An Open Invitation

Doug Pennington is an employee of the Brady Campaign, and I’m pretty sure the guy who does the Brady Campaign blog on Paul’s behalf.  As Thirdpower points out, he’s been commenting at The Huffington Post.  Here’s what he says in one of his comments:

One thing: I’ve read comments off and on over the months on the blog, and one reason I (and I suspect others) choose not to get between the warring sides here is that nobody listens to anybody. Commenters here seem to be good at the schoolyard taunts and calling each other “liars,” etc, though. A few do seem to have arguments at the ready and numbers to go along with them – on both sides. (If I can make it through the drek, I can actually learn things.) Almost nobody, though, shows a sense that they may not actually have all the answers. Get in the middle of a bunch of know-it-alls convinced of their correctness? Disagree and be called a liar? Spend hours going tit-for-tat in a pointless spiral? Uh, no thanks….

Welcome to the Internet, Doug.  I agree that once you get beyond the first couple of iterations of comment-reply-comment, it goes downhill pretty quickly.  So I’ll extend an open invitation to Doug to have a public discussion with him on this blog regarding any gun control related topic he may want to talk about.  The discussion could happen over a series of e-mails, with the end result being published here.  No Kelli, no Macca, No Thirdpower, no Kaveman.  Just Doug and myself.

Think they’ll take me up on it?

9 thoughts on “An Open Invitation”

  1. For the sake of intellectual consistency, I truly do hope that Doug Pennington takes you up on the offer for rational and reasoned discourse.

    Who knows…you both might learn a few things.

    We all might just learn a few things.

  2. “Think they’ll take me up on it?”

    ….Something along the lines of ‘Snowflakes in Hell’ comes to mind!

  3. No, he doesn’t actually want an honest debate. The Brady folks entire theory is based on lies & emotional arguments with no basis in actual fact. Just a stack of cards that falls when you actually start looking at the data.

  4. It’s kind of like what Mojo Nixon said about Elvis: Kelli is everywhere.

    Well, except pro-gun blogs. I guess she’s not that much of a glutton for punishment.

  5. In defense of myself, this is how I responded to Doug’s post…

    “Thankyou for responding Doug.

    Many of us here enjoyed lively debate with Zach before you replaced him at the Brady Campaign. We dissagreed more often than not, but we were civil. We’re in agreement that Paul’s blog has devolved somewhat since he decided to shut off comments at your own website.

    Names have been called by both sides, yes. But if you claim that you’ve been reading on/off for months, I think your smart enough to know where the vitriol is orginating.

    Between Jade’s insults and Kelli’s assertions that we are

    1. Posting from prison.
    2. Uncaring about crime/violence.
    3. Evil for believing that the Jews in the Warsaw Getto uprising were heros.

    Kelli actually stated that since Hitler was democratically elected, the people had no right to resist him. Just shut up and get in the cattle car.

    I hope that you will reconsider and join the debate. Paul’s choice of sending Kelli here and Jade’s fascination with ad hominen attacks really does damage to the Brady Campaign’s stated goal of building grass roots support.

    We all want to live in safer world, but my safety is my responsibility. Not yours, not the government, not the police.


    I was very polite because I do want to engage him just like we engaged Zach back in the day.

    Oh and about your offer to him?

    What’s the name of your blog again?

    I hope I’m wrong, but until you post the debate, I’ll keep doing my own thing.

    BTW, Mike W., yes Kelli is still around, she appears as “shedances.”

  6. What, no Kelli?

    How will I get through my day without being called a ‘pro-death gun pusher”?

Comments are closed.