While I’m busy today with research, I thought I’d treat you to a few gems from my hatemail bag. These are in response to the latest Sun Media column.
Responding to climate change is the single most important mission for humanity at the moment.
The fact that Bush botched Iraq and can’t seen to muster manpower to combat genocides that he did not help set up has diddly squat to do with his reluctance to face the reality of climate change…
And the UN waiting for the US to “do the heavy lifting?” How about doing their part? How about differing to the UN on matters of war so the rest of the world doesn’t view America as the bully that it has been? How about paying their debts to the UN? America does need to be told off on certain issues, and so does
And anyone with a shred of intelligence knows all of this. I have little or no defence for The Sun when people tell me it is designed to keep people stupid and that it is written at a grade three level. I notice you print corrections if a person is inaccurately named in a caption, but do you ever correct the drooling stupidity – or worse: willfill disinformation – of columnists?
Although I have CC’d Ms Marsden, I have the impression certain Sun e-mail addresses are simply a place where complaints go to die.
Response: Where to do I start with this one. Let’s just say he’s obviously wrong on the last line, and everything else that comes before it. Imagine, people tell him the Sun “is designed to keep people stupid”, yet he reads it “willfilly” — enough to be able to describe editorial minutiae. Jeez, maybe he’s proof positive of his own theory? And how about America “paying their dues to the UN”? If America wasn’t funding that debating club, it wouldn’t even exist, buddy. As for climate change being more important than terrorism, would you like to go to the Mideast and see which does you in first — the terrorists or the weather?
Your erotics of war, getting hot at the thought of flesh being ripped apart with inevitable civilian casualties and no accountability, is either the most disturbing take on violence I’ve ever heard or else a mock-up of the next David Cronenberg movie. You obviously have no clue about world affairs beyond your school girl fantasies of big powerful men and their victims, but your lack of credibility does little to excuse your lack of responsibility for the things you advocate. I expect you’re the kind of monger that would scream “unfair” at the slightest provocation against you, even while you call for the most horrendous unfairnesses against others. You won’t turn anti-violent until it touches you, but you, of course, would never risk yourself — only demand the ultimate cost from others.
I hold a secret hope that you will be caught for plagiarism from White House sources.
Response: This was actually written by a dude — one who clearly needs to man up. Somehow he confused my getting hot and bothered by Sarkozy’s pressure washing with getting off on war. Hey, I only get off on war when it’s the other bastards who are dying for their cause, to borrow from the great General George Patton. But not nearly as much as I get off on hatemail like yours. As for viewing pressure washing as an act of violence — hey guy, do you shower? Incidentally, judging by the email address, the author of this note is at Brock University in Ontario — I only mention that as yet another ringing endorsement for “higher” education.
I was surprised by your recent article, “Award winning performances”. Your use of a vulgar, sexual term (circle jerk) was neither necessary nor appreciated. If it was intentional use, shame on you! If was not, please research your vocabulary more diligently. We do not need to read these things in editorial articles. (or anywhere for that matter)
Response: Pussy (and no, I don’t mean “cat”).