An Open Letter to Tennessee State Representative Stacey Campfield
Hello Mr. Campfield,
This is Jon Fish. You may remember me as the person that asked you why you wanted to regulate opinion in public universities and you, in turn, accused me of using drugs. Or maybe you remember me as the guy that took said e-mail correspondences and published them in one of the largest newspapers in Knoxville. You probably saw it in one of the hundreds of comments you deleted which linked to it on your blog.
Anyway, as you're back in the news, I decided to sieze the opportunity to berate you mercilessly and further destroy your career by writing yet another piece about you. So I have some questions which I hope you will respond to in the same arrogant yet incompetent tone that you have now become more than famous for with the 100,000 people that have visited the page where I posted your previous letters:
1. Why do you want to join the Black Caucus?
Follow Up: Is it just pure narcissism?
Second follow up: Did you know what narcissism means, or did you have to look it up?
2. Has it been difficult to maintain balance on that pedistal with your giant ego?
3. What would you do if you were allowed to join the Black Caucus? Would you actually go? Or would you merely bow out because they wouldn't play your self-agrandizing game you shallow, self-important wannabe pseudo-martyr?
4. I have an application pending with the Republican National Committee, could you throw some influence my way? They seem to be mad that I want to join considering I'm not a Reuplican.
Follow up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are they discriminating against liberals?
5. Same question, except regarding the Christian Coalition. I'm not a Christian so they take offense at the insinuation that I think I should have a voice in a group that believes in pretty much the exact opposite of everything I do.
Follow Up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are they discriminating against non-Christians (a not all too uncommon occurrence from the right)?
6. Can I work on your campaign next year?
Follow Up: If not, why?
Second Follow Up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are you discriminating against people who actively seek to destroy your political career?
7. What will you do when you don't even get the Republican nomination next year because no self-aware conservative with any hope of keeping the seat in Republican hands will support you anymore?
Anyway, feel free to respond at your leisure and have a good day. Thank you for bringing both dignity and sanity to politics in this country.
Jon Fish
Editorial Columnist
The Daily Beacon
This is Jon Fish. You may remember me as the person that asked you why you wanted to regulate opinion in public universities and you, in turn, accused me of using drugs. Or maybe you remember me as the guy that took said e-mail correspondences and published them in one of the largest newspapers in Knoxville. You probably saw it in one of the hundreds of comments you deleted which linked to it on your blog.
Anyway, as you're back in the news, I decided to sieze the opportunity to berate you mercilessly and further destroy your career by writing yet another piece about you. So I have some questions which I hope you will respond to in the same arrogant yet incompetent tone that you have now become more than famous for with the 100,000 people that have visited the page where I posted your previous letters:
1. Why do you want to join the Black Caucus?
Follow Up: Is it just pure narcissism?
Second follow up: Did you know what narcissism means, or did you have to look it up?
2. Has it been difficult to maintain balance on that pedistal with your giant ego?
3. What would you do if you were allowed to join the Black Caucus? Would you actually go? Or would you merely bow out because they wouldn't play your self-agrandizing game you shallow, self-important wannabe pseudo-martyr?
4. I have an application pending with the Republican National Committee, could you throw some influence my way? They seem to be mad that I want to join considering I'm not a Reuplican.
Follow up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are they discriminating against liberals?
5. Same question, except regarding the Christian Coalition. I'm not a Christian so they take offense at the insinuation that I think I should have a voice in a group that believes in pretty much the exact opposite of everything I do.
Follow Up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are they discriminating against non-Christians (a not all too uncommon occurrence from the right)?
6. Can I work on your campaign next year?
Follow Up: If not, why?
Second Follow Up: How is this any different from you not being allowed to join the Black Caucus? Are you discriminating against people who actively seek to destroy your political career?
7. What will you do when you don't even get the Republican nomination next year because no self-aware conservative with any hope of keeping the seat in Republican hands will support you anymore?
Anyway, feel free to respond at your leisure and have a good day. Thank you for bringing both dignity and sanity to politics in this country.
Jon Fish
Editorial Columnist
The Daily Beacon
posted by Jon Fish at 11:18 PM
3 Comments:
I pray every night that logical human beings will see this (from his constituency) and say to themselves, "wow this guy is doing absolutely nothing to forward our progress as a citizen of the State of Tennessee." Let’s face it, a monkey working a keyboard could probably do the same job he's doing right now.
~Brian
. . . and I am that "monkey working a keyboard" . . .
The belief is the intent of the bill is to curtail data supported and research funded factual statistics into towing a certain party line based on anecdotal representations from a small sample of students. There is a lot of red tape here, what exactly constitutes a hostile environment? And I for one can testify to having NEVER been witness to "substantially unrelated controversial matter," but then again what do we define as controversial matter?
I'll go ahead and apologize to the democrats and republicans who have their beliefs challenged in the annuals of higher learning; I never realized that wasn't the point. Dialectic Aristotle type education is practically the basis of our country's higher learning system. The entire point is to present SUPPORTED research to students, not some opinion. Anyone doing otherwise is already breaking the trust and objectives of college learning, and is taken care of regardless. This bill, in other words, does little to advance education because it opens the opportunity for censorship based on belief rather than fact.
~Brian
Post a Comment
<< Home