From An Angry Reader:
You might have had that intolerable delay because of my son and I (sic). We’re (sic) you the old guy with the nasty glare? We are use (sic) to people like you. Did you ever hear the phrase, “liberty for all” or “equality for all?” You are a Trumpite, which means your (sic) special…How’s that working out for you? I love the Neo-Nazis, the draft deferments, porn stars, staff loyalty, the overt incompetency and overt racism. As a father of a son who is alive because of embryonic stem cell research and would sit in a pre-existing death care policy if you (sic) nutters had your way. By the way, science is real, empirical and not swayed by greed, racism or ignorance. The last three terms apply to you. You are a terrible historian, (sic) you are a Reactionary. And sorry you had to wait, asshole. Dos Vidanya, Stormy
_____________________________
Dear Angry Reader Owen Hall,
When you write an angry reader letter at least try to be coherent and identify the source of your wrath. The above letter is just stream of consciousness blather, full of half-written thoughts that are almost impossible to fathom. In any case, here is an effort to address your harangue:
1) I do not need your lectures about the disabled. Had you read the column that I think you are referring to, my precise point was concern for special needs people by critiquing those who use special parking permits and who demand wheel chairs going into the plane, but mysteriously sprint off after landing. Meanwhile, those who need special assistance are often ill-served by drivers taking their spots or passengers using their wheelchairs who are not in real need.
2) I am old (64) but do not glare, much less nastily so. Projection and paranoias are not healthy for one’s soul. I have a disabled granddaughter and know all too well about glares, but I do not invent dragons to slay them and thereby virtue signal.
3) I do not know what a “Trumpite” is and I do not think you do either, unless you mean 46% of the country who voted for him as preferable to Hillary Clinton. I do not think those who voted for Hillary are “Clintonites.” Life is more complex that your simplistic us/them dichotomy.
4) When I read your first sentence, I assumed three or four angry reader talking points would inevitably follow. Instead, you managed six(!): 1) the Nazi slur (check), 2) the terrible grammar and near illiterate expression (check), 3) the victimized self-referencing (check), 4) the profanity, (check), 5) the personal slurs (check), and 6) the lame attempts at sarcasm and snark (check). All that was missing were the emphatic capital letters (only a quarter-check) and the veiled threats. I would still give you an 8 on the Angry Reader unhinged scale.
5) Science is indeed real and timeless. But some scientists are unfortunately throughout 2,500 years of civilized research and empiricism often swayed by “greed, racism or ignorance.” Money is often one incentive for non-empirical advocacy masking as disinterested science. Ask yourself how exactly “Earth in the Balance” Al Gore became a near billionaire, and mysteriously dropped his opposition to carbon-fuel profiteering when the anti-Semitic, oil-funded Qatari autocracy offered him many millions for his failed cable Current TV outlet (sold in haste to Qatari-funded Al Jazeera to beat new capital gains taxes that he supported).
6) Mr. Hall, try to calm down, and see the world as it is rather than as the way your dark impulses are terrified it is. Donald Trump was created not by haters, but by an often hateful contempt displayed to half the country. Please reference Hillary Clinton’s latest red-state slurs that update her deplorables and irredeemable invective.