But if you must keep using danimal as your avitar, I'll get ok with it.
Chill, because Myers is not a real person. No one could be that clueless and survive in today's enviornment unless he were a retired gummint' worker or maybe an alter ego for Bonkers.

Are you accusing me of being "clueless?"
What does that mean anyway?

I understand why bloggers here hide behind fake names and write letters to the editor with fake names, I really do. I don't agree with it, but I get it. Yet I strongly contend that it would be far more interesting and certainly far more honest if people had the guts to put their name by their comments.

Just don't tell the Secret Service I'm lurking around.

Dan, it's good to see someone with the honor to put their name behind their public comments instead of throwing rocks in the form of insults from behind the figurative bushes. It seems that anonymity prompts weak people to do and say things they would not be proud for their parents or children to see. Which is why, in my opinion, comments in this forum too often resemble a food fight.

Terry Garlock

Anonymity does not exist everywhere. For instance, should someone show up at one of the rare coffees, where some of the bloggers meet up to put a face on the blogging name, you can see the real deals at that time.
Anonymity does have its virtues, the best one being: allowing a chat persona to develop, which is why at the coffees we go by our chat names.
And I would say, in my opinion, that having an active email contact is not being totally anonymous.
Anonymously, or not, good intentions or not, insults are still insulting, and good manners are appreciated. Food fights are a terrible waste of food but a blog site is different. Blog sites are entertaining at the least, and informative and thought provoking at their best.

It's not easy being the carbonunit

Your real gripe is with Cal Beverly, a small-time capitalist trying to generate more hits and make more money by allowing anonymous comments.

If you feel so strongly this enables weak and dishonorable people to engage in weak and dishonorable behavior, I expect you to stop participating in Beverly’s enterprise immediately.

tell it to:

Alexander Hamilton
Thomas Jefferson
Ben Franklin
John Jay

Just to name a very few, publishing political thought under a nom de guerre is as old as the Republic.

They of course would be more eloquent than anyone writing in this forum.

I am sure you are not suggesting the founders mentioned above are "weak people"?

Your castigation, Mr. Garlock, that the anonymous are "weak" may in some instances be true. However, many cannot comment for fear of reprisal. Take for example a county or city worker. They most assuredly could not raise the slighest even admirably constructive criticism.

You should also read the history of the Letter to the Editor. Benjamin Franklin wrote anonymous letters to the editor which were published by his unknowing brother. Ben's pseudonym was Silence Dogood and he successfully conveyed the air of an elderly widow.

No, the answer in a free society is not to restrict free speech any more than needed. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said that the best antidote to unsatisfactory speech is more speech.

Respond as you have so very capably Mr. Garlock but do not advocate more censorship.

is directed only to those who criticize the military for their shortcomings. They have the biggest budget yet always feel unappreciated....and make no mistakes. They are an excellent bunch but make mistakes.
Garlock won't criticize Cal. He writes for Cal.
Go along to get along.

Who cares about names, handles, or whatever. When does the food fight begin?

Dan you're an expert alright.

In your case Dan, 'Ex' is a has-been and 'spert' is a drip under pressure.

Why don't you run for office so we can show you once again the respect and admiration we have for you?

What a looser!