Reply to "concern taxpayer": I was right again.

Earlier today, I made a bet with Mrs. Confidential.

Explaining to her that there was a seemingly sincere, even-tempered discussion occurring at the SOLNA blog (yes, really), I wagered that the fragile ambience would survive only until "concern taxpayer" decided to anonymously enter the fray to spew hatred, at which point the truce would splinter owing to CT's self-defeating anger, and furthermore, I predicted that CT would be unable to remain silent until nightfall.

Right on all counts. When you're hot, you're hot ...

Here it is, and since this most recent flaccid salvo is aimed right at me, here are my answers, line by fatuous line. Take it away, Vicki ...

CONCERN TAXPAYER said...

Your problem Mr. Baylor is this. Bottom line.

1. Your always right and everybody else is wrong!

It’s hardly a problem to always be right when other always are wrong, but I haven’t gotten there, yet.

2. Your 2nd biggie is you can not stand it east ender allows anonymous comments.

Indeed, I have a consistent and logical position with regard to anonymity, and I’ve been expressing it for two decades. True, I find it amusing that people have so little courage and respect for themselves that they wear masks in order to attack, but I concede that this is beyond my ability to resolve (see “personality disorder,” below).

If East Ender thinks that empowering the lesser angels of the natures of you and others somehow helps New Albany, yes, that’s her business on her blog. It doesn’t mean I or anyone else should not be able to question her opinion and counter with views of our own. That’s the nature of debate, and of freedom of speech.

3. And you have forgotten again this is east enders blog. You have your own blog.

Finally, we agree on something. And Healthblogger has his, and Maury has his ...

You don't like what certain or most people write or say on this blog. You choose to attack us and others. I personally have never felt offended by your remarks because I like others know the truth about this adminstration.

I want answers, others want answers. But of course you Roger have all the answers. But again Roger you try to verbally abuse people. And defend the Mayor as if he does no wrong! Hello Roger are you still with me here?

CT, I have made remarks about hundreds of matters in the past year, from basketball to Richard Florida, and from coffee shops to bicycling, but so very tellingly, the sole and only area that you can specify as a means of illustrating the differences between you and I is “this adminstration” and “the Mayor.”

Granted, your personal obsession with the Mayor, and your obvious vendetta against the current administration both have been remarkably well documented through numerous postings in which you crudely insult the mayor and his assistants as though you were standing on an elementary school playground with a can of spray paint in your hand … but really, CT, does your expertise extend to anything else? When it comes to topics, you’re a one-trick pony.

You Sir are a Psychology 101 text book case of a person with a personality disorder. As well as you having typical impaired social skills. As well as being a bully. Based on your actions.(now how does it feel for us to attack you)

Have any of you ever heard the adage about the pot and the kettle?

According to Psych 101 (which I’m willing to bet that you didn’t take in college):

“A personality disorder is identified by a pervasive pattern of experience and behavior that is abnormal with respect to any two of the following: thinking, mood, personal relations, and the control of impulses … Personality disorders are not illnesses in a strict sense … however, those with personality disorders suffer a life that is not positive, proactive, or fulfilling.”

Well, let’s see how I measure up.

Thinking? I’d imagine that my writing and the ability to operate a nationally recognized specialty business are sufficient evidence of that. Mood? Hey, we’ve all had our moments, but the people who are around me all the time would certainly vouch for my equilibrium. Personal relations? Again, it’s difficult to be successful in the pub and restaurant business without having good relationships with people. Control of impulses? I’m neither a binge drinker nor an impulse shopper, although occasionally a song nestles in my head, and I whistle the tune quite a lot until it passes.

Seems to me that an anonymous & masked Internet dispenser of venom might look first in the mirror before accusing others of a harboring a “personality disorder” – but naturally, that’s just my ohhhpinion.

You Sir constantly accuse others including myself as being people of hate and anger.

4.And "ROGER" what you need to learn is Respect is "Earned not Demanded!

Do I hate you. Absolutely not! I personally think you are a phony.

I agree that respect is earned, and cannot be demanded. I think that it’s incredibly sad –- and a bit pathetic -- when someone so desperately craves respect, attention and legitimacy that he or she stoops to lies, things like creating fictitious identities on blogs, i.e., “Erik” the “college professor,” who runs “Freedom of Speech” for the “little people.”

People of that ilk probably come slightly closer to your characterization of “personality disorder” than I ever will.

Because no one is ever/or always right. We all make mistakes<(but you) because we are humans.

But if someone defends OR says something you do not like(regardless of the issue) You want to put the "Rath of Roger on them."

It is true that to err is human, but of course, we’d all probably admit that an inadvertent mistake is far less significant than an intentional one –- say, a lie … a lie like the one that you, CT, told last May when you said you saw me walk out from the Mayor’s office before a council meeting. That was something malicious and intentional, not inadvertent, don't you think? And you've never, ever admitted to it, even as you demand the truth from others. That's hypocrisy, don't you think?

Like I have said many many times... You Sir are the Minority in this town. Not the Majority.

If that’s true, then why are you so obviously frightened that I may be right about a few, if not all, of the things I assert?

These issues we are asking about does not concern you Roger.(Because rember you have all the answers and you are right and we are wrong)

Just a hint from someone who can write clearly: Arguments make more sense if there’s a structure, a guiding logic. It seems that you get so apoplectic, that you lose the thread. It makes no sense to say, as you just did, that “because you’re right and we’re wrong, these issues don’t concern you.” That’s gibberish. Please rewrite it, okay?

If you are the Mayors best drinkin buddy who cares.

To be perfectly honest, I don’t even know if the Mayor drinks.

Advice to you Sir please don't put all your eggs in one basket, cause you might have to end up eatting everyone of them!

Just like Cool Hand Luke?

BOTTOM LINE WE WANT AN AUDIT!
BOTTOM LINE WE WANT ANSWERS!
Instead of excuses!Again if Mayor Garner has nothing to hide he would open the books!Lord knows if we can afford to pay $750.00 for his car mats. And us taxpayers are paying for outragious cell phone bills. And wasting our tax dollars what the hell does this Mayor have to hide.

Another patented CT primal scream, duly capitalized, in the record books. How many anguished decibels was that one, VD?

Our numbers(SOL-NA) and his numbers(Mayors) do not add up.

If neither yours nor his add up, then which numbers actually do add up? Ah, yes, maybe that’s not what you meant, but that is what you wrote. See why proper grammar is good?

Numbers is the bottom line here.
1+1=2 not 3 Roger.

True; I learned that numbers trick in first grade. But numbers "are," not "is" the bottom line -- I learned that verb agreement trick in first grade, too.

Why do some people have to pay there sewer bills when others don't? Why can certain deals be cut, when we have to pay for their mistakes... We are tired of paying for other peoples "MISTAKES"

Sewer bills? Good question, but you go from the specific (sewer bills) to the general ("mistake" and "deals") in one entire accusation. You would have to describe the “deals” being cut, as these aren’t the same as the unpaid sewer bills. Don’t worry; they didn’t teach kids about logical fallacies when you were in high school, so you’re off the hook for that one.

Why do certain people not have to pay their property taxes when others do? And for your information Mr. Baylor this is happening and the truth on this and other matters will come to light in 2006.

Good question. Individuals, or businesses? Where is the exact information … wait, I know, it’s “coming soon,” and “just around the corner,” and “about to be here at any minute.” Rather like the guy on the street corner with “the world is coming to an end” sign. Someday, it will … when the guy holding the sign dies, not the outside physical world, and then, only then, he’s finally proven right – but he’s dead and can’t enjoy the victory. Funny, isn’t it? It's all about his internal problems and not about the real world.

So accuse me of blowing smoke and not telling the truth. But beprepared to eat what ever attack you make on me and others.

CT, the only time I ever accused you of lying was when you flat-out, 100%, take-it-to-the-bank lied, as in the office episode recounted above. If you’d just apologize for lying … but what am I saying? How would someone without the guts to use their name be convinced that they should tell the truth about lying?

Because we have has enough. And you can take this to the bank.

I do admire your frequent threats, though. Very classy. Like Al Capone.

Lord we all learned alot after dealing with "OVERTON." Talk about "The Mayor from Hell.."

And Sir if you do not believe the Democrats are not ready to "run James Garner out of town on a rail" you are talking to his employees not some of the Democrats who picked up his tab to get elected?

Ask them Mr. Baylor!

Where’s Guido Mattingly when you need him? He could take out the Mayor and get Dougie E. enthroned again, for old time's sake, couldn’t he?

How come you never attack Bev Crump, Jack Messer, Donnie Blevins, Mark Seabrooks, Jeff Gayhan?

My personal opinion most of them should not plan on getting re-elected. Because the democrats are lining people up to run against most of them as WE SPEAK!

Flash: Democratic candidate chosen to run against Republican -- is that legal in a two-party state? I’m not a Democrat, but isn’t it the case that there usually are primary challenges, with two or more party members contesting a nomination?

Some of these people are in the Mayors pocket and "do have" there own agenda.

“Their” own agenda? How ‘bout some evidence, CT – have you seen the Protocols of the Elders of Gahan? (Do you even know what historical slur I’m referring to here?)

And if you really think Mayor James Garner is doing such a great job you have been hiding your head in New Albany sewers to damn long.

Sorry, Vick, I’m not the one with the bizarro sewer fetish. Yvonne Kersey might be better placed to answer this question.

And sir you have been drinking to many $10.00 pints.

No anonymous SOLNA diatribe would be truly complete without an ignorant reference to one’s drinking habits. Actually, I’ve found something more enjoyable than drinking these expensive pints – it’s selling them to people, who are willing to come from far away to pay a premium price for quality that they can trust. Gee, just imagine if all of New Albany worked that way.

Merry Christmas Mr. Roger Baylor. Looking forward to battling with you again in 2006.

CT, it's not a battle. It's when you surrender to your demons, and then mistakenly imagine that the bile engendered resembles coherence. But, okay, if we're going to continue doing this, be aware that it would be even more fun for me if you would (1) arm yourself, (2) learn just a few of the “rules” that you inaccurately claim to play by, and (3) understand that for all your self-loathing, insecurity and envy, no one’s ever going to take you seriously as long as you remain hidden behind the mask.

In closing, let’s go back to that Psych 101 definition I provided earlier -- the type of passage that Erik would understand, if in fact he were a real human and not a pathetic creation of an unbalanced mind:

“The character of a person is shown through his or her personality -- by the way an individual thinks, feels, and behaves. When the behavior is inflexible, maladaptive, and antisocial, then that individual is diagnosed with a personality disorder.”

I’m serene and untroubled in the absolute certainty that if impartial readers, ones without a horse in this race, were to read the collected works of the anonymous CT and the known RAB, and to apply the definition of “personality disorder” to the respective writers and their writings, I wouldn’t be the one being asked to start taking medicine.

Have a happy, ecumenical holiday, oh embittered one.