• Recent delusions of applicability

  • Advertisements

Feeling very torn here

It seems Prof. Henderson got in a bit of trouble with his spouse.

He made his previous posts, which included some vaguely personal details about his wife, without verifying it was okay to do so first.

He relates that she does not share in his opinions and objected to his inclusion of those details after he received the response that he did.

 As he says:

The reason I took the very unusual step of deleting them is because my wife, who did not approve of my original post and disagrees vehemently with my opinion, did not consent to the publication of personal details about our family. In retrospect, it was a highly effective but incredibly stupid thing to do. (emphasis mine)

1st) Sorry his wife has to put up with him.

2nd) Highly effective?!?!?! How dense is the man? He repeatedly insisted his point was to:

My only objective is to point out the impact that these new tax policies will have on real people…My only point is that this is valuable profession, we are doing our best to live a normal life, and we are not going to be unaffected by tax increases…The double speak here is disingenuous. To use income figures but talk in millionaire terms makes it sounds like the tax hits far fewer than it will hit. A teacher and fireman in Chicago can easily top $250,000 in income, but hardly think of themselves as the super rich. That was my only point…

And yet instead he managed to come across as whining. That would be a failure to effectively communicate his point. His message was lost because of the vehicle he used to send it. So no, it was not a highly effective message.
Unless he was just trolling, if he was it was highly effective. Although if I am to take another writer on the site at face value he was not trolling. No, if I heed them it was only class warfare, and not (in large part) people pointing out how he really was not helping the case of over taxation with the method he choose to emphasise it.

Now, back to the title of this post. I say I am torn because I had to make a choice. I have cached versions of his posts, and I have already posted them. So, should I leave them up, take them down, or redact them.

I’ve chosen to redact them and remove the links to the cached versions.

 The electronic lynch mob that has attacked and harassed me — you should see the emails sent to me personally! — has made my family feel threatened and insecure. We recently had a very early preemie, and this was a quite inopportune time to bring this on my family.

Now this though is all a result of his postings, his word choice. So do I feel very sorry if he now pays the price for his own posts? Not particularly. Would I condone him being harassed, not at all. Would my removing my blog postings about it change any of this? Not in the slightest (come on I got a total of about 30 views on that post).

But, I do feel a sense of compassion for his family. I understand they did not have wish this upon themselves. But, what can I do about it? You cannot rebuild the egg. And this egg has been rather throughly smashed and crushed. There is no undoing the damage, but time may make it fade in people’s memories.

However, if they find it so difficult to live with what has transpired I suggest they take their frustration out at what has caused their problem.

I believe he may be found sleeping on the sofa.

(Hopefully there will be no further blog posts about this)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: