To the Editor:
I would like to respond David Harrison’s multi-page letter concerning not only me but also Villages-News.com. He even suggests that you hire me as a columnist.
He tries to cast himself as an intellectual critical thinker in an attempt to diminish and demean any letter I present and you publish. He would like the reader to believe your media agrees with all of my viewpoints and place priority in publishing my submissions. I can assure the reader that The Villages-News.com does not publish all of my submissions and I don’t believe the editors agree with all of my opinions.
Let me address the various assertions Mr. Harrison offers.
He believes that the use of Google offers the opportunity for “people with data to disguise their strong opinions and … present them as facts….” Mr. Harrison if the opinion is based in fact why would anyone attempt to “disguise” it? That makes no sense.
Mr. Harrison believes that “restating sometimes humorous gaffes and linking them to political …opinion requires superb intellectual capacity.” I would suggest that President Biden’s multiple and frequent gaffes are not only humorous but dangerous because the entire world, including our enemies see these gaffes for what they are. They are the result of a demented mind that produces the gaffs and they see it as a weakness. Mr. Harrison, in that sense the gaffe becomes political.
So, Mr. Harrison took the time and trouble to research my submissions to the news. That suggests he has a lot of time on his hands. From that search he has drawn some conclusions.
He comes to the conclusion that my submissions rise to the level of “featured letters!” I’m honored by his suggestion but I’m sure it isn’t true. How does he come to that conclusion? After arriving at that tortured logic he expands. He wants the reader to conclude that my submissions are not just a letter, but a disguised Villages-News sponsored “editorial”…He goes on to suggest that the Villages-News.com, “PAY THE MAN”. Sorry Mr. Harrison your assertion is not true.
Mr. Harrison goes on to opine in “over 45” featured letters “… about a Democrat, it was 100% derogatory.” Obviously, Mr. Harrison has determined that the remarks made were finding fault with the Democrats and he thinks those remarks are “derogatory.” Mr. Harrison if the truth is derogatory, it’s still the truth. You didn’t advise in your opinion whether what you found derogatory was truthful. Please show the reader the nature of the “derogatory” information I presented. The same can be said of anything i presented about the Republicans.
Mr. Harrison opines that my submission characterizes Democrats as …” evil, vicious, cheaters, on a mission to destroy the United States…. with their Marxist supporting convictions.” Once again Mr. Harrison takes these submissions and conflates the submission(s) to make his point, by taking them out of context and grouping them into a self-serving and intellectually dishonest assault on the truth. If one views each of these submissions as originally presented, one will see that Mr. Harrison has worked hard to present a skewed viewpoint.
Mr. Harrison shared his mentor’s admonishment, what he feels is full of wisdom. His mentor advises that “angry people strike out in angry ways. Beware of intelligent, judgmental people who are incapable of ever changing their minds.” He then ( I believe these words belong to Mr. Harrison) goes on to write “communication that is emotionally charged are often simple opinions by self-righteous individuals cleverly disguising strongly held opinions and “cloaking” them in a perception that they have shared undeniable facts with absolute and undebatable conclusions.”
Wow… how deep is that? I find that pseudo intellectuals often offer a lot of information but little fact to back it up. Mr. Harrison seems to be guilty of that with his four-page dissertation. Let’s look at his last paragraph. How does Mr. Harrison know if i am incapable of changing my mind? He doesn’t know me, but he’s already determined that I am incapable of changing my mind. Mr. Harrison, I am fully capable of changing my mind, so your assertion falls down on that conclusion alone, but let’s go on.
How does Mr. Harrison arrive at a conclusion that I am “self-righteous”? The only way he can come to that conclusion is by judging me based on his bias(s). In that case he is guilty of being self-righteous and judgmental, making him a hypocrite.
Mr. Harrison accuses me of being “angry.” In that he may be mistaking my concern for anger. There are times that concern can turn to anger, no doubt.
Mr. Harrison, the 45 letters you so diligently looked up will always represent my concern(s) about the democrat “leadership” of our country (the democrats hold The Presidency, and both houses of congress) as well as the mayoral leadership of our major cities (Philadelphia, New York, Los Angeles) and the fact that this so-called leadership has put our country on a path of destruction. Each one of those letters are fact based.
I want to thank you for suggesting the Villages-News.com pay me for my submissions, but I won’t hold my breath. I am grateful for the Villages-News.com because they allow a breadth and depth of differing opinions on a grand scale.
Larry Moran
Village of Mallory Square
