Now, That Is Some Real Sunday Insight

Charlie Sykes has his weekly TV propaganda show he calls "Sunday Insight" but should really just be called "Sunday Incite," since it is nothing more than Chuckles and some of his closest buddies, like James "I own my women" Harris and Preview Patrick McIlheran doing a political singalong.

For a while, Chuckles and Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist Eugene Kane had a little spat. It was little since Kane mostly ignored Sykes, who just mostly bloviates any way. But Kane knew how to get his licks in as well.

I think Sykes' problem is one more of jealousy of Kane's skill with the written word than anything else.

Kane again shows his mastery and real insight with his column from today's paper. It deals with the subject of incest, spawned by the recent revelations of actress McKenzie Phillips. The insight, and mastery of the written word is shown at the end of Kane's column:

I've covered organizations that deal with these issues and have talked with counselors who described sexual abuse by a trusted relative or friend as a powerful dynamic that shatters lives. Given that, I probably shouldn't have been so quick to dismiss Phillips' claims.

If she were a man claiming to have been abused decades ago by a priest, I suspect people as a whole would have been more empathetic.

My lesson learned is that tolerance means more than just accepting the fact we are all different people in terms of race, age and gender. It also means giving the proper respect to someone else's experiences.

My initial response to the Phillips' story by saying "TMI" prevented me from realizing it really wasn't too much information for people who have managed to weather the storm but still need support. I still fail to see how talking about it on Oprah helps Phillips heal, but I really don't have to.

Her words may help others deal with the same darkness, which I suppose is the entire point.

In A Hole? Just Dig Deeper

Dad29 has put his foot into it. In a poorly thought out post, he basically accuses the high number of rapes in the armed services on the victims. Whether or not this is the way he meant it, this is the way it came out.

Jay at folkbum's and Grumps right here at Whallah! called him out on it.

Instead of apologizing, or trying to clarify, he defends his statements. Then things get uglier. In responding to a former military man, he writes (emphasis mine):

No, actually, Sancho, the post says what I said: Women do NOT belong in the military.

You can fantasize all you want about other "meanings," if you wish to make it clear that you cannot read.

Thanks for your service. Now learn to think.

Isn't that the kind of crap that got John Kerry into so much hot water in the last presidential election? And if that wasn't bad enough, he tries to defend his position at Jay's site. But not in a good way. Instead, he starts resorting to ad hominem attacks and in trying to distract from the point by expressing selective outrage.

He follows this up with blaming Bill Clinton for soldiers raping their comrades in arms. Remember that when the right tries to attack people for wanting tighter gun control, with their arguments about it being the shooter, not the gun. They can't have it both ways.

Now, I've had public and private conversations with Dad. He is a very intelligent man, and does have a fairly good sense of humor. However, he can also be quite block-headed at times (like all of us).

I've made my own fair share of blunders in the blogosphere (I know, it's hard to believe, isn't it?). Some big and some small. I have found that the best way to deal with them, as in real life, is to admit you screwed up, and to move on. Most people respect a person that can admit an error and apologize.

But when you are in a hole, it's never a good idea to just keep digging.