From: John 'Birdman' Bryant
To: "Curmudgeon Emeritus": Francis W. Porretto
(curmudgeonemeritus@palaceofreason.com)
Re: Your screed about me at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anncoulterfanclub/message/15746
To begin, I had a friend of mine write Charles Murray, author of
The Bell
Curve, concerning your last long paragraph in which you presumed
to 'prove'
that IQ was primarily an environmental rather than a genetic
phenomenon by
citing the stats that Jews tested at 85 in 1917, but now test at
115, a
major change. Dr Murray replied:
> I've been wanting to get the citation on that estimate of
Jewish IQ from
the
> early 20th century for a long time. I've heard about it for
years, but
never
> been able to track it down. It might well exist--IQ tests in
1917 were
still
> primitive, and all you need to explain a tested IQ of 85
among Jews is
> hypothesize fairly modest percentages of testees for whom
English was not
> their native language. But I'd still like to look at the
original article.
If you have the citation, I will be glad to pass it along to
Murray and get
his further comments.
Now with that out of the way, I shall make a few other remarks:
* I have read a sampling of things on your site. I find nothing
of
socially redeeming importance. More specifically, there isn't
even
anything on your site that is sufficiently interesting to make me
wish to
comment, tho I am accustomed to commenting on things which rise
above the
Horizon of Boredom, and I have 40 books and 5 years of Weekly
Letters to
prove it.
* I see you are a big Sports Fan and Novel Reader. That provides
its own
comment. I will add, however, that since you "read every Tom
Clancy novel
on the day it's issued, from cover to cover", you might wish
to read the
correspondence between me and Mr Clancy, in which he comes off
second, or
perhaps third best. It's posted in the Net Losses section of my
webpage,
www.thebirdman.org, in case you have suppressed it.
* I observe that you list a large number of composers whom you
admire,
including one Weather Report. I am not sure whether I should be
in awe of
your taste, your sense of humor, or the amount of Irish whiskey
you
consumed before composing your bio.
* I see you love Free Republic. I can imagine why, as my readers
tell me
that it carefully censors any reports negative of Jews or Israel.
Ignorance is bliss, is it not?
* I see you like the columns of 'the endearing Linda Bowles'. You
may note
that she favorably reviewed one of my books (on Government and
Politics).
* You state of me: "In the style of the expert demagogue, he
mixes
incontrovertible facts with wild, baseless allegations ..."
Care to give
any examples of 'wild baseless allegations'? (I didn't think so.)
* Did you by any chance read my laboriously-documented essay
"The case
against the Jews"? (I didn't think so.)
* You say of me: "Bryant is ultimately less important as an
individual
purveyor of sentiment than he is as a representative of a trend
in
demagoguery." To this I respond that you accuse me of
"wild baseless
allegations", yet you make the just-quoted claim, for which
you cite not a
shred of evidence, and which therefore makes it as wild and
baseless as
they come. Care to retract it and apologize? (I didn't think so.)
* You say: "Question everything. Demand references and
cross-verification.
And be careful about your inferences." Did you do this when
writing your
screed? (I didn't think so.)
* You say of yourself that you "have extensive side
interests in ... moral
theory (of course!)...", yet you posted your screed without
notifying me or
giving me a chance to reply. That is, you attacked me, but you
had neither
the courage nor the decency to do so to my face. Wouldn't you
call that
immoral? (I didn't think so.)
Have an ice day, you immoral, dishonest, cowardly, ignorant piece
of
excrement.
-Birdman
PS: This will be posted on my website, along with any reply or
replies you
care to offer, and my responses.
[Porretto replies]
[Birdman's initial comments are preceded by --'s]
Mr. Bryant:
-- I have read a sampling of things on your site. I find nothing
of
socially redeeming importance. More specifically, there isn't
even anything
on your site that is sufficiently interesting to make me wish to
comment,
tho I am accustomed to commenting on things which rise above the
Horizon of
Boredom, and I have 40 books and 5 years of Weekly Letters to
prove it. --
You're quite welcome to your opinion of my writing, nor do I feel
the need
to defend it.
-- I see you are a big Sports Fan and Novel Reader. That provides
its own
comment. I will add, however, that since you "read every Tom
Clancy novel
on the day it's issued, from cover to cover", you might wish
to read the
correspondence between me and Mr Clancy, in which he comes off
second, or
perhaps third best. It's posted in the Net Losses section of my
webpage,
www.thebirdman.org, in case you have suppressed it. --
You're quite welcome to your opinion of my enthusiasms and
pastimes, nor do
I feel a need to defend them.
-- I observe that you list a large number of composers whom you
admire,
including on Weather Report. I am not sure whether I should be in
awe of
your taste, your sense of humor, or the amount of Irish whiskey
you consumed
before composing your bio. --
You're quite welcome to your opinion of my aesthetic taste, nor
do I feel
the need to defend it. Are you beginning to see the glimmerings
of a pattern
here?
-- I see you love Free Republic. I can imagine why, as my readers
tell me
that it carefully censors any reports negative of Jews or Israel.
Ignorance
is bliss, is it not? --
You're quite welcome to choose the Websites you prefer and
patronize them
and them only.
-- I see you like the columns of 'the endearing Linda Bowles'.
You may note
that she favorably reviewed one of my books (on Government and
Politics). --
We all have our off-days, Miss Bowles included.
-- You state of me: "In the style of the expert demagogue,
he mixes
incontrovertible facts with wild, baseless allegations ..."
Care to give
any examples of 'wild baseless allegations'? (I didn't think so.)
--
I would imagine that your Website, which pounds out an
overpowering
anti-Semitic theme, now and then edging toward a call for a
Second
Holocaust, would be all the substantiation anyone would need.
-- Did you by any chance read my laboriously-documented essay
"The case
against the Jews"? (I didn't think so.) --
I can't remember, though I doubt it. I have little tolerance for
that sort
of material.
-- You say of me: "Bryant is ultimately less important as an
individual
purveyor of
sentiment than he is as a representative of a trend in
demagoguery." To
this I respond that you accuse me of "wild baseless
allegations", yet you
make the just-quoted claim, for which you cite not a shred of
evidence, and
which therefore makes it as wild and baseless as they come. Care
to retract
it and apologize? (I didn't think so.) --
As they say in the publishing business, "Op. cit."
-- You say: "Question everything. Demand references and
cross-verification.
And be
careful about your inferences." Did you do this when writing
your screed?
(I didn't think so.) --
I do so at all opportunities. I certainly read enough of your
Website to
form a firm opinion of your work. Has your theme changed these
past two
years? (I didn't think so.)
-- You say of yourself that you "have extensive side
interests in ... moral
theory (of course!)...", yet you posted your screed without
notifying me or
giving me a chance to reply. That is, you attacked me, but you
had neither
the courage nor the decency to do so to my face. Wouldn't you
call that
immoral? (I didn't think so.) --
Oh, you'd like to **face** me? With what, pray tell? I'm rather
expert with
both sword and pistol, so you'd better give that a few moments
thought. Are
you good with a slingshot? But wait, if memory serves, it's the
challenged
party that has the choice of weapons. This should be fun!
But, as to the subject of morality, I consider your Website to
make you a
public figure, just as mine makes me one. Your writing is an
objective
demonstration of both your creed and whatever evidence you have
for it, and
therefore enough for anyone to judge you and your emissions for
himself. I
gave my opinion. I stand by it.
-- Have an ice day, you immoral, dishonest, cowardly, ignorant
piece of
excrement. --
If you meant "a nice" day, then I assure you I will,
along with:
-- My wife (Jewish),
-- My two stepdaughters (Jewish),
-- And a couple of close friends who've dropped by (Jewish).
-- PS: This will be posted on my website, along with any reply or
replies
you care to offer, and my responses. --
It's your Website; do as you please with it. I'm unconcerned with
your
opinions and uninterested in the reactions of your devotees. Your
notions
are only significant to me as specimens of mental pathology.
I must say, though, that I do envy you your free time. At least,
I don't
know anyone else who has the time to dredge up critical mentions
from that
far back and write hate-filled letters to those who originated
them.
Have a nice life.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason:
http://www.palaceofreason.com
[Birdman replies]
I see that you have chosen to answer my criticisms by mostly
flippant non-
answers. That strategy has the advantage of keeping you from
digging
yourself into a deeper hole than you already are in, but it also
shows that
you have no defense. But then I already knew that.
As to responses that were in some way substantive, I will respond
as follows:
* Re your remark that it was an 'off-day' that caused one of your
favorite
columnists to endorse one of my books, that is typical liberal
dishonesty:
Never acknowledge anything good about an enemy; never admit you
made a
mistake; and above all, never apologize.
* You claim that saying I am a 'demagogue' does not constitute a
wild and
baseless allegation as follows:
>I would imagine that your Website, which pounds out an
overpowering
>anti-Semitic theme, now and then edging toward a call for a
Second
>Holocaust, would be all the substantiation anyone would need.
In short, what you are saying is, never inquire whether what I
say is true;
only ask, 'do I criticize Jews' -- that is sufficient to make me
a
demagogue. Again, typical liberal dishonesty -- truth makes no
difference,
only WHO I criticize.
* In asking whether you read my best documented and most
carefully-written
essay, you dismiss it by saying
>I can't remember, though I doubt it. I have little tolerance
for that sort
>of material.
Again, typical liberal dishonesty -- you have 'little tolerance'
for a
substantive counter-argument to your beliefs.
* As to the business of criticizing me behind my back, you know
perfectly
well that I am not referring to any face-to-face meeting, but
rather that
you failed to do the morally proper thing, namely, to alert the
other
person to your criticism and give him a chance to respond, thus
taking
responsibility for what you have said. Again, typical liberal
dishonesty
by twisting my words.
With the above, we have identified four more instances of your
immorality.
As you say below, you aren't concerned with what I think, which
apparently
means you are not concerned with the fact that you are dishonest
and
immoral; but perhaps you will be concerned that others will be
able to find
this posting on the Net and realize what kind of an intellectual
scumbag
you are.
Now should you have any more of your infinitely clever and
infinitely
devastating remarks to make, feel free to send them along. I am
sure there
will be room for them when I post your correspondence in the Net
Losses
section.
[Porretto responds]
Mr. Bryant,
This will be the last time I write back to you, as I have many
more
important things to do.
As I've already said, you're free to have whatever opinions you
please. No
one can prosecute you for your opinions. You're also free to have
whatever
opinion you like about me, my writing, and my opinions. Since I
think so
little of you, nothing you think or say can affect me.
Is that clear? I can't use simpler words; there aren't any. So
"you go your
way and I'll go mine." (from the great Jewish bard Robert
Zimmerman, a.k.a.
Bob Dylan) I feel sorry for you, really I do, but it's not my
responsibility
to heal you. I simply don't care what you think, or where or how
your life
road takes you. I'm afraid you're just going to have to live with
that.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason:
http://www.palaceofreason.com
[Birdman replies]
Mr Porretto:
This will be the last time I write back to you, as I have many
more
important things to do. That is, unless you write me back, which
I rather
think you won't.
As I am sure you realize, you are free to have whatever opinions
you
please, and to post those opinions. But when you do, and when the
opinions
involve me, and when I find out about it, you are not going to be
free of
my responding comments. And now that you have seen what that
involves, I
very much imagine that you are not going to post any more
comments, or if
you do, you are going to be very careful what you say.
Today I think you may have learned some lessons. One of those is
that
being wrong is risky, and that being a smug liberal who thinks he
knows it
all will not cut you any ice with somebody who knows the score.
That's why
I wiped the floor with Tom Clancy; that's why I did the same with
you.
A second lesson you may have learned is that not all people you
dismiss
with the usual epithets are incompetent mentally-deranged
mouth-frothers,
but instead are quite as intelligent and informed as you are, and
in fact
may just be a bit moreso.
You say that you think so little of me that nothing I say can
affect you.
But that's a lie, Francie. You started out calling me demagogue
and a lot
of other crap, and now you are reduced to whining that you aren't
going to
say anything more. I would say that's a pretty big 'affect'. And
I would
say that no matter what you 'think of' me, you sure as hell are
going to
think twice before saying anything more to me or about me.
You respect me, Francie. You respect me because I kicked your
butt. (I
like that in an enemy.) And maybe that butt-kicking will actually
do you
some good, because it will force you -- however reluctantly -- to
recognize
that someone on this side of the political fence has something
going for
him. Like an old friend of mine used to say, "Learnin' is
churnin'". We
got you churnin'; maybe we can get you learnin'. But then perhaps
not --
after all, you can lead a horse's ass to 'oughter' but you can't
make him
think.
-Birdman
[End of correspondence]
YOUR DONATION = OUR SURVIVAL!
Please contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all your friends!
* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *