Bring it on!
Before I began writing for WorldNetDaily, I was, like many of you, a voracious reader of socio-political commentary. Thus, I understand the frustration of writing to a columnist who does not write you in return and I know the outrage you feel when a writer who is generally sound in your eyes happens to go off the deep end on occasion.
But now that I'm writing a column myself, I understand why columnists so seldom write back to their readers - it simply isn't possible! I estimate it would take approximately 10 times longer to respond to everyone who writes than it does to write the column in the first place, even though more than three-quarters of the e-mail I receive doesn't really ask a question or otherwise require a response.
This is not to say that I don't appreciate your e-mails, because I do! Your questions and corrections have caused me to sharpen my thinking and devote more effort to precisely articulating my words. I especially enjoy e-mail from outraged parties who are deeply offended that I've skewered one of their sacred cows. Some have called me Young Nasty Man, but that's not me, that's my boy Timmy. I'm Wonderboy, and this is not that song, this is just a tribute.
Note to editor: Insert guitar solo here.
However, the fact that I don't wish to engage in lengthy e-mail debates or provide remedial historical education does not mean that I am altogether opposed to the notion of writer-reader interaction. In fact, I have an idea which I think promises to bring an entertaining new edge to this column on a monthly basis.
Here's what I'm thinking. Once a month, 350 words, (46 percent of the column), will be devoted to one fortunate correspondent translation: sacrificial lamb interested in challenging me on any subject, significant or trivial. Anything, from the moral superiority of supporting the Minnesota Vikings to the ontological argument for the existence of Cthulhu, is fair game. I will exert columnist's privilege in choosing from among the entries received, of course, and the latter half of the column will consist of my response to the reader's contribution.
For my part, I will commit to not selecting easy prey, unless, of course, I receive something so egregiously stupid that it would make for good humor in the inevitable dissection. I will play fair and will do my best to answer all of the issues raised, although I will assuredly not play nice. There's no flag for taunting in this league! I will also refrain from editing your submissions except in the case of unprintable language or overly confusing punctuation, so keep that in mind if you don't wish to look like a maleducated buffoon.
What I will require of those of you who wish to enter the arena is as follows: 1) No preaching to the choir. My general views are fairly well known by now, so don't write a half-column on the evils of taxation or gun control and expect to trigger a debate. 2) Make your case. This is not a TV talk show, so a hysterical screed of name-calling will not pass for a reasonable argument. 3) 350 words is the limit. Your word processor has something called Word Count under the Tools menu. Use it. 4) Don't expect mollycoddling. If you expose a weakness in your argument, I will rip it apart, not necessarily in a kindly manner. Deal with it. 5) Send the text in the body of the e-mail, as I never open attachments. Put "350 words" somewhere in the title. 6) Tell me if you wish to be identified by name and city, or only by initials. Your e-mail address will not be divulged in any case.
Keep in mind that I'm only going to do this once a month, so it will not be possible to respond to all half-columns submitted. We'll see how it goes, perhaps this will prove interesting to everyone, perhaps not. If it turns out to be lame, let me know and we'll certainly bag it. But it should be an interesting experiment, so if you ever wished to take a shot at a radical pro-life Austrian-school neo-capitalist Jacksonian techno-libertarian Southern Baptist Christian, here's your chance.
As they say in the Octagon, let's get it on!