A few days ago I posted an article about the commentary from the Kos Kidz regarding Michelle Malkin's upcoming trip to Iraq. The response was mainly positive with only two exceptions:

By an Anonymous Coward-

"First of all. learn to SPELL. People judge you two ways. First, by the way you look, l then by the way you speak (write). They can overlook your lack of beauty, but if you speak as an idiot, that is the way that they will think of you. As an idiot that cannot speak properly. Nuff said."

    Note that this guy has no actual point regarding the article and doesn't even make it clear exactly who he is taking issue with (me or a commentor). He didn't like the viewpoint of the article but hadn't the rhetorical weapons to attack it. He was also excoriated in the comments for his own formatting and grammar issues.

By adnauseum

"Now hear this: Michelle Malkin does not answer mails from crappy little bloggers like me. Probably because I do not spew enough vitriol (like her)."

My response to that:

"Now hear this : She gets more email in a day than we get in our lifetimes. Get real and grow up. Have a trolling."

Led to this gem from adnauseum:

"Sure she does. If she's going to spew racist comments about atrocities I'd like to know why and I don't give a tinker's toenail whether she gets a million mails or not. If you don't service your high-faluting blog why are you blogging? OOps, it can't be serviced due to World-wide adoration: Jeez, who wants to adore a bloglady who is so wrapped up in her self-serving opinions?"

     I don't know how to respond to that other than wonder who thinks Michelle Malkin is a racist besides adnauseum? The naked hatred in his responses is a little shocking to me. I expect it from the Kos Kidz but most JU'ers have more under the hood than this.

     Is answering your email (even if there are tens of thousands of them) a requirement to be a blogger? Is bloggings only purpose to "seervice" your blog generated email? What the hell does "servicing your blog" even mean? Don't news-blogs provide their service in the way of posts and commentary?

     It is also interesting to note the cognitive dissonance displayed in the second comment. He derides her for not being a good blogger yet also notes that she has "world-wide adoration". Her "high-falutin" blog is apparently dammned because it is more successful than his (or mine) and thus she can't take time out to respond to his email.

     I have no clue what the content of his email was but judging from his commentary I would bet it was fairly screedy and hysterical. I can't imagine why it didn't float right to the top of her list of things to do.

     This is all too common among extremists on both sides of the issue but I seem to find it most prevalent amongst folks who are espousing a left-of-center view. Sartre said that "hell is other people." but for the some it seems that "Hell is other people who don't believe that way I do."

     Maybe I will email Markos Moulitsas (He runs the Daily Kos) and see if I get a response and them condemn him for not taking time out to respond to one reader out of his millions. I dislike Kos's politics but I am not going scream like a man crazed and whine because he won't correspond with me. I wonder if adnauseum also despises Hollywood stars for not responsing to his calls and letters? I mean shouldn't everyone be required to respond to his emails?