Muat have been one helluva thanksgiving at your house, Cathy. Thanks for not inviting me.

Cathy you didn't mention forgiving yourself for contributing to the death of a turkey, or was yours made of tofu like your letter is?

Cathy, you carry no authority to forgive anyone for anything that you mention above. You think way to highly of yourself. You apparently did not dine on humility during your Thanksgiving.

Cathy,
People like you make me thankful for having a family in which it's not a matter of forgiving but a matter of LOVING. Be careful, the simmering hatred you appear to have will gradually eat away at you from inside, and in the end, you will be the one who suffers. You may see yourself as so superior, but guess what? People don't need or WANT forgiveness from people like you.

Dan: Great comment about the turkey! LOL Thanks for a laugh after this drama-ladened letter.

Must be tough to have to go through life with such depressive resentment.

Prozac does wonders in such cases I hear. Oh wait, then that would be supporrting the evil pharmecuetical companies! D'oh!

Five posts. Five personal attacks. No where in the previous five posts does anyone address the issues the LTE writer mentions. Par for the course.

Cathy,

Let me check real fast...yep, I'm doing just fine. I'm very comfortable with myself. I did have some turkey at Thanksgiving, watched football, and enjoyed being with my family. I did not, however, suffer as you did. You carry a heavy burden, indeed. As one poster observed, you may want to consult with your physician for that condition of yours. And, just to let you know, we don't really need your forgiveness, but I bet your family found you a real joy to be around at Thanksgiving, and they'll appredeciate any forgiveness that you decide to grant to them.

But one question, why did you prostitute your childhood faith for political gain? One can only prostitute themselves, no one else can do it.

Joe, besides a whining rant that screams ME! ME! ME!, what does the letter say?

Damn. What a spanking. Cathy , you better think twice before you write another letter.

Thanksgiving is a time to be thankful, not a time to lash out at everyone you disagree with. I'm sorry you missed the point of what Thanksgiving is all about.

And I'll forgive you for writing this letter. :)

I'll try to comment on the alleged points of this self-righteous lament.

1) Every time we build up a deficit the lefties weep and wail. Then a (conservative government enabled) economic recovery produces a surplus and then they grumble about economic inequity.

2) Lefties have trouble with the concepts of morality, intention, and will. Consequently they do not appreciate that choosing to kill an innocent baby because it is inconvenient is not the same as inadvertently killing a civilian during a war. They despise their protectors. They're pitiful and contemptible -- because when they are attacked they cower behind those same protectors. And when the attackers are stopped, they again comdemn their protectors.

3 & 4) When others find in their religion a reason to disgree with the writer, she says they are prostituting HER childhood religion. I wonder exactly which civil rights have been "rolled back". There's no substance here.

5 & 6) The writer is the one who is displaying ignorance about the war in Iraq. She is also ignorant about the political system of the US. She can address any issues she may have with funding for first responders at the municipal, county, and state levels. If she wants more funding in her community, let her community provide it.

I'm not sure what her childhood religion was, but I'd guess some version of Christianity, whose Lord as much as said that being able to forgive is required for being able to live with oneself, and who reserved His harshest criticism for those who, like the Pharisee in the parable, considered themselves righteous.

The writer made her own virtue (and therefore her own person) the subtext of her letter. Disgreement will necessarily be personal.

Cathy:

I too am thankful! Thankful that John Kerry and John Edwards did not get in office! Thankful that we are finally proactive for world peace. Beruit, the USS Cole, 9-11 and other events were just preliminaries! I am thankful for the many Iraqi families who can finally begin some closure for their murdered, abused family members during Saddam"s reign! I am thankful for the many families, military and civilian who have sacrificed in order that our freedoms and way of life can continue! I am thankful that many others now have the hope to experience some of that freedom!

I am thankful that you have the freedom to feel the way you do! I am also thankful that cooler minds prevail!

Dang - good post Mad Dawg. I was warming up the keyboard but you said it all for me.

Mad Dawg, The last sentence of your post sums it up. I count nine sentences in the letter. The subject of seven of those sentences was Ms. Lally herself in the form of "I".

It's only the first and last sentences that don't contain a reference to herself.

Joe Schmoe,
Didn't Cathy attack first?

Mad Dawg, while I have some agreement with Ms. Lally's letter, I find no need to personally attack her for her belief in what she writes as some have done.

In regards to the post made at 9:27 AM, regarding #1, where is the surplus with the current administration? The information that read, from all sections, is that the deficit is the largest in our nation's history! So, with that in mind, where is the surplus from this conservative government? Just for the record, this "compassionate conservative" administration has spent like the so-called "tax and spend" democrats.

With regards to #'s 3-4 on civil rights, check out the (un)Patriot Act.

Enough said!

Shalom

Darryl,

Your question is not relevant to my assertions. I didn't say that there was NOW a surplus. As a percentage of GDP the deficit is not so huge. Personally I think borrowing money when I need to and paying it back when I can is a good management. In the economic slowdown which began in 2000 and was exacerbated by 9/11, and since we are in a war, I think deficit spending is appropriate. Do you have a mortgage? So does the US. I pay down the principle on my mortgage when I have a little surplus loot. So does the US. Are you old enough to remember the Reagan years? All the lefies' weeping and wailing about the deficit! And it vanished like the morning dew in the boom of the nineties. Been there, done that, not about to let tendentious lefties sucker me again.

As to the Patriot Act. Let me whisper in your ear: There's a war on. And when you consider the persecution of my ancestors in WWI (Grandpop was a Kraut), the relocation of the Japanese in WWII, and Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of Northern Aggression , I think the Congress has been extremely temperate.

Besides, I still wonder which of the writer's civil rights have been rolled back. I think she's looking for things to be unhappy about, because for many lefties happiness is impossible without a vital existential guilt and misery about the viciousness and callousness and lack of exquisite and refined sensibility in those who disagree with them.

As others have noted, the writer's subject was her forgiving inclination. Her closing challenge was that she was righteous in her own eyes and that she wondered if Bush supporters were. SHE brought her righteousness into the discussion. She bears the responsibility for having HER subject responded to.

Aleichem sholem.

To those who have said such kind things: Thank you! Y'see: it all depends on really good coffee. A cup of Community Kitchen French Roast and I am ready to cross dialectical swords with the best the whiners have to offer.

Dear Cathy:

You're right about the one issue voters. They should not be permitted to vote, ever. I assume you're speaking of the pro-abortion crowd!

Tony Moschetti

hugh, I saw the points. Did you? I think not.

bunny, no she didn't. The writer doesn't address any of you by name.

Mad Dawg:

... no real issues with your assertions - but the stereotypes drive me crazy and it is neither helpful not accurate ... some examples:

“Every time we build up a deficit the lefties weep and wail.”
I would hope the other 80% of the population is concerned with finances too.

“Then a (conservative government enabled) economic recovery …. “
… so only conservative governments enable economic recovery? I did not know that – I doubt you can prove that. Also – what is a “conservative government”? Are we being led by one now, ‘cause a lot of conservatives are having issues with the current deficit ..

… and I do hope you’re correct that we will grow out of the deficit. I think Jimmy Carter was the last president to preside over a genuinely balanced budget. The post Reagan recovery didn’t happen until the Internet boom happened – and those events are pretty rare.

“Lefties have trouble with the concepts of morality, intention, and will.”
I’m glad the other 80% of the population is so pristine. No need to cite alternative examples; if you don’t know a few exceptions ….

I can’t really follow some of her reasoning, or your return diatribe, but there is some evidence that the number of available First Responders to Katrina was limited by 40% of the National Guard being overseas, and there is a lot of evidence that the much of the monies appropriated after 911 were not spent in a very wise way.

Again the main, subtile, and important point: stereotypes are often accurate and always useless.

"The writer doesn't address any of you by name"

To that I say:

If someone approaches me on the street and beats me to a pulp, but doesn't address me by name, then am I not attacked?

When we dropped a bomb on Hiroshima, we didn't call everyone's name first. Were they attacked?

The fact is, Cathy's remarks WERE attacks on everyone who agreed with what she disagreed with. She felt like she needed to point out to everyone who feels differently than her that they needed to be forgiven BY HER.

Gosh, look at some of the other forums. People got upset because some thought they needed to be forgiven by God if they were to obtain salvation. Let's compare: God or Cathy. No, wait let's not do that. She's already appointed herself to both roles by her letter.

There is a 200 word limit on these LTE's. That may be another reason she didn't address everyone by name.

...and they were about the people in her family.....not you per say.

Excuse me.....per se.

BTW truth, you are comparing an act of war and an assault and battery with speech. That's an argumentive fallacy.

And the rhetoric contiues.

One more thought and I'm outta here. If it was that depressing at Thanksgiving, what does Christmas hold in store? If I were a family member in that household, I'd be looking for excuses to get the hell outta there on xmas day! lol

Hmm, let's see--I don't remember saying that anyone needed my forgiveness. I said it was something I would try to do for myself. Who's got the overinflated egoes here?

As far as depressing, I can see why some of the posters would find attempts at personal growth kind of a downer. It's probably a real difficult concept for them.

I won't defend my letter because it is based on facts and if "ya'all" haven't done your homework I won't do it for you. And as far as the personal remarks go, whatever. It's easier to attack me than do your research and realize your support for Bush and Co. is stupid and misguided. Whatever gets ya through the night. I actually laughed out loud that I could make people so mad, little ol' me. So fire away, "ya'all". I will turn my other self righteous cheek.

Cathy

Cathy,

With any due possible respect, cut the crap. You now try to spin your letter as that you are trying to find the forgiveness for yourself, not others. That is crap, and you know it. You got spanked here for your wimpy letter. Take it and move on. This letter gave not a shread of an attempt for personal growth. You attacked Bush supporters, and you know it. It is obvious that you were finding fault in others, not yourself. If you really were attempting personal growth, please show us where that is in your letter. Better yet, ask your relatives that you had a disagreement with at Thanksgiving to provide witness for you.

Cathy-Easy to see you aren't from around here...you can't spell y'all, ya'all.

"...and they were about the people in her family.....not you per say."

Actually Joe, she stated in here letter: "I also struggled to forgive family members and people in my community who voted for George Bush."

So people in her community, would that not be us per say?

"I will, however, be able to live with myself. Will they?"

Yes I will, but thanks for your concern.

"I also struggled to forgive family members and people in my community who voted for George Bush."
I really don’t know how to respond here. First off I didn’t ask, not do I care one way or another whether you “forgive me”. This is after all a free country, I can vote for anyone I dare well please. It is my vote, not yours. What gives you the right to say otherwise? Secondly, give up trying to forgive and quit worrying about how people in your community votes. Believe me it is a useless endeavor, because quite frankly I deal with it every 2 years when “my community” goes to the polls and puts people like Skip Alston, Bruce Davis and Carolyn Coleman in power and further people like Kay Hagan who does absolutely nothing for the people of Guildford County on the state level. Need I say Governor do nothing Easley? Do I even need to talk about who my community puts on the school board, these members you are responsible for the mess that is called Guildford County schools? However unlike you although I may question their reasons for voting this way, I do not assume they need my forgiveness. Nor do I expect them to vote a certain way. As I stated it is after all, their vote, their right, not mine and not yours.

"Hmm, let's see--I don't remember saying that anyone needed my forgiveness. I said it was something I would try to do for myself."
Really, did you write the letter? Or have you forgotten you said: “I also struggled to forgive family members and people in my community who voted for George Bush.”

"As far as depressing, I can see why some of the posters would find attempts at personal growth kind of a downer."
Personal growth? Really? Then maybe you should try a little humility. First off for Thanksgiving maybe you should have been thankful for being alive, lots of people weren’t. Secondly you should be thankful that you’re family members were alive. Third you should be thankful that you live in a country were you are allowed to criticize your government and work hard and succeed. Further you should be thankful that you didn’t get on a bus that was blown up by a suicide bomber. You should be thankful that your kids’ school wasn’t taken over my terrorist. You should be thankful that you weren’t on a plane that crashed into a building. You should be thankful for not having to worry about your kids getting candy from soldiers and being blown up by a car bomb. You should be thankful for living in a country where you have freedom of religion, where since you are a woman you can drive a car and hold a job if you wished. I could continue on but I’m sure you get the point. And further, while you are attempting your personal growth, it would be wise to remember that just because you have an opinion, doesn’t mean that the rest of us have to agree with it.

"It's easier to attack me than do your research and realize your support for Bush and Co. is stupid and misguided."
Well your little romp with personal growth sure didn’t work. You need much, much more practice.

"Who's got the overinflated egoes here?"
Well that would be you I’m afraid. You who thinks that people should vote a certain way because of your wishes. You who thinks that you are better and smarther then other people because others don’t think like you. You who thinks that others need your forgiveness. You who thought that your opinions were so much more correct and important that you felt the need to write a letter to the newspaper, declaring that your fellow citizens need your approval for who they vote for and when they don’t vote the way you want them to, how you will “try to forgive them”. Sounds like a pretty over-inflated ego to me.

We Regulars owe Ms. Cathy Lally an apology of sorts ... here's why:

This is the first time I recall an Actual Letter Writer has ventured into the blog world to further discuss their letter.

That in itself is cause for celebration.

I have not really followed the later discussion - (got too personal for my pea-brain) - but all of us state things that are mis-read, mis-interpreted, or mis-written in the first place .... so we own her a little slack on that.

We also all state things which which others disagree. While her style may have been interpreted as attacky, I for one agree that Bushy will not be view in the history books with loving distinction. Here we blew a rare chance to fairly discuss things.

Thank you Ms. Cathy Lally, for having the balls to join the blog.

JDR said: "I for one agree that Bushy will not be view in the history books with loving distinction."

A further thought has occured in JDR:

Did you notice that after Katrina, Bush took steps decidedly to the middle if not near-left?

I think he's worried about his legacy.

Anyone else notice too?

Trish: 10
Cathy: Zilch

I think some of you need to understand the concept of a personal attack. If you focus on the person and not the argument, that is a personal attack or ad hominem. The letter writer mentions people in her family and others who support Bush. That would be a group and not a person. Therefore, it is not a personal attack.

The letter writer's logical fallacy may be hasty generalization about people who support Bush. I state this knowing that there are some of my friends who support Bush, but speak out against his policies.

You may ask why am I so certain of all this? Perhaps it's the twenty plus years of teaching university students argumentative writing. One thing that seems to happen here is a certain digression into almost every logical fallacy when one feels strongly about a subject.

Also, I would have to agree with those of you who mentioned that Thanksgiving is about "giving Thanks" to God for your bounty and not about forgiveness. The forgiveness aspect comes on Sundays in church or whenever someone trespasses against us. It would seem all of us need a little more practice with that aspect of our lives. Just look at the way we talk and write to each other on a daily basis.

Okay, one last try here. Trish and whoever said I was trying to "spin" my letter and change what I said about forgiveness--what I said was I never said anyone NEEDED my forgiveness, that I would try to forgive them for MY own sense of well being. Whether you think you need my forgiveness or not is up to you. I thought maybe I wasn't giving those voters a fair shake in my own mind, that maybe they weren't malicious or hateful or misguided. Well . . . seems to me, at least the Bush voters in here, my first impression about them was probably correct. So thanks for clearing that up.

As far as the humility and self righteousness stuff goes, hmm . . . did you READ your post before hitting submit? You seemed to have no problems with correcting me with what you saw as the errors of my ways, or is that something only Bush supporters have the insight for?

And, no, I'm not from around here originally. That was why I put Ya'all in quotation marks. Telling someone they spelled Ya'all wrong is about like correcting someone on the spelling of "ain't".

Okay, even though this has been amusing, I really am done. I have more arrogant letters to write.

Thank you, JDR, for responding. This could get very long, so I will risk unclarity to be concise.

"... the other 80% .." -- Since Bush's victory was someting less than 80% I think that this guesstimate may be too generous.

"is concerned with finances too" -- Failing to weep and wail over a deficit is not the same as not being concerned about finances. I am concerned about the economy but deficits do not strike me as something with which to flog a president.

"Conservative enabled recovery" -- Kennedy cut taxes, the economy rebounded. Reagan cut taxes, ditto. Bush43 cut taxes and wew are now in a recovery. Proof of such things is hard to come by, but I'll settle for what I just adduced. Believers in the objectivity of the MSM and drinkers of the PBS/NPR coolaid find this hard to take.

If Clinton's budget wasn't balanced, you wouldn't know it by Cindy's post or by the MSM. After spending around 6 years giving wildly varying numbers about the deificet surplus Clinton left office proclaiming a surplus.

"The Internet Boom" -- The railroad boom, the automobile boom, with their follwoing busts (or, ore politely, ahem "consolidations") Yeah, they're rare. WHen I consider how resistant my borker and others in the business were to MSFT IPO, I conclude thaat they are also VERY hardd to predict. BUt I reckon there will be more about every 30 to 50 years.

" ... 80% .. so pristine" -- Cheap shot. Having a good intellectual foundation in Ethics and morality is not the same as being virtuous. However, lacking such usually means that distinctions between killing the innocent, executing the guilty, and inadvertent civilian deaths in war time are often not understood, leading to such things as Cathy's hackneyed accusation of hypocrisy. I made no claim to pristinity (is that a word?)

The evidence of the lack of first responders to Katrina/Rita being caused by the war is bogus. Spend some time with Google, and you'll see. I spent 10 delightful days doing Safety and Security at a shelter in Monroe LA with the Red Cross and a bunch of splendid guys from THe KY Nat Guard. (I didn't see Cathy there ...)

Check out -- http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1133593157325970.xml -- for how the Dim politicians in LA have worked to spin their failure as Dubya's ....

A lot of the monies appropriated after 9/11 were given to state and local organizations. We're all trying something new here and there are a LOT of flubs. Not Dubya's fault. In my area we have spent 10 years (!) trying to get a comm sywstem that all first responders can use. It was supposed to be in place Fall of 04. Now, after issues with Motorola we're looking at MAYBE Jan/Feb of '06. THis isn't easy, and a theme of the Opposition is that we can do anything by snapping our fingers, so our failures must be unusual stupidity or lack of will. That's childish and uninformed.

My stereotypes are hard won and not cheap.

Yo, Cathy! If you characterize Bush supporters as indulging in hypocrisy and write about your efforts to forgive us, you can't complain if we think you've attacked us. Your post is not based on facts. Characterizing something as hypocrisy is a judgement arising from the perception of an apparent contradiction.

Joe Schmoe: If a writer attacks a the virtue ("hypocrisy" again) of a group, she attacks the virtue of the members of the group. That's personal. If Cathy thinks that folks who voted for Dubya did something she should struggle to forgive, she thinks I did something she ditto. That's personal. The theme of her LTE is her struglle to forgive. It asssumes there is a fault or injury. She mentions the infliction of debt, hypocrisy, prostitution, rolloing back civil rights, ignorance, and "other issues".

If somebody enters the lists talking like that about people with whom I am affiliated, she's gonna get a response in kind.
(sorry for typos, etc. I'm in a rush.)

Cathy: "Okay, even though this has been amusing, I really am done. I have more arrogant letters to write."

You couldn't have said it better, your first letter was arrogant, so go write some more, you have the freedom to do so and we have the freedom to criticize your arrogant letters.

Hope this doesn't hurt your feelings, but I don't really care about your forgiving ME for YOUR sense of well being. More arrogance, typical and predictable.

You really are done? Adios then.

WOW, how can only one person be so miserably misunderstood, even after seeking to offer clairty?

Hmmm, let's see if it continues.

Shalom

Darryl,

Cathy is incoherent in her initial post and in her follow-ups. At least as most people use the word "forgive", it involves a perceived injury, injustice or debt. If I walk up to you and say, "I'm trying to forgive you, but, wow is it hard!" you will probab ly respond something like,"Forgive me? For what? What did I do?"

But Cathy says that while she is struggling to forgive us, that doesn't mean we need forgiveness. Thus she exhibits the moral solipsism of -- well Joe gets anxious when I say "Lefties", so I'll just say -- a certain school of thought.

But then, with head-snapping agility she says that though she was exploring the concept that supporters of Bush might not be "malicious hateful or misguided" our response to her failed efforts at forgiveness persuade her that we are indeed just generally nasty folk. (Hey, am I allowed to take it personally now?)

So, by her we don't need her forgiveness, but we are horrible horrible people who have done a terrible terrible thing by suuporting tax cuts, personal responsibility, and the safety and security of the nation in a manner which she finds malicious, hateful, or misguided.

But she's not judgemental. We who respond to her accusatory efforts at pardon are the hypocrites. She's just a li'l old he'pless woman lamenting the awfulness of a Thanksgiving which doesn't protect her from the likes of me with my recreational baby-killing and all ...

If Cathy is the one person you think was so miserably understoof, I disagree. I think I understand her all too well.

Well, I have to go prostitute my religion, excyse me, HER religion, now ...

“Okay, one last try here. Trish and whoever said I was trying to "spin" my letter and change what I said about forgiveness”

Cindy please explain to me how I can “spin” your letter and change what you said when I copy and pasted it directly from your letter? Also if you never said anyone NEEDED your forgiveness, why then you go into detail about what people needed to be forgiven for: Debt, killing children, rolling back civil rights and high gas prices among other things? You know I was after all educated in the Guilford County School system so maybe my comprehension is not what it should be, please explain to me where in your letter you state you are trying to forgive for your own well being. Because quite frankly it does not read like that to me nor does it seem to others here.

“I thought maybe I wasn't giving those voters a fair shake in my own mind, that maybe they weren't malicious or hateful or misguided.”

Malicious and hateful? Do you have proof of this? Because quite frankly I have a ton of examples that show leftist as malicious or hateful. Here is a couple: Darryl’s group likes to go down to Ft. Bragg and march with coffins through neighborhoods where children and wives are waiting at home while their loved one is fighting a war. I call that pretty malicious and hateful, however Darryl disagrees. I have seen people protest at Walter Reed Army hospital where family members of loved ones have to walk by. I have seen where members of Chuck Schumer’s staff didn’t like the fact that a black republican was running for the Senate so decided to steal his social security number and get his credit report. I have saw where a bunch of Kerry supports were convicted of slashing the tires on a Republican van during elections. I have seen my car get keyed because I have a Bush sticker. The list goes on and on, however unlike you I do not paint everyone by the actions of others nor do I paint everyone as malicious and hateful by how they vote. Perfect example, I do not think that all those voters who re-elected Bill Clinton as malicious and hateful even though Bill Clinton refused to take custody of Bill Laden (even though he knew Bill Laden wanted to kill Americans) thus insuring the 9/11 attacks where 3000 citizens were killed. I think of these voters as citizens in a free society who take their right and vote as they see fit. More to the point I have more respect for them then the people who don’t vote at all. At least they care enough to vote in the first place. So maybe for your well being you might want to try to forgive all those people who couldn’t take the time nor cared enough to vote in the first place.

Misguided? By whose standards? Yours? So what makes you think that you are so much smarter then anyone else?

"So thanks for clearing that up"

No problem and thanks for clearing up that people who suffer from Bush Derangement Syndrome are close-minded and self-righteous.

"As far as the humility and self righteousness stuff goes, hmm . . . did you READ your post before hitting submit?"

Yes I did read it before I hit it. Because unlike you on Thanksgiving I was thankful. I was thankful that I lived in this wonderful country. I was thankful that I was alive and healthy as well as the rest of my family. I was thankful for what I had, although not a lot but I know there are people in this world who have it much worse then I do. And unlike you I do not judge people by how they vote, nor do I think they need my forgiveness (even for my own well-being). Because they are free to vote for whom they want and even if they vote differently from the way I do, I am thankful that they even voted in the first place.

"You seemed to have no problems with correcting me with what you saw as the errors of my ways,"

I had no problem in correcting you for attacking me. You try to spin your letter as one for your own well being, however not once was it even mentioned. Maybe next time to cut down of the confusion it might be best to say what you mean. For example if you had said: “I have Bush Derangement Syndrome thus I have a lot of anger at people who voted for him and on Thanksgiving I realized that I should be thankful instead of angry so I will try to forgive the people who voted for him for my own sense of well being. Signed Cathy” that would have been straightforward. However as we read in your letter that wasn’t the case at all. You have anger at people who voted for Bush because you don’t like Bush, so you felt the need to make a list of what in your opinions are of what Bush has done wrong and then blame it on the voters.

"is that something only Bush supporters have the insight for?"

Well let’s see Darryl, Brian Harper, JDR, Hayes, Yvonne, Demon and Carol Dunn oh and let us not forget you with your letter of forgiveness just to name a few have no problem informing Bush supporters the error of their ways. And you know what Cindy that is what this blog is all about. It is called discussion, debate and an exchange of ideas. If you don’t want people to disagree with you, I would suggestion you do not write any more letters to the editor because opinions are like certain holes of the body everyone has one.

Sorry Mad Dawg, but you're wrong. Personal attacks are aimed at a specific individual and not at a group of people. You may take it personally if you are a member of the group, but it does not make it a personal attack.

To clarify look at the following example. If one were to say that all Bush supporters are blood thirsty war mongers who are too sycophantic to question his stupidity; that would be a hasty generalization or even stereotyping. However if one were to say that Mad Dawg is a Bush supporter who is a blood thirsty war monger who is too sychophantic to question Bush's stupidity; that would be a personal attack. The focus shifts from the group to the individual.

As it stands, the letter writer is making hasty generalizations about people who support the president and the first commenters (and some since) have committed personal attacks. Both of these are logical fallacies and should be avoided whenever one is expressing one's ideas. I hope this alleviates some of the ignorance surrounding the difference between a personal attack and a hasty generalization.

[The following is meant as a counter example only. I odn't really mean it.]

I may be wrong, Joe, but your family is stupid vicious and ugly AND they smell bad.

[example over]

Gee, sure am glad I didn't get personal!

I think that you are mistaken. If the Germans had won their war against the US they would have won it against me.

Joe,

Come to think of it, I don't really care what you think of the style of my counter-attack. I didn't come here to be instructed in rhetoric, I came here to respond to a very silly letter by a woman who thinks that her struggle to forgive is a matter of interest, or thinks that even though she questions the ability of Bush supporters to live with themselves, they have done nothing that needs to be forgiven, or that since she cast the first stone anyone who responds will be just as self-righteous as she is, or .... oh, who can tell what (or whether) she thinks!

I would guess if you were as concerned about rhetoric and argument as you profess (double-entendre intended), you'd go after the Cathy's incoherence and especially the nonsense of her asserting that she offers forgiveness to people who don't need it.

Oh, by the way, I think teachers and instructors are bogus -- "...; those who can't, teach." But don't take that personally; it's only an opinion about a class of which you are a member.