Someone on Twitter just asked me “why they would retweet crap” – in reference to the articles on my blog at rog99.blogspot.com, I suppose – although when they sent that question to me, they hadn’t read any of them at all.
And hey look, I’m just an old daily news reporter. I know my articles aren’t thrilling to many folks – and I’d love to be able to write glowing articles about our government all the time, but they so rarely do anything I want to dance a jig over. I have said before, that the only guy who could have stood with that bullhorn at the ruins of the Trade Center, was George Bush. His father couldn’t have done it, Clinton, couldn’t have done it, Barack Obama couldn’t have done it, Carter, Ford and maybe Reagen couldn’t have done it – only George W. Bush had the right stuff at just the right moment. He was the right man at the right time.
People have moments like that – when history makes them the only, perfect choice. It’s just my opinion, but I think it’s true. I mean, I didn’t agree with a lot of stuff that came through during the remainder of Bush's two terms, just as I didn’t like other presidential and government actions at other times while I’ve been alive, and just like I have a few reservations regarding the current day administration.
But based on a single line of text, on Twitter no less, this individual calls my writing crap, then calls me a “typical right wing Zionist scaremonger.” Wow. For a moment I thought I was just a Zionist or maybe only a scaremonger. But evidently I get both titles – plus one other. Yep, I was called a “neocon military skull.” What does that mean?
Really? Is this the kind of foolish crap Sarah Palin had to deal with? By the way, she was the only hope for McCain in my opinion - another case of the right person at the right time. It just wasn't enough to save him. But she was perfect then. And maybe she'll come around at the right time and be perfect again - on the world stage - and really make a difference. I think I'd like that.
But back to my "troll," which is twitter language apparently for gibbering witlings like this person who afflicted me today.
This person said that it is “revolting how NeoCons try to make the whole world live in fear, justify more guns, more invasions and more killings.” I suppose that was in reference to my announcement of a new article on Iran going nuclear, and how that might be a bad thing. Oh yeah, and why it might be bad, too.
Or maybe it's because I'm wearing a .44 Magnum in the photo on this blog. Yeah, it's scary. But you just have to know how to use it. Next time I'll take a shot with something more politically correct - like an AK47 or an FN P90. It's all about how you frame and light the photo. You have to choose that neutral, happy background and not look too grim. Because grim gets you called "a neocon military skull."
Strange - and just bark-at-the-moon crazy.
Not to group my new friend in with anyone else, but by calling me a Zionist, does that make them a Neo Nazi Skinhead? Or just a Neo Nazi? I mean, if they’re just a Neo Nazi, they don’t have to shave their head. But in either case, they will have to get more comfy with the firearms. Need hardware if they're going to make a good Skinhead.
Or maybe this particular individual is just interested in improving nuclear proliferation throughout the world? I suppose from their perspective, more nukes means a better environment, right? After all, following a nuclear exchange you’ve got nuclear winter, right?
That’s global cooling! Al Gore would back that I think. We could stop producing clown cars right away - and get back to our '73 Stingrays and Hummer H1s and the Chevy Subdivision - yeah baby. Rollin' in style, just because - because the whole world will be a damned parking lot!
On the other hand, this particular individual seemed to also be angry that I was former military and wanted to tell me that. The fact that they didn’t have to do that in German, Russian or some other foreign language - and the fact that they were free to do that - doesn’t strike them as relevant. All those people whom they claim to be moaning about, using their anti-war slogans, well many of them are giving their lives in the hard places, so that people can flap their lips and say foolish things like this. But folks like this don’t realize that they aren’t coming across as “anti-war,” but rather, “anti-soldier.” And that’s too bad. Those guys and girls are out there in harm’s way because they’ve been ordered there.
Don’t like it? Run for office of President, win and replace the Big O - then vow to bring all troops home in a year to participate in the Olympics (another big O) – then actually do it. Or learn that the world is a more complicated place than campaign slogans and tele-prompters provide for, and send more troops to back them up, so our fighting men and women don't have to die for stupid reasons. And saying you need more time to think about it after you've been nearly a year in office - that falls into the stupid category, along with the comments made today by my personal "troll."
But, hey, you know, it takes all kinds to make the world turn and the tides come in and out, etc. And if it makes them feel better to call me names and whine and gag about this or that, please let them continue. At least it's one less whack job the important people out there will have to listen to.
I’ll sure continue writing for as long as I can, and maybe some of the articles they will like. A lot of them they won’t. But like good and bad art, the words I write are doing what they should if they elicit an emotional response. Happy, sad, attraction, revulsion, anger, fear – whatever – it’s all a victory for me. After all, you read it and you commented or “re-tweeted,” or sent me a nasty-gram. It’s all good.
I’ll try to write ‘em as I see ‘em – and I bet there will be a lot of folks who will hate that. Tough crap. Don’t like it? Write the anti-Jolly blog – and I will still have won the fight, because I made you do it.
Fun isn’t it? I could just go on forever this way.