Letters to the Editor: January 4, 2017

Re: Medal for Trump


Respectfully suggest readers who contribute here check their facts first. Rosa Parks did NOT PRESENT a MEDAL to TRUMP. The Ellis Island MEDAL thing was a boondoggle. (Too much for here)

The comment about Clinton saying Sen Byrd was her mentor was part of a commemoration after his death. What should she have said? If you were to research it, you would find that while Sen Byrd was a KKK member in his youth , he spent the majority of his life publicly disavowing and repeatedly apologizing for his early KKK affiliation.

Karen Peters


Democrats’ turn for depression


For the past 8 years, with Washington led by the BO team, it’s now time for you liberals to live with the “DT”s. At long last your turn to be depressed.

Ken Semmler


Worst man for the job


I have searched for a name, a term for the incoming administration of the Donald. I think I have found it, matter of fact, I am sure I have found it and it is so appropriate. For now and evermore the administration of Donald Trump will be know as a KAKISTOCRACY. A more apropos name for his form of governing is not available.

T. Kroll


Hats off to protesters


My hat is off to those Rockettes who are protesting participation in the presidential inauguration celebrations. This represents a clash of professionalism vs. personal integrity, and for these protesters, personal integrity won out.

I’ve been a lifelong musician and Democrat. As a professional musician, I’ve played many a Republican function: Lincoln Club dinner dances, fundraisers, etc. I’ve even furnished a string quartet at a private reception for Vice President Quayle.

But you could offer me a thousand dollars and I would not help celebrate the presidency of this rabble-rousing, sexist, boorish excuse for a leader.

Steve Berliner

Rate this article: 
No votes yet
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
4 + 10 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.


Gordon, if you have time please explain to me and the rest of the readers why you think progressive ideas will help us become a better and stronger nation. What is it about big and bigger government You find so appealing?

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Since your question is based on several false premises, I can't possibly answer it.  Instead, let me state (for the umpteeenth time) what those false premises are, so you can revise your question into something approaching reality.

1) I'm not a "Progressive", so I can hardly speak for them.

2) Though I can't claim to know what constitutes "progressive ideas", I'm confident that (like "liberal ideas") many of them do not involve "big and bigger government".

3) Indeed, among the "liberal ideas" I know you find fault with are:  A) that women should decide for themselves what to do with their bodies;  B) that the Federal government shouldn't pass laws interfering with that;  C) similarly, that we all should be able to decide whether or not to use contraceptives without the government (State or Federal) interfering;  D) that we should be able to decide when and how to end our lives without (etc.);  E) that people should be able to decide what to believe on matters of Faith, and whether to believe at all, without (etc.) - which includes being forced to pay taxes to support such beliefs.

   Please, note that the items listed in Point 3 (which are just examples, there's plenty more) involve limiting government power to nothing in those areas!

   Meanwhile, here's a question for you to answer, one I've asked you many times before, and which you always evaded and avoided (as have just about every other "conservative" I've put it to):

So-called "small government conservatives" objected to "Obamacare" on the grounds that the Constitution doesn't explicitly mention healthcare or Medicine as being within the Federal government's power.  Yet they have no problem with the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.  Pray tell me why the inconsistency, and where does the Constitution explicitly give Congress the power to ban a surgical procedure?

   I'll answer your revised question only after you answer this one.



Gordon, Surprise surprise I absolutely agree with you on C, D, and E.

On A and B I would agree with you in theory if it were not for the fact that aborting an unborn fetus is murder. When you abort an unborn fetus you stop a human heart from beating which if left alone almost always would result in a human baby being born. If willfully stoping a human heart from beating is not murder tell me what is ? Please do not tell me that a fetus is not a human being because that is just plain bull. Yea a woman can do whatever she wants with her body. She can tattoo it , put rings through her nose , prostitute it and whatever the hell else she wants to do but killing an unborn human being is murder regardless of what the Supreme Court says.

You may not know it but you are as much a progressive as Hitler was a nazi. You are as much of a progressive as the pope is a Catholic You believe that government is better as it gets bigger. You ask me what are progressive ideas. Gordon, really ? I have been describing progressive ideas for years in my letters. The same letters you have been criticizing for years and years. So are you telling me that you have been criticizing my letters because of who I am since I wonder if you have ever read any ?

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Leaving aside your erroneous claim that Abortion is murder* (we can debate that another time, and end up exactly where we always end up), you still haven't answered the question I put to you innumberable times:  Where does the Federal government get the consitutional authority to do anything about Abortion (or even Murder, for that matter).  Until you correctly answer that question, you simply demonstrate your complete ignorance of Constitutional Law, and of the limits that actually do exist on the Federal government.  And, again, until you do answer my question I will not answer your original question, nor debate Abortion with you here either.

   Since you like comparisons with Hitler, remember that he regarded any of his oppoents to be "enemies" and "subversives" - as have all other tyrants throughout history.  It's long past time you stop worrying about the state of other people's souls, and worry about your own.  (And don't try to evade the issue by arguing you're "justified by faith".  Torquemada, the Grand Inquisitor of Spain, thought the same thing.  I doubt he liked where he ended up!)

   Oh, and like such tyrants, including the potential one you just helped elect as President, you are incapable of telling the truth!  So, according to you, I "believe that government is better as it gets bigger"?  Gee, got any proof for that claim?  Start with the Comment you're pretending to reply to, where I specifically stated that many "liberal ideas do not involve big and bigger government"!  I then went on to mention five examples (though I could have mentioned more).  You claimed to agree with only three of them.  Gee, Roy, isn't having the Federal government interfere with a woman's body an example of "bigger government"?  You sound like a "Progressive" on that one!

   Which, of course, gets us back  to the question you keep evading and avoiding.  If, as you dishonestly claim, you believe in "limited" government - especially on the Federal level - then where does the United States of America (as distinct from individual States) get the constitutional authority to ban Abortion?  Screaming "it's murder" doesn't answer that question.  Know why?  Because unless it happens on Federal property (such as a National Park), or otherwise involves a Federal interest (the murder of an FBI agent, for example) the Federal government has no general criminal jurisdiction!  Except for those cases, murder is a matter of State Law.  It's just one of the many ways the power of the Federal government is limited.

   By the way, the Federal government can't even punish kidnapping unless the kidnappers cross State lines.  Look into that and you'll have a better understanding of the limits of the Federal government, and how they apply to the question you refuse to address.


   As for your denunciation of "progressive ideas", what I've seen is that you use the phrase as a general epithet to describe anything you don't like.  (Much the way "conservatives" describe anything they don't like as "Socialism!" or "Communism!", regardless of what those terms actually mean.)  So, sorry, Roy, but all I get from you is that anything you dislike is "progressive", including being expelled from a local Bocce Club!

   And that is one of the main reasons I've been criticizing your rantings, because you use words without regard to their meaning, and make accusations without regard to the facts! When challenged on that, you take refuge in the pathetic line that "it's just an opinion". Well, Roy, it's my opinion you don't know what you're talking about!  So how am I to answer a question you pose when it's based on such false premises?

   "Liberals" don't believe "bigger government is better", and I presume "Progressives" (whoever they are) don't either.  We do believe government has a legitimate role to play in some areas, such as insuring the air we breath, the water we drink, and the land we live on and grow our crops in doesn't poison us!  If that makes me a "Progressive" in your view, then I would wear the label proudly.

   But if you think that means I must, in knee-jerk fashion, support every environmental law or regulation, then you don't know me, you don't know "liberals", and I suspect you don't know "Progressives" either.  Yet, out of that vast ocean of ignorance you presume to lecture us on what's good for the nation.  No wonder you voted for a creature like Lying Trump!

   So, how about abandonning your evasion and avoidance, and answer the question I posed.  Where does the Federal government get the constitutional authority to ban Abortion?  I know where, do you?  (And do you understand the consequences of the answer?)


* P.S. - Of course, your views about Abortion disprove your claim that you agree with Point 3 E, since passing laws based primarily (if not exclusively) on a religious belief (such as banning all Abortions on the ground it's murder) violates that point.  You've made it very clear that your political views are greatly influenced by your religious views, and an honest person would admit that's also true of the so-called "Pro-Life Movment".  But as I said, there will be no further discussion about this until you address the issue of Federalism!

first Buckeye is a very good place to live.

Over the years the constant complaints  from

residents about the total lack of any kind of

good restaurants  is our Economical Demographics

will not allow us to have all the different restaurants

we would love to see located here in Buckeye, so

the residents just get in their cars and travel to

where the good eating places are.

90% of what we have here are fast food joints that

more often then not make me ill.

Breezed through the McDonalds recently and got

a fish sandwich and a medium shake that looked like

a small. $ 8 ,19 , try that on a family of four if you can

talk the kids out of fries.

Thous the Brown Bagging it comment,  and I am more

then sticking to it.







Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Vickie:

  Thanks for the response.

  I wasn't questioning the substance of your Comment, only asking for information so I could understand it.  You've now provided that, and I sympathize.

   I might add that I'm frequently annoyed at how the Arizona Republic seems to assume that the only places worth eating in are on the East Side.  There are plenty of good places in the West Valley, and I hope some of them come to Buckeye so you don't have to drive far to enjoy them.

coming to Buckeye.

300 Highly Skilled Professional workers

are going to take one look at the Buckeye's

Eaters and will all Brown Bag it.

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Vickie:

   Not being familiar with things in Buckeye, I have to ask what the heck you're talking about?

For the last 8 years I made the general observation that the letters were very much leaning Republican on a numerical basis. I felt good about that because I deduced there were a lot more Repulicans in the west valley area. I was wrong. Based on the letters in the last few issues I believe the reason Republicans seemed to dominate numerically is because Obummer was President. It now appears left wing letters will dominate the letters section for the forseeable future or say the next eight years . Happy New Years to all my liberal friends. I suggest you all stop crying and just SUCK IT UP ! Go find a safe space and get out your play dough, especially you Dennis . Posner at least contributed a lot of stuff even if it was faulty to the left. But you Dennis just were an annoying nonsensical mosquito buzzing around my ear ina darkroom as I tried to fall asleep . An annoying little nat .

YOU are the problem. Not ypor imagined boogiemen LOL.

But keep writing your nonsense, it is funny stuff!! LOL


Dennis, do you ever proof read your comments ? What does ypor mean ?

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   People who don't use spell check shouldn't throw stones.  I suspect it means the same thing that "nat" (properly spelled gnat) means.

   Or maybe it's short for "your poor".  Though I agree such "abbreviations" should be avoided.  Maybe both of you need a course in remedial English!

   Of course, I've been known to make a typo or to. wink

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Congratualtions!  You finally managed to say something that was fact based and true!

   Of course, that's only if one takes your words out-of-context.  Naturally, the conclusion you've reached is factless and wrong.

   In the first place, despite its name, the View doesn't cover the entire West Side.  There are plenty of communities that don't get the paper, and even in the places that do there are plenty who don't subscribe to it or receive it.  (For example, I have a friend who used to live in the same apartment complex in Tolleson I live in.  When his parents died he inherited and moved to their house in Peoria.  He doesn't get the View there, so I get him a copy here and give it to him on a regular basis.)

   Second, and I know this will come as a shock, a lot of people who read the View aren't the least interested in the Letters page, and would be happy to see it disappear.  Obviously, they don't send Letters to the Editor.

   (It works out, though.  I'd be more than happy to see the Sports page vanish.  You can't always get what you want.)

   Third, you may have noticed that the people who do write Letters tend to be "the usual suspects" (you, me, Patrick, "Mother" Maccree, etc.).  It's easy to see that even people who read the Letters page don't all participate in it.  (I'd say we're a distinct minority in that department.)

   All of which means that any conclusion you care to draw about the number of Republicans or "conservatives" (or Democrats and "liberals") in the West Valley based on the Letters page is bound to be false!

   But there is a way to learn the truth, not that you've ever shown any interest in that.  Just look up the statistics for voter registration in the West Valley.  For example, if you go to the website for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commision (http://azredistricting.org/Maps/Final-Maps/default.asp), you can obtain maps and registration data for the entire State (including, of course, the West Valley).  Another resource is the website for the Arizona Association of Counties (http://azcounties.org/).

   Let's look at the numbers for the West Valley.  For simplicity's sake I'm using the information for Legislative Districts, and only the Districts in the communities the View serves: Avondale, Buckey, Goodyear, Litchfield Park and Tolleson.  Those are Districts 4, 13, 19 and 29.  (Some of them, like District 4, extend far beyond the boundaries of the West Valley, but this is the best we can do.)  Here are the results by District.

   You will note (for the little it's worth) that in all but one of the districts (13) the Democratic voters far outnumber the Republicans!  Why do I say it's worth little?  Because in elections the number registered doesn't matter, only the number who vote!  Still, if you look at the Members Roster for the incoming Legislature (http://www.azleg.gov/memberroster/) you'll see it tracks these results.  All but District 13 are fully Democratic.

   And your claim that Republicans "dominated" the Letters page is laughably wrong.  True they may have submitted the loudest and most bigoted of Letters (I'm referring to intellectual bigotry, not racial or other forms of it), but if you care to review all the Letters for the past eight years I think you'll find the numbers were evenly balanced.  (Of course, we have to exclude all the Letters about feral cats eating dead coots on egg farms. wink )

   Given your displeasure in Lying Trump's choice for U.N. Ambassador, perhaps it's you who will have to "suck it up" (along with just sucking).  But if we accept your "theory", then what were Republicans like you doing for the past eight years but being "bummed out" and crying like a bunch of infants?

   (I apologize to the infants of the world for that comparison.)

   I don't know who this "Dennis" is you have such antipathy towards.  (He certainly didn't submit a Letter or a Comment to this issue - so far - so why address him?)  But that buzzing sound you hear comes from what substitutes for your brains!  At least you don't have to fear the Zombie Apocalypse.

Gordon, At least I have a brain . And you sir ??

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Too bad you never bother to use it.

Gordon. You are wrong. On occasion I do use my brain.

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Then, I guess, just not when writing to the View.

Gordon There you go again splitting hairs and attempting to practice law in the letters section as you have been doing for years. I on the other hand am merely offering my opinion which by definition is how someone feels or believes and not necessarily fact related. And I bet you still do not know the difference between a democracy and a republic Do you? No I did not think so

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   No matter how many times you repeat that childish sophistry, it remains false.  Also hypocritical, since you don't use that same argument when those you call "Progressives" (or "Subversives") offer theirs.

   You really should read or see the book or movie Denial, it's about a man who devoted his life to venturing his "opinion" that the Holocaust never happened.  Then he made the mistake of suing a real historian who called him on it, and was declared a liar and a fraud in the courts.  The only reason that hasn't happened to you is that you're too trivial to be sued.

   I don't care if you "feel" the moon is made of green cheese, or that the Sun orbits the Earth, state such an "opinion" and you're wrong.  And you are wrong so frequently because you are the Factless Wonder.  Which is why your "opinions" are worthless!

   You see, Roy, there's something called reality out there, and it doesn't give a damn for your "opinions", anymore than the rest of us should.  So keep living in your fantasy land in which the "great Progressive conspiracy" had nothing better to do than expel you from a local Bocce club.

P.S. - As for the difference between a democracy and a republic, I know it, you don't.  But that's a subject for a Letter that won't be appearing for several weeks (depending on the View's schedule).

Gordon Posner's picture

   Slight mis-statement there.  The sentence about Denial should have said the guy "was declared a liar and a fraud by the courts".  Which is a judgment which will follow him forever.

porr000's picture


That's rich, coming from you.

Your own letter complaining about Trump picking Nikki Haley sounds like you need to take your own advice and "suck it up". If ANYONE was doing any "crying" about Trump to these pages, it was YOU.

I'm still waiting to see if you are right when you called Trump the Anti-Christ last year.

If it ends up being true, there may be a lot of Republicans writing in to complain about him as you did.


Patrick you are wrong. I never called anyone the anti Christ Please quote what issue I supposedly said that. Also you are wrong about crying about Trump because I do not like Haley has nothing to do with Trump I never complained about Trump in this section because this is the first time in months I submitted anything at all in this section. Your generalities are inaccurate and grossly exaggerated .

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Oh, now you decide that opinions must be based on fact?  So it's not enough that Patrick had an opinion (however erroneous) that you called Lying Trump the Anti-Christ?  (As detailed in my Letter of last October 12th, that was Ms. Chelini.  But you had plenty of other derogatory things to say about the guy.  Patrick's "opinion" was correct about that!)

   And sorry, oh Factless One, but your Letter of December 14th, where you objected to Lying Trump's appointement of Ms. Haley, sure sounds like whining to me!  Here are your own words at the start of it:

I see where President Elect Trump has selected Nikki Haley of South Carolina as ambassador to the United Nations. I had to ask myself, What was he thinking ?

What does Haley know about being an ambassador ? So many others, it seems, were much more qualified for the position. As our ambassador to the U N,Haley will need to be tough and loyal to principle. She has neither quality. Haley is a “ wimp” who buckles under political pressure.

As governor of South Carolina, Nikki Haley collaborated with the Progressives, and was only too happy to have the Confederate flag permanently removed from the Capitol building. She is a disgrace to the South ! That flag which had been proudly flying in South Carolina since civil war days should not have been removed at this point in our history . Fact is that the Progressives are hell bent on tearing down symbols of America’s culture. This is just another example .

   Sorry, sir, but that hardly sounds like full throated and enthusiastic support for Lying Trump's choice; more like total disagreement, and questioning of his ability to choose who will run this country.  That's definitely a complaint about Trump!

   I agree Patrick sometimes engages in vague generalities, which turn out to be grossly exaggerated.  But so does Lying Trump, yet you voted for him.  (He's also a habitual liar, something we can't say about Patrick.)

P.S. - And no lectures about grossly exaggerated generalities from the guy whose "opinions" consist almost entirely of them!

Gordon Posner's picture

  I thought I indented all three of the paragraphs I quoted from your earlier Letter, but only the first one came out that way.  More proof of my fallibility.

porr000's picture


I'm tempted to say that according to your standards, I don't need no stinkin proof...that it is my opinion you said that.

I'm also tempted to say, that according to President Elect Trump’s standards, I don't need to prove anything, matter of fact, I should double-down on my statement, then disparage you and say you don't know what you are talking about... or I should flat out reject that I even said it, even though it is in writing that I did.

However, I am more ethical than that.

You are correct you never called Trump the anti-Christ in the WVV, it was someone else who said that. I apologize for the error.

Perhaps I misspoke because what you DID actually say in the past issues was just as bad.

You said:

11/17/15: “Republicans, beware of Donald Trump. . . . Trump is UNELECTABLE . . . . the way he smirks and badmouths other Republicans does nothing but show his ignorance, . . . . Maybe he is a Democratic plant.”
3/23/16: “. . . we have the Donald, whom if elected President may prove to be worse than Obama, . . . . Some have compared him to Hitler . . . . Mussolini is a much better fit. . . . he has little if any spiritual values. . . . I predict if Trump is elected, all evangelicals . . . will also come to have serious buyer’s remorse.”
5/25/16: “. . . the Donald with his obnoxious and deceitful personality . . . . Trump was and still is the least qualified. . . .”

And yes, you were indeed crying about Trump selecting Haley for ambassador, so suck it up bud! This is on you.


Patrick You just quoted from two different letters of mine and attempted to show them as one. Talk about spin. You are as bad as Posner

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   No, let's talk about lies, like the one you just told.  Patrick neither attempted nor accomplished any such thing.  He clearly provided the different dates for each of the Letters.  He also preceded his quotes by noting they came from "past issues" (note the use of the plural form).

   But, of course, being the "Factless Wonder" you can't be bothered with "details" like that!

P.S. - And that's not just an "opinion", it's truth!

P.P.S. - Apparently, Math isn't your forte' either, since he quoted three of your Letters!  (That's also not just an "opinion".)

porr000's picture


You completely NAILED it!


Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Patrick:

   I'd say witless myself!

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Patrick:

   You nailed it!  Both as to Roy and Lying Trump.


P.S. - Funny how he still can't produce that supposed video of thousands of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks by dancing in the streets of Jersey City.

Patrick, here is the bottom line . Trump was never my choice for president. My choices were Rubio by a wide margin followed by Cruz and Santorum. I watched in disbelief as Trump continued to thrive despite all his bad behavior. I felt he was unelectable and was angry at the Republicans who gave him his primary victor. I thought Trump was the only candidate crooked Hillary could beat and I said so. I was wrong . Trump is a terribly flawed candidate. However he was still far superior to Clinton. To me Hillary was unthinkable. She as a big progressive represents everything which is wrong with America. Therefore now that I am stuck with Trump I wish him well in reversing all of Obama's unconstitutional executive orders . I want Obamacare repealed, illegals sent back to where ever the hell they came from, the border sealed, the military strengthened, more drilling for oil and political correctness to go to hell. I do not care who does or does not agree with me and I absolutely refuse to be intimidated by anyone or to shut up. So I guess you get the idea.

porr000's picture


Believe it or not, there was a lot you wrote that we can agree on. 

1. Trump was never my choice for president. 

2. I watched in disbelief as Trump continued to thrive despite all his bad behavior.

3. I felt he was unelectable and was angry at the Republicans who gave him his primary victory.

4. Trump was a terribly flawed candidate.

5. Therefore, now that I am stuck with Trump, I wish him well...

Actually, not only do I wish him well, I wish him to be successful as president.  I don't want to see him fail in the way the Republicans wanted Obama to fail.


Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

  Time for a simple "Yes" or "No" question, which you can't weasel your way out of:  Did you vote for Trump on Election Day?

  If no, then he wasn't your choice for President.  If yes, then you just lied through your teeth!

P.S. - And when has either Patrick or I suggested you "shut up"?  (Except, perhaps in jest, or as a bit of rhetoric.)

   You, on the other hand, have spent most of your time here trying to intimidate and silence those you call "Progressives" (just like Lying Trump does), as your Letter about them being "subversives" proves (along with Lying Trump's tweet about them being "enemies").  That, sir, is the classic behavior of tyrants!  (And since you like "Southern Culture" and "Heritage" so much, perhaps there's a John Wilkes Booth waiting for you!  Sic Semper Tyrannis.)

Gordon Trump was never my choice but I voted for him because my choice was not on the ballot . Where do you see an. Inconsistency there? Secondly I am not trying to shut up progressives. I am simply calling them out for the threat they are to my freedoms . You sure throw around a lot of nonsense for one person . Wise up Gordon. Wise up

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

  For someone who just falsely accused Patrick of "spin", you're quite the "master" of it!  (Well, an incompetent amateur anyway.)

   So Lying Trump wasn't your "choice" for President, but you chose to vote for him on Election Day?  Talk about inconsistency!  You could have voted for someone else (say Libertarian Gary Johnson), wrote in another name, or simply not voted for President at all!  Whatever your reasons for choosing to vote for him, the fact remains Lying Trump was your choice for President when it mattered most!

   As for your attempts to silence Progressives, I'll let others form their own judgment about that.  But if I wrote that Republicans were a bunch of "subversives", and that "conservatives" were trying to tear down and destroy all symbols of American culture (as you falsely accused your dreaded "Progressives" of doing), there would be little doubt that your purpose in using such rhetoric was to silence people.  (Much the same way you and Lying Trump use the cry of "Political Correctness" to silence anyone who's "opinions" you disagree with.)

   If there is a God, an Afterlife, and a Judgment, you will face a reckoning for all such lies and sophistry you engage in.  Some people sell their souls for the whole world, the Devil (if he exists) is getting yours cheap!  (Which is about what it's worth, anyway.)

   Wise up yourself.




Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Patrick:

   Of course, you managed to say the same thing I did, but far more briefly.

Damn your eyes!

Hey Pos. Why don't you start your own newspaper and you can write your own letters each week . I am sure you could contribute several letters of 500 words each . You are as verbose as the entire editorial section of a dozen newspapers put together . Go for it . Progressives can spin all day and never tired of it

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Roy:

   Looking in the mirror, are we?  Since that describes you perfectly!

   And when are you going to learn that trying to insult me for being "brevity challenged" won't work?  I freely admit to being long-winded and verbose - just like the Founders, who were wise enough to realize that important matters can't be properly discussed in 140 characters.  (Which is why I say Twitter is for twits - like you!)

   But be careful what you wish for, I occasionally consider starting my own blog.

Gordon Posner's picture

   Four measly Letters, and none of them even close to 300 words long?

   Good think I don't pay to get the View, I'd be demanding my money back for this issue!

porr000's picture


If you paid for it, would you pay extra if The WWV prints MORE letters than usual?

My guess is you wouldn't?

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Patrick:

   Let's be frank, I doubt I'd pay for it no matter what the content! wink

I'm pretty sure I'm the Dennis he is referring to. I called him out, so of course he does the only thing he can do. ATTACK.  LOL

If he ever said ANYTHING worthwhile I might be offended, but he doesn't. LOL


Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Dennis:

   That's what I thought, actually, but he should have made it clear in his Comment rather than leaving everyone to guess.  And since you "attacked" him (I'd say, instead, responded to his nonsense) in an earlier issue, he should have included a link to what he was so "offendend" by.  So I stand by my statement that making that remark about you here made no sense at all.  (But then again, when does anything he say make sense?)

Comment Here