Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Mr. U. Know-Who Bursts his Sphygmomanometer

In my previous entry, HERE, I told you about the editing of my most recent submission to the Daily
Pilot and, in the interest of clarification, I provided the full text for you to read. At that time I assumed the editing, which removed almost half of my submission, was done in the interest of space restrictions. I still believe that may have been the case.

That submission - which appeared in print on Sunday, March 2nd, at the bottom of page A7, the Daily Pilot's Forum page - was critical of a local resident for his intolerant views and his influence on the majority on our city council. Even in it's excised form, it outlined my views of his "contribution" to our city over much of the last decade. Those same thoughts have been chronicled on this blog over the past coupl
e years at length - some might say "ad nauseum".


This morning the Daily Pilot published a rebuttal from this guy, who has been referred to on thes
e pages as Your Neighbor and Mr. U. Know-Who (a name he gave himself). The rebuttal was not unexpected. What was unexpected was the size of the rebuttal and it's location. The editors of the Daily Pilot, after chopping my 924-word submission to a measly 503, provided almost a half page above the fold on page A3 - prime real estate in the newspaper business - for Mr. U. Know-Who to print his 1043 word rant. You can read it HERE.


Most of you who read these pages regularly know that I'm a big fan of the Daily Pilot. I think the editors and reporters do a good job of providing accurate, timely news for our region. I have what I feel is a good relationship with many of the folks at the Pilot and am always grateful when they publish something I submit - even when they edit my work extensively. Most of the time the edited version is superior to my original, but not always. For example, a few years ago a senior editor - who is no longer on the staff, by the way - made some assumptions because he didn't understand the subject and edited a commentary of mine so drastically that it changed the meaning of the piece 180 degrees. No "correction" buried in the bowels of a subsequent edition can fix that kind of a mistake.

Last night, when I read Mr. Who's screed online, I prepared a multi-part comment and posted it on the Daily Pilot blog. This rebuttal - if the editors publish it - will be read only by those folks who read the newspaper online. It will never see the print edition. Frankly, I have my doubts as to whether the editors will actually publish my comments. As I post this entry it's more than 12 hours since I submitted them, but I'm still keeping a positive thought...


So, in the interest of clarification, the following is that 9-segment comment as submitted last night:

What a surprise! The writer, known by some around these parts as "Mensa Marty", is unhappy with my characterization of him and his influence in our city. I'd like to thank him for going out of his way to provide us with his little epistle, much of which proves my point. (Cont.)

As you read through his little essay you will note that the common thread is, indeed, the discomfort and displacement of the Latinos among us. He calls for a "college on the Westside". Where might that citadel of higher learning be located? Why, on land confiscated by eminent domain - which he has recently advocated - that presently houses members of the Latino laboring class in our city. (Cont.)

He denies any "connection" between himself and Allan Mansoor, and yet those of us who take the time to watch the council proceedings recognize that Mansoor and the other members of the council majority frequently echo his words with uncanny precision - as virtual "Charlie McCarthy's" to his "Edgar Bergen". Coincidence? Hardly! (Cont.)

His actions on the 3R committee are a matter of public record. There is no doubt about his role in reducing the funding for Westside charities, the disdain for which he readily admits in his piece. Which group would suffer the most from reduced funding of the charities? Yep, those hard-working folks with brown skin living on the Westside. (Cont.)

Like some pathetic William F. Buckley, Jr. wannabe, he arrogantly proclaims that he "writes to be read", and that his target audience is "free-thinking adults with average or above-average I.Q.'s". He doesn’t mention that he’s embraced and praised by that "paragon of tolerance", David Duke - the former head of the Ku Klux Klan, who features Millard's essays on his web site, which Millard uses as a marketing tool to sell his books. He says he writes for those of high intellect when, in fact, his internet essays appeal to the knuckle-dragging extremists on the far right. (Cont.)

He says he writes not "in the dry language of the academy but in ways that I hope will be interesting to some readers". I'm sure he's accomplished that goal as he decries the "blending" of the American identity, causing, in his words, the evolution of "Tan Everyman" and goes on to encourage us to breed only within our own race - as often as possible. (Cont.)

His ego is fully on display as he, with no trace of humility, compares himself to Galileo and other great thinkers of the past. I hope you all appreciate just how lucky you are that he has chosen to address us mere mortals from his place on high. Give me a break!

He uses this opportunity to hawk his books, wave his alleged Mensa membership like a battle flag and advertise his blog. I've never said he wasn't smart. (Cont.)

And, of course, he denigrates me as a lesser being, barely able to understand the written word, much less his profound pronouncements. He may be correct - I'm just a simple guy, without Millard's prodigious intellect - the existence of which I have acknowledged many times. I do know right from wrong. I do know intolerance when I see it. I've got enough gray matter to understand the common thread of his actions in our city is the extraction of the Latinos from our midst. I'm grateful to him for proving my points. (Cont.)

He closed his commentary by saying, "I will continue working as hard as I can to help improve Costa Mesa. Count on it." I'm sure he will. And you can count on me to set my picture books aside and observe and report on his attempts at "improvement", too, whether he likes it or not.


I'm not quite sure what to make of it if the editors fail to publish my comments on their blog. There are many things that could be read into that act - or, rather, lack thereof. One could assume that Mr. Who has applied significant pressure - perhaps in the form of a lawsuit. Or, one might speculate that, for whatever reason, the editors are no longer interested in providing their readers the full, accurate story. Personally, I don't believe that. My personal experience with them is just the opposite - they always try to provide the complete, accurate story. Or, it could simply be that they won't play ping-pong with commentaries.

I shouldn't have worried... just after noon today the editors decided to publish my 9-segment comment. Life is good!

So, that leaves us to contemplate our navels on this subject. Fortunately, I've got some nice picture books handy to help me pass the time.

I was very amused to note that our pal, Mr. U. Know-Who, dedicated an entire posting on his blog, the CM Press, to me today. I'm not sure where he found that accurate image of me, but it did make me chuckle. You can read it HERE.

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home