part time job.

      In THIS post I say that he is responsible for not writing the full, accurate, truth on his poster and for (intentionally or unintentionally) twisting the facts to make the situation seem different.

      Which facts do you personally believe were assumptions? I said specifically that the AHCCCS numbers, my calculations of wage and part time hours, were facts. They were.

      • That’s exactly it. The poster is a readers digest version of what happened. I’m pretty sure if Guy went about trying to give a 100% full account of his situation, it wouldn’t fit on a single sheet of paper.

        The AHCCCS numbers, wages and part time hours you provided are accurate. No one is arguing this. What you seem to be missing is that all Guy had to be doing was working two part time jobs (which he was) and your entire “fact check” falls to pieces because all of a sudden, he’s making too much money to get AHCCCS.

        But you didn’t account for this. You’ve created a narrative in your head of what he’s been through and the type of person he is and you attempted to make the truth fit your narrative. You suffer from what we call “confirmation bias”.

        What both you and your lackey here seem to missing is that Guys point in his picture is strengthened by the fact that he worked two jobs. He was laid of by an industry he worked in longer than you’ve been alive. He then refused to become another unemployment statistic and so took two jobs. In other words, he embodies the very definition of a hard working, motivated individual you hold up a model citizen. Shouldn’t that hard work and industrious personality have benefited him?

        I can’t wait for the day you find out that Ayn Rand lived off Social Security handouts and Medicare.

        • Including “I worked 2 part time jobs” would not have taken up that much room. It would easily have fit on the paper. He chose not to write it, making his statement false.

          Lackey? I see no lackey. I see a friend who chooses to post in response to an abuse of accuracy.

          I already knew that fact about Ayn Rand. It seems that, unlike the people you usually converse with, I actually do research on the people I consider important historical person to me. I have plenty of reasons why I understand Rand’s reasoning for what she did.

          You do what you accuse me of doing. You have a bias that I must not know what I’m talking about, that I must be ignorant, that I must not know “everything” and if I did I would change my opinions on the spot.

          I see no problem with Guy’s situation as I pointed out in this post. I DO have a problem with twisting the facts. Did you read this follow up, that is exactly what I said.

          • I was creating a poster that people could absorb easily. I didn’t change facts to do this and I wasn’t writing my life story. That’s why I have a blog.

            I was trying to make as neutral a statement as possible to focus attention on what I thought was broken, not explain every nuance of my life so people could pick apart the veracity of my comments. Again, I have a blog for that.

            The message was short for a reason. A novel makes a poor billboard. Everything I said was the truth, and you’re still trying to cast doubt on all of it simply because you don’t know and can’t know the entire story.

          • I’m gathering that you think Guy has some sort of nefarious scheme up his sleeve. Or that he was being less than genuine in an attempt to lend credence to his story. I think?

            What you’re missing is that regardless of how many jobs Guy worked, the bigger picture is that he is illustrating (and the intended message of his picture) is that our system is a broken one. He HAD to become a burden on society to receive the medical care he needed. Two jobs and health insurance weren’t enough. In order to survive cancer, he was forced to become unemployed. Does this not inflame your libertarian senses?

            None of this changes if he worked one job or two jobs. His story as presented in that picture is 100% accurate. It’s not the full story because the full story isn’t necessary. Nothing is added or taken away from the truth of his experience by pointing out a second job. I notice you aren’t asking about what type of cancer he had. It’s irrelevant. So is his second job.

            So you found out that worked a second job. How does this validate your argument in any way? How does it discredit his? It’s omission doesn’t make him a liar because the information he omitted isn’t necessary. In this debate. you’re failing to see the forest through the trees.

        • All of the assumptions that were made actually were put in the best possible light for him, it is simply he said “part time” which by definition is one job for less than 30 hours. This was not the case and he skewed facts to make himself more sympathetic.

          The real problem here is that you are viewing this as an attack on your friend. This was not personal, it was using a specific case of the rash of these dumb photos to show that the claims made by them are questionable at best. This picture was chosen more because Meredith was familiar with the AHCCCS system. Any photo could have been picked and shown that there are half truths and questionable statements which are being used to bolster this infantile meme of “I am the 99%”

          And who is making assumptions now? If you read Meredith’s blog, or mine you might know that we don’t hold Rand, bat shit lunatic that she was, as the end all be all of ideas. She said some nice quotable things, she wrote a fun book. She is not by a long shot the last word on anything in either character or philosophy.

          • No, it’s simply a case of you and Meredith being sick of seeing a rash of these types of photos and decided to attack the most prominent one you could find.

            The Rand connection matches way too nicely with your “I don’t give a shit about anyone but myself” attitude.

            • Now you are making gross assumptions about myself and Cris. You have absolutely no idea what was going through my head when I wrote the post.

              I do not, as you seem to think, go around looking at 99% posters. In fact, I rarely see them, I know they are around because they are, occasionally, posted by my liberal friends. (Yes, somehow I do get along with liberals. They are a good bit less reactionary than you though). This particular one came across a friend’s facebook page while I was visiting them. As I’m from Arizona, and have had experience with AHCCCS (on more than a personal level, as I’ve worked in a medical office before) I took interest in the picture as the story that was presented on it did not ring true with reality.

    • She made her analysis based on the facts given. A lie by omission is still a lie; and if he’s lying about the facts, there must be a reason for it. He deliberately left out the fact that he worked two jobs and he said nothing about how much he made at the other one. Exactly who is wrong in this situation?

      • “A lie by omission is still a lie”

        This is a false argument. If I don’t tell you I have a daughter, that’s not a lie, it’s just not important to the discussion.

        The fact that I held two jobs has no bearing on anything. I had to quit the first job before I was diagnosed, as I said, and if I included that, people like Meredith would have pointed out that I was “lying” about having two jobs because I didn’t have them when I applied for Access.

        She made her analysis on what could never be more than incomplete information. I either need to put my life story on the poster or be called a liar? Who’s wrong in that situation?

        • I have read the original article and all of the comments. I will state to begin with that I am conservative and so obviously lack humanity.

          The Bloggers original article was an actual response to the picture put out by a person with personal issues basically begging for sympathy and also money (as I also looked at his blog). There was no need for her to look for additional info or facts as she was only dealing with the picture and it’s premise.

          I realize that many people who use only their feelings have difficulty dealing with reality and facts. She made comments based on what was presented only. She made no comments relating to the value of the person as a person or whether he is a good person or a good friend. For people to respond to something that was not involved in the article is again a demonstration of their ability to not face reality or facts. The only pertinent comments would be based on the actual article she wrote – were her assumptions incorrect based on the info provided, etc.

          I will go further then she did and state that that my initial reaction to posts like this are disgust. I find people who whine and try to play on people’s feelings repulsive. I would be sympathetic to a person you stated that they needed help for a medical condition and what that help would provide and then if I was interested I would ask for more info and then decide if I should donate. But to put out a poster to make a political statement along with a request for sympathy is silly and pointless. Politics should be based on reality and facts – not feelings. That is the problem with half this country.

          In reviewing the many comments I also again looked at the blog of the gentleman with the cancer and found that he had posted the young ladies picture and additional info about her. I again would call that aggressive behavior as you were actually asking for people to attack her to support you. Again a definite lack of character.

          In your last response you felt that there were no threatening responses to her. Is there something wrong with you! I would say that beyond the actual threat (I kill ……) you are a stupid ……..) many of the responses of your friends were very aggressive. Just because you did not receive the response you wanted does not deserve the rude comments given to the lady. And for someone to call what she wrote libel when they can not see the threat in the above statement is beyond the pale.

          You also keep trying to justify your poster and need for sympathy. The point is that many (I would hazard a guess that most of us) have problems in life and many of them are at the level as yours. The main point of your poster regardless of the facts involved is that you believe that the world or our country owes you medical care and obviously everything else you need in life and you are not receiving that. I contend that once you and your ilk get your way you will find out that you and many others will not longer receive any care and I am sure you will like it when that occurs. But since as I have already stated I lack humanity I would like to state that you are not owed anything in life. Life is not fair and often sucks. I am actually sorry that you have cancer and since I work in the medical arena I know that it can be very devastating. But I would hazard a guess that most of us even with full insurance do not have the money to pay our part or the medical bills that we would then owe so since you have been given care at no cost to you then I would say you came out ahead of most of us. Again my inhumanity – I also know that personal life style and view of life affects greatly on those who acquire cancers. You never actually state the type of cancer you have (maybe you did in your blog but honestly I only skimmed) and might that have some bearing on your cancer?

          The point is if you want to discuss the additional details of your life then you should have then offered her the specifics and then asked her to analyze.

          I think I am rambling now – there were comments about Fox news in the comments and other things so I must assume that you and all your friends are liberal so always believe that it is someone else’s problem to solve your problems. I am sorry that kind of philosophy rarely works for anyone.

          Anyway you last asked for comments and hopefully this fulfills your request.

          • Okay, based on the information presented, I think Meredith is a liar. No, I know she’s a liar and a libelist. She’s also an Aynd Rand Tea Party Lesbian who like fantasy and science fiction. From there I would assume she musht beat herself about the face every night for being a Tea Party Lesbian, and that she has crappy writing skills. Also, on the evidence presented, I would say you are a wannabe psych student or just watch too much procedural tv.

            And thanks for the further backhand judgement about my lifestyle causing my cancer. From that evidence I would surmise, NO! STATE AS FACT that you are a petty and dumb.

            As I said, I replied and laid out the specifics she says I omitted from my short message. I pointed straight to my blog. I don’t know how you can now conclude that I didn’t offer “her the specifics and then asked her to analyze.” That’s precisely what I did do.

            • Well, let’s see… Nothing Meredith put down would allow an assumption that she is a liar and there is no way you could know that for a fact. She certainly did not libel you as she dealt with only the info you originally presented and did it admirably. I do not believe that most tea party folks are also Rand followers. As I am sure that a large percentage (if not the majority) are social conservatives and as I like reading Ann Rand I know that she would not support that. I know it is difficult for people who follow feelings first to understand that people can agree with a part of a philosophy but not its entirety. I do not understand the reference to Meridith as a lesbian being at all relevent to the discussion. What does that say about you as a person?? I do not think her writing skills are bad and sometimes I find her quite amusing and funny! I am not sure if the psych student is a reference to me or Meridith. Obviously if you had looked at her blog you would not that is not true and if you are referring to me well I am beyond going to school but I certainly never would major in psych – actually I was an accounting major.
              As far as my reference to your lifestyle it was do to not knowing what type of cancer you had and had seen a reference to throat cancer but then I just saw something a lyphoma (more genetic then anything else I believe). But anyway the reference is more to my belief system – karma.
              And sorry, I am far from dumb.
              But basically you missed the point I was making (probably my fault as I am not a writer – her original blog was based solely on your original poster. She did not choose to write about your life story as you wish to give it to her now. Unfortunately you do not get to direct people to write as you wish.

            • And to your analysis of the information presented, in that you have access to my entire blog and a good long list of interests on my facebook page (and I had, at the time of writing the original post, one poster that you had written), I would say that you are spectacular bad at analyzing information.

          • The fact that you started your reply with passive aggression and ended it with basically telling him that he might have given himself cancer (yeah I know what you’re talking about medically, but that’s more about stress than “living a certain kind of lifestyle” and you know that.) is so so disturbing to me. No, you don’t “lack humanity because you’re conservative” but you sure drove home the point in how you chose to respond.

            He isn’t asking for sympathy. If you disagree with or don’t understand why the “99%” people feel the ways that they do, then that is your choice and that’s fine. But to just treat them like stupid parasites who are saying waaaaah me instead of being upstanding like yourself is biased at best and does nothing to make your point. Again, not agreeing with an issue doesn’t mean you have the sudden right to look down on them. I’m sure you agree with a lot of issues that I don’t, or disagree with a lot of issues I do, but I have no urge to call you names or sneer at you or try to make you feel lowly. And that’s the sort of language you utilized in your response, and I personally don’t approve of addressing issues that way and so had to say so.

            Have a good evening.

      • there is something wrong with you. this is like the movie ground hog day. it;s a nightmare. how childish and disgusting human beings. this man had cancer. he almost died. what is wrong with you? you and all your righteousness that is full of shit, period. oh please, all you idiots putting down this guy because you said he had an “ommission” in his statement. are you for real? you know what’s the ommission in your life, humanity and I also dare say the fear of GOD you pompass dirt bags. shame on you. give up the crap. go out tomorrow and help the homeless then say you did something productive. oh please.

        • Are you saying that once someone gets cancer they all of a sudden have great character and integrity? Are you saying that cancer suddenly wipes out ones whole life and that is all that is important? The person is no longer important just the fact that they have cancer? How very shallow of you….. Why would anyone fear God as he is only love…. You can only do something productive if you help the homeless or someone with cancer???

            • Guy they really don’t like to answer the posts we write. You notice they just come up with new shit. LOL what a joke. I wish they would have sent your ass to Iraq and put you out there in the middle of the action. I would laugh my ass off. So safe behind your computer. I come from a family of dignity, morales and the love for this country. My husband is a retired Leiutenant Commander, went to Officer school and was the President of his class. He is “Sir” to you little pee bodies. My whole family is military and police officials. So they also know how to use but would never waste their time with people like you who are little girls and boys and one day, one day your day will come. I think it’s called Karma. I don’t have to wish you bad or illness you are doing it all by yourself. Goodbye as well.

            • This is a reply to Ivonne Macewen, but since there is no “reply” button available to their post, I’m putting it here. I don’t give a flying hoo-ha who or what your husband was in the military. They are not “Sir” to anyone outside of the military, and if you feel the need to call everyone else “little pee bodies,” perhaps you should look to him to learn some goddamn respect. I say this not in an anti-feminist way, but rather because I’m sure HE learned something about it going through ACADEMY. If you really DID expect anyone to respect him or yourself, you would act with some goddamn maturity.

              As far as all of this nonsensical character attack BULLSH**, you guys really should look in a damn mirror before attacking others. I just LOVE how everyone on here feels free to attack a girl who was pointing out some simple inconsistencies like she’s some goddamn war criminal.

              This lady HAPPENS to be a friend of mine. She HAPPENED to come across the image that started this whole mess while at MY home. It just so happens that it was ME who pointed out that all of this seemed pretty inconsistent. I feel like absolute CRAP that all of this has blown up into some truly ridiculous flaming, by people who don’t like their cries for sympathy being called into question. As a woman who cannot hold a job, myself, I DO know what it’s like to rely on others. And I don’t go to my GOVERNMENT to get what I need. I truly DO rely on the kindness and compassion of others. And while Meredith may be suffering, she has shown more kindness to me than I’ve found in ANY of you, on this thread. I truly hope that one day you’ll look back on this and ashamed of how you’ve treated her. I assume you won’t feel any of it for now, but I can hope that one day, that will change.

              I do laud you for standing up for your friend. I am sorry for the truly horrendous things he has gone through. But sometimes, life just sucks. Trust me, I’d know.

    • Of course I called the cops. Insult my intelligence, fine. Tell me I’m not compassionate enough for you, not news. Tell me I’m not empathetic enough to your situation, clearly. Tell me I’m ugly, fat, stupid, etc. and I’ll just give as good as I get and keep right on going.

      Threaten me, which that commenter did, and you will be reported to the cops. Even if they get sick of me filing reports every time it happens.

      It’s a crime.

      13-1202 Threatening Or Intimidating

      A. A person commits threatening or intimidating if such person threatens or intimidates by word or conduct:

      1. To cause physical injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another; or

      2. To cause, or in reckless disregard to causing, serious public inconvenience including, but not limited to, evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or transportation facility; or

      3. To cause physical injury to another person or damage to the property of another in order to promote, further or assist in the interests of or to cause, induce or solicit another person to participate in a criminal street gang, a criminal syndicate or a racketeering enterprise.

      B. Threatening or intimidating pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2 is a class 1 misdemeanor. Threatening or intimidating pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 3 is a class 4 felony.

      Important sections in bold to assist you.


    Seriously though, Why so much bickering?
    Guy, leave it alone man. You gave it what-for, and she sure as hell wasn’t expecting the lash-back. I think it is time to pack shop and move on

  7. Wow, what a pile-on. And repeated attempts to simultaneously deny a very clear death threat to Meredith and to claim there never was one.

    Leave her the hell alone, you compassionate and super-duper-enlightened “progressive” souls. Go and spread your peace and love elsewhere. I’m sure she doesn’t need any more of it.

    If that is peace and love and enlightened compassion, then God help the world.

    • If that’s a “very clear death threat” then I’d like to see what the police had to say about it. Bullies at schools say much worse, often very blatantly saying “I am going to kill you.” I’m not condoning the statement, mind you, just noting the fact that it wasn’t more than implied by the address they posted for it. Perhaps that is the person’s personal email that they’ve had for years and that is their brand of humor. Perhaps it’s a disposable that they created just for the comment. Who knows. But “you’re a cunt@ikillcunts.com” is not a very clear death threat by any means. I highly doubt that would get anyone arrested unless they said much more than just that.

      Do you think that person really goes around killing people? I doubt it. Was it in poor taste? Yes, very much so. Are you making it into more than what it was? I believe so. And we’re both entitled to those beliefs. Do I personally think I’m changing anyone’s mind? Nope. But I feel that I should stand up for what I believe in, much as you likely do. I don’t think anyone was denying anything, they were felt a different way than you did about that particular comment. The way being that it wasn’t intended as a serious threat on anyone’s life, but more a “fuck you” sort of comment. The person who said it was likely just as amused by shaking her up as many of the people later are amused by talking down to those who aren’t very clearly defined conservatives. If I’m included in your ending, well. I’m sorry you think I think I’m enlightened. I’m a complete mess in my own life. But I always try to do right by people even if they’re not friendly, because I feel that’s just how I should live my life. I don’t think I have anything over anyone else, and I think that I can teach you just as much as you can teach me- it all depends on what you’re offering and how much the other person is willing to listen.

      Good evening.

      • For people who claim to have more compassion then others, I am appalled at the attitude toward an implied threat from a sick person to a young girl. Any man who uses an email address like that is not perpetuating a joke or sick humor but the fact that he is a mysoginist/hates women. For all of you who do not condem him you have demonstrated that you deep down agree with his conduct. And you are concerned that we lack empathy or emotion. Wow!
        I think a think a period of time for all Guy supporters in contemplating moral relevancy is in order.

  8. “Now you are making gross assumptions about myself and Cris. You have absolutely no idea what was going through my head when I wrote the post.”

    I think this wins the award for the most unintentionally ironic statement ever.

Comments are closed.