There is, clearly, history about which you are unaware, Shodan. I will share:
Obama = Hitler. Is this columnist plagarizing?
Obama=Hitler Guy is back! I need some criticizing help.
Obama=Hiter Guy: The local paper printed my response
Obama=Hitler Guy: The Saga Continues! He responded to my response
Obam=Hitler Guy: More Shots Across the Bow
To the substance of it we clearly disagree. I think she’s responding to a meeting called ‘No Labels’ coming up shortly that will attempt to challenge her and her husband in their political ambitions. I find, in my experience, that the placing of labels serves to separate people into convenient boxes. This, in turn, allows one to make easy, black and white, decisions that require little acknowledgment of the complexities and shades of gray of life. Not unlike those people who see party affiliation and know who to vote for it relieves them of the need to be informed about the world in making their decisions.
Still, the back and forth has been surprisingly civil, to date. Especially given the firebrand nature of some of their other writings and activities. It’s been fun to joust with him. We’ll have to see how well she takes it.
The quickest and most easily understood refutation to her letter is to ask, why does Frank Luntz have a job?
What a stupid letter. Okay, so up is up, down is down, and A is A. What is her point? That’s it’s acceptable to label Obama a Socialist because the smear is grounded in reality? How about she substantiate that claim, instead of reminding everyone that it’s okay to tell the truth.
Yes. Regardless of the (de)merits of her other writings, responding to this one is a waste of time at best.
It doesn’t speak well of the paper that they ran it.
This is the first time I’ve delved into this thread. I’ve enjoyed reading all the “back issues” so to speak of your ongoing discourse. Kudos to the newspaper for offering this platform…I wish more would do it.
I see one problem on the horizon though, in terms of the debate. To date Obama=Hitler team is playing offense to Chance team-of-one’s defense. Sooner or later the all-defense play is going to start to sound like carping and credability will suffer. Is there any way you can turn the tables and put the other team on the defensive? Beckians labor under many delusions…could you pick one or two of these and tear it down? Not attacking Obama=Hitler team personally, but mercilessly tearing down one of their sacred cows in such a way that they will be forced to respond or lose face?
Good luck, and please continue to keep us informed. I’m enjoying reading about it. Ignorance fought, a little bit at a time.
SS
I’ve thought about going on offense but I’d have to pick my spot carefully. I’m on the ballot in November and, while this is defense, I’ve gotten a lot of good words around town about my replies.
I’m sort of trying to define myself as the sensible, non-extreme candidate who will support local business and economic development without being one of those ‘crazy tea party’ guys.
I’ll figure something out.
She can’t even spell kumbaya. Geez.
Well, in all honesty, even I, as a professional, would have trouble defining a spelling for that. Her usage is weird, though.
Working on the reply now.
Whoa. I read Mrs. Ritter’s letter, but it struck me as kind of unprovoked (“out of the blue,” and “out of left field” also work for me, even if they seem less respectful).
I note that you surmise that she is responding to the prospect of a meeting called “No Labels.” It might have been polite for her (or the editor of the letters page of the paper, if appropriate) to have specified that this is the case. That said, can you provide us with some background on this meeting (who, where, when, why, that sort of thing), to maybe give us a frame of reference against which we might infer her thesis, presuming she has one?
Also, I have enjoyed reading the saga you linked to in post #3 above, and from my perspective, the mere fact that you refer to Mr. Ritter by name in your letters, where he does not respond in kind, means you’re already ahead of him on respectfulness points (fact, reason, and logic, too, of course). However, I wonder if you might have done better to refer to him from the beginning as “Mr. Ritter” (as opposed to just “Ritter”), and do you think it is too late to start doing so?
P.S. Did you guys ever go out to that lunch he offered you, and if so, how did that go?
Typically, it’s spelled with an initial “k” rather than a “c.” The rest of it is subject to regional variation.
Her spelling of “Cumbaya” brings to mind the possibility of a connection to a certain type of “Lifestyle”, such that it conveys an image of a group of people of all races, creeds, and colors joining hands and gittin’ their freak on. 
Hey, you don’t suppose…
Here’s the article on the ‘No Labels’ meeting that will be held on Wednesday;
No Labels Meeting Planned for Next Week
On the Ritter naming thing I can only say this:
I did refer to him by full name in my letter. I would suppose the editor shortened it.
I spent a paragraph pointed out in one letter just what you did (that he won’t refer to me by name) and it was taken out.
And no, he never called to take me out.
Thanks. Is there ANYTHING in the context of that letter as it appeared in the paper to suggest that she was attacking the idea behind the meeting? 'Cos if not, it makes her sound positively Delphic.
Stupid Editor (grumblegrumble)
Stupid Editor (grumblegrumble)
Stupid insincere invitation-profferer (grumblegrumble)
You know who else really liked labeling people…?
well, he did!
Again in the ongoing saga of Jonathan Chance vs the Tea Party folks (known colloquially as Obama=Hitler Guy) I have had a reply printed by our local paper.
Political labeling is simply convenient
The title is unfortunate. I didn’t write it, for God’s sake.
Here’s a like to the thread where I mention her letter.
Obama=Hitler WIFE Enters the Fray!
And, amusingly, Obama=Hitler guy chimed in on the ‘No labels’ thing a few days ago as well:
No Labels not to be taken seriously
Why they BOTH felt a need to weigh in I have no idea. But there it is.
Unfortunately you handed them the title in your last paragraph. You might have made a better choice of wording like, “Labels are an expedience”. You would have an additional benefit of about half the readers not having a clue what that means. 
I must disagree with what you said in the first paragraph, “…passion itself must be informed with knowledge.” It really doesn’t. It SHOULD in some arenas, such as public policy, but in others it passion is almost an end in and of itself.
Of course, if you’re going to be totally accurate in your writing, you will end up with so many qualifiers no one will read far enough to get to your point.
How about, “I have a label for this woman. She’s an idiot!” 
Urgh. This one contains so many fallacies (or so much sophistry, likely unintentional) that it’s close to drivel.
Here’s what I don’t get: do these people have absolutely no sense of proportionality? Your pointing out the immediate jump to Hitler/Stalin comparisons is totally on-point and justified. It’s just baffling to me…
If you write another letter in response to this man, you really ought to include a request that he follow through on that lunch invitation.
Also: what the hell is it with this guy that he can’t include a shout-out to whatever it is that provokes his [del]drivel[/del] musings, so at least it looks like he’s talking about something?
I sure have no control over THEIR behavior! Woo!
I don’t know what they think they’re gaining from it. I’m certainly getting some recognition and respect for replying to them, though.
If Kevin would at least invite me to that lunch I could begin educating him on how to make my job difficult, at least.
After discussing it with Jonathan Chance, we decided to make the saga its own thread, which he will update as events unfold. I have thus merged all the threads together and renamed the new entity.