Jill,

First of all, I would like to apologize for my comments about your pictures. I had assumed the following:

• You would recognize my screename from my previous comments on your blog.
• You know that all was in jest and I was spreading the Xanga love.
• You remembered my writing style.
• In the past, we were friends.
• You knew that in no way did I ever want a real-life relationship with you.
• You understood that I was catching up on your site from my hiatus, ergo the deluge of comments.

My apologies to you for assuming things that simply were not true and, being my usual asshole self, acted on them accordingly as an asshole. I saw a provocative picture and thought to myself, “hmmm, that’s a Jill I haven’t seen before. What’s the change?” and proceeded to make what I thought was an over-the-top joke. It was a bad joke that backfired. I offer my personal apology and will do whatever it takes to earn your forgiveness.

I am in no way a flirt or a player. Had you read my recent entry, you would have known this. Some time ago, we had a little exchange in which I told you that I was considering dropping you from my subscription list because you were so overtly liberal. You challenged me claiming (rightfully so, I might add) that my reasoning for dropping my subscription to your site was rather lame and proved how shallow I was by publicly admitting to not trying to more fully understand the other side. I have taken that admonishment to heart, and therefore continue to read your site.

My only hope was that we could engage in battle in the arena of ideas. Apparently, you do not wish to do so. That is fine, and I respect you for it. However, you have shown your elitism that is so common to liberalism that you:

a) censor your opposition
b) brag about something you do not have (i.e. being 10 times smarter than these people can ever hope to be, and 100 times more interesting because of my multi-cultural background.).

If you have to brag and constantly remind people of what you do and do not have, you don’t have it and are very insecure. You might claim that my openers are just that: boastful bragging and reminding people of what I do and do not have. I challenge you that I am gloating about what is blatantly obvious, not what I need people to see.

I have not blocked you on my site nor will I, as I believe in censorship only the most extreme of cases. My site is a place where people come together and do battle in the arena of ideas. If you choose not to do so, that is your choice, but by failing to rise to the occasion, you prove how insecure you are in you own ideology. I urge you to come, let us reason together

In parting, I would like to add a few thoughts:

1. You showed your unprofessionalism by calling Snapper illiterate. It would seem to me by the length of her comment and the command of the English language that she is far from illiterate. Perhaps you meant ineloquent? I would appreciate a public retraction, though I do not expect one. She doesn’t follow you site like I and therefore can’t be held accountable for all of the information I posess.

2. You have not responded to my point by point explanation of why I thought your post or the selected pull texts were anti-American. Surely someone as intelligent as you can stand to put someone like me in my place by thoroughly refuting my errant assessments.

3. If I were to move to France for two years, I would think more highly of this country, not less.

4. While I possess logic (ergo this calmly, meticulously written rebuttal) it seems that you want to leech on the concepts of “peace”, “love” and “color” all hippie liberal virtues which at the end of the day result in anarchy. I have grown up quite a lot, and I must say that while there are shades of gray in certain issues, most of life is black and white, assuming non-Kerry types.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Once again, I offer my apologies and my willingness to make restitution.

Sincerely,
Professor Tom