Sancliff: "Would you like me to interview you for a future column"?
On Wednesday, 23, 2010, the following comment came in from Dave Stancliff:
I've met,interviewed, and published columns on some fascinating people over the years Joe.
Would you like me to interview you for a future column? Seriously. I have a column coming up in August on a guy I met back in 1985. People love to read about people.
It would give you an opportunity to reach more people with your observations on people and life. As a blogger, you have demonstrated an interest in sharing your observations on issues.
I'm not dis-respecting you Joe.
If you have no desire to share your observations with a wider audience then that's up to you.
June 23, 2010 6:56 PM
Another Answer – Another Offer
Guess what? Dave Stancliff DID NOT simply walk away. He really wants to know who writes the Joe Blow Report. Regardless of whatever Dave Stancliff believes, thinks or fantasizes, people like him never ever impressed me.
Well, I've been expecting a column on me or my type of blogging from Dave Stancliff anyway. This offer under different circumstances might even be intriguing. It could also be just a ruse to find out who writes this blog. Unfortunately, there's a couple of problems.
I'm not averse to identifying who the Joe Blow Report writer is if I thought we (Joe Blow and I) could continue to keep our objective, non-personal perspective WITHOUT getting into the same kind of a situation Dave Stancliff has subjected me (us) and this Report. I could identify myself, but then I'd probably have move to Brazil. Publicity? People and publicity comes with quality, when the product is worth reading, when it's something people are interested. Most people are just not used to a really impersonal, objective perspective.
Then there's Dave Stancliff, himself. What has he done lately, except make this offer, to cause me think he really cares about my interests? Even in this latest comment (above) he sets the tone for the way he really thinks about me. He says, as if to assure me: “I'm not dis-respecting you Joe.” Then notice the condescending, permissive and dismissive attitude where he's trying to tell me how to think and what to do: “If you have no desire to share your observations with a wider audience then that's up to you.” Like, if I don't take him up his rather expansive and generous offer, I'm somehow really just blogging as a excuse or a means to get at him for some “personal grudge.”
So, what would it take to resolve these “differences”? Probably for heaven and earth to move. Something just as hard for Dave Stancliff would be to reconcile all of his personal invectives and threats he's leveled at me for the past year or so. That would be a start. To do that he'd have to crawl down off that elitist stool he's perched on and stop trying to talk down to me and everyone else like he's some kind of opinionated, know-it-all jerk. When Dave Stancliff can show me and everyone else that he can accept people for who and what they are without recriminations or filthy accusations – when Dave Stancliff can prove to me and the rest of the world that he's a man worth of our respect, we'll talk.
Joe Blow: Until then he's irrelevant.
[UPDATE :: Monday, June 30, 2010]
I wonder how well Joe Klein and Dave Stancliff would get along?
It is extremely refreshing and heart-warming to see what good company I am in keeping.
For the record, Joe Klein is TIME's political columnist and author. Just like Dave Stancliff and the Times-Standard newspaper, what Joe Klein says in his Vacation Interruptus article in Time says more about the magazine's integrity and value as a legitimate media source than the small-minded invectives and ad hominem assaults of a Dark Age Joe Klein. Too bad these editors aren't smart enough to figure that out.
[UPDATE I :: Monday, June 30, 2010]
Now you can another, ''falsehood-spewing war propagandist" to the list. This one is Jeffrey Goldberg is a national correspondent for The Atlantic. Another national media outlet.