E-Mailaholic

or E-Mail Anonymous

Yesterday being a slow day work-wise and also probably a slower day news-wise, I wasted several hours watching one of the satellite news networks which shall remain nameless at this time so as to avoid all appearances of dealing in promotionalism. During the short time that I actually listened to their prating I heard them say at least 10 times that they wanted me to e-mail my thoughts to them and gave their addresses. I thought back to last year, just before Thanksgiving, during the health care debate and how on that occasion I had done just that without getting any indication that they even knew what I was talking about. In the seven months that have followed that first writing I have sent at least sixty-five more with the same results but lately it has become almost impossible to get through to them. Maybe they put me on a black list. Excerpts from a few of those e-mails are copied below.

11-23-09, Glenn, Why have neither you nor anyone else, that I have heard, mentioned that any money saved by cutting Medicare (waste and fraud or cutting payments to doctors and hospitals) still belongs to Medicare and is not to be used for some other government scheme like public option insurance?

11-25-09, Friends, Why is it that no one even mentions that any money saved by cutting waste and fraud or payments to doctors and hospitals still belongs to Medicare ---?

11-25-09, Cavuto, We need someone to tell our elected officials, be it President, Representatives or Senators, that any money saved from cutting either waste and fraud ----.

11-25-09, O'Reilly, Tell us how the President or Congress can take money from Medicare, be it savings from cutting waste and fraud or cutting payments to doctors and hospitals, then give it to some other ----.

11-25-09, Hannity, I am puzzled as to how the president or congress can take money out of Medicare, be it waste and fraud or cuts to doctors and hospitals, then give it to ----.

12-9-09, Cavuto, Once again, would you please tell us under-educated country hicks how Lord Harry (Reid) can write a bill, call it law, then force the opposition to come up with 60 votes to amend it -- the law of the land, as passed by congress, keeps any taxpayer money from going for abortions except in special circumstances but Lord Harry and his cohorts demand a 60 vote majority to keep that law in effect. How can they do that?

3-4-10, O'Reilly, I had always thought that you were reasonably intelligent until tonight when you let two democrats convince you that they could balance the budget by cutting Medicare. Did you check your brain at the door?

At least ten more e-mails were basically the same so I'll move on to later writings.

4-19-10, Bill, How do you find illegal Hispanics without profiling Hispanics?

5-1-10, Friends, Today, one of my fondest dreams is to become as intelligent as some of the current anchors on "Fox and Friends" so that I can understand, all on my own without being told, how it is that some illegal immigrants can come to this great country, then demand that our laws be changed to accommodate them. I will admit that at least one of my ancestors may have been associated with a group who inadvertently entered this country illegally but if not for them the Colony at Jamestown may have been lost. Can we ever forgive them for such an indiscretion? But on the other hand my Cherokee heratige no longer cries out for the sight of white man's blood spilled on the field of battle and it has been years since I've had the urge to take a scalp.

5-6-10, Bill, The Arizona Immigration Law is much ado about nothing. Arizona has the right to defend itself, RIGHT? (see Article 4, Section 4, of Constitution)

6-7-10, Allison, What makes you think the First and Second ammendments are safe when you won't say anything about the lack of enforcement of "Article 4, Section 4 of our Constitution? (Check posting of June 16, 2010, Constitutional or Ex Post Facto)

6-7-10, Megyn, I don't know how it is where you live but here in Tennessee the Highway Patrol can set up roadblocks and check everyone's drivers license. I have no problem with it or the Arizona law.

7-1-10, Friends, Check out the new Tennessee illegals law just signed by the Governor.

7-5-10, Gerri, On the program today you had a three person panel discussing, among other things, the House Bill which would raise the limits of liability in an oil spill. I heard mentioned the 1850 and 1920 laws but nothing about the 1990 law that was passed following the Exxon Valdez spill off the coast of Alaska which raised the Economic Liability from an oil spill to seventy-five million dollars. The rest would be picked up by the taxpayers. Any law, which would apply to BP, would be Ex Post Facto and unconstitutional.

After that e-mail was sent, Judge Andrew Napolitano was on Fox News discussing the proposed change in "The Oil Pollution Act" which was passed in 1990. The Judge stated that if the law was changed so as to take advantage of BP in the current oil spill that it would be Ex Post Facto and therefore unconstitutional. At least the Judge agrees with me. As for the title and sub-title, do you think I'm an e-mailaholic and should I be looking for a chapter of E-mail anonymous?Thanks, stay tuned for the next chapter. William