Oh my, it looks like I've made Richard C. Hoffman angry. In his letter of April 26, Hoffman made it clear he doesn't like the way I responded to David Schmaltz's glowing testimonial for Obama and Company.
Hoffman maintains I'm an expert at ridicule. Well, the way Hoffman wrote his letter about me, I'd say that he has expertise of his own when it comes to ridicule. Let the reader decide.
Whatever the case, my writing style is what it is. Some are offended by it, but the feedback I receive indicates most readers are not offended. As a matter of fact, I'm often complimented on my writing style. If Mr. Hoffman can't deal with that, perhaps he can find a support group.
Hoffman asserted I don't tolerate the opinions of others. He says I don't think anyone is entitled to admire someone unless I approve. Balderdash!
I don't lose sleep over the opinions of others. But if someone submits a letter to the U-B, then I have the right to respond, whether it's to agree or disagree.
I'm sure David Schmaltz knows that his letters to the U-B are not popular with a lot of people. I'm not the first one to disagree with Schmaltz, and I doubt I'll be the last.
As for the admiration thing, Schmaltz has the right to proclaim his admiration for Obama, and I have the right to proclaim why I don't admire Obama. If Schmaltz can't handle that (but I know he can) then he shouldn't put his opinions out there for consideration. I hope Mr. Hoffman takes note.
It's interesting that Hoffman used the blame Bush tactic. He wants to know why I didn't mention "the atrocities the Bush administration implemented." I don't agree that Bush is guilty of atrocities. Bush made mistakes, but he owned up to them.
Obama should man up and admit his wrong doings. (Don't worry, I'll write more letters!)
But Obama won't admit anything because he's too busy blaming Bush, just like Hoffman and Schmaltz!