I don’t have to reply to those disingenuous questions, Matt - the answers are already in my post, and in other posts I’ve already made. They’re also in comments on other people’s blogs - with my name and linkback on them. You want an answer? It’s already there. Help yourself.

Surely you have friends who you have a fundamental disagreement with on one issue?

Of course I do! Lots of issues, in fact. When we don’t agree, we can have some stimulating and enjoyable conversations. Sometimes, one of us will actually play devil’s advocate just to stir things up a bit.

However Matt … you seem to have difficulty grasping a few concepts, since they seem to be a recurring theme with you:

You do not seem to understand the difference between a person being able to condemn (or hate) injustice without condemning (or hating) the one(s) who is/are being unjust.

Are you aware that I have friends who happen to be lawyers, or that there are lawyers whom I admire and respect?

And you may feel that there’s “nothing wrong” with someone having a “blanket hatred” of an entire group of people (Dude, that’s scary coming from a lawyer!) but I guess that’s just one more area that you and I will have to disagree on.

I agree with you on posts on lots of other subjects

Really? I’m not aware of which posts those might be. Perhaps they were the fluffy, fuzzy ones in which no opinion whatsoever was expressed …? How long have we “known” each other, Matt? I remember arguing with you on DB’s Med Rants and Rangel MD at least two years ago, and I’m not sure I remember ever seeing a comment you’ve written which I’ve agreed with.

But then again, perhaps you’re right. You’ve mentioned before - I think it was on Dr. Flea’s blog, that if we were to meet, that we would find “each other very pleasant.” It needs to be pointed out though, that if we were to meet, I would still be who I am: what you see is what you get. You, however, would be out in the open for the first time, since I’ve never seen your blog - only the comments you leave on other people’s.

And those comments, Matt … are all I’ve had to go by.

The reason you should reply is because that is what you are claiming and presumably you believe it. If you believe that position has validity, then you ought to be able to explain it. Let me put it another way - if you and I were in a car wreck, and we both claimed the light was green for us, yet I blogged “anonymously” that I knew it was red for me, should you not be able to bring that up? Why should I be insulated from that statement simply because I use a pseudonym?

As for our agreements, I agree with you on posts on lots of other subjects, but your blanket hatred of all those who practice law is where I don’t. Nothing wrong with that. I’m sure face to face we would find each other very pleasant. Surely you have friends who you have a fundamental disagreement with on one issue?

if you prefer a world where you can simply say things and have everyone agree with you

… my, wouldn’t that be dull!

while I agree with much of you say

… you have a very strange way of indicating your “agreement.”

And Matt … why should I reply to questions like:

Why should people feel intimidated if they mean what they say? What are they afraid of? Why would you say something you didn’t mean unless clearly in jest? And if you did mean it, why should you be insulated from its consequences?

… from someone with a chronic case of anonymity? I find it difficult to understand where you even get the cheek to ask such questions! *LOL*

Hey, if you prefer a world where you can simply say things and have everyone agree with you, that’s fine with me. I’ll not bother you then, as while I agree with much of you say, I doubt I, or anyone else, will ever agree with EVERYTHING you say.

My given name is not hidden - and it never has been, however I go by Moof in my daily life away from my blog. My closest friends, my family, and my children all call me Moof, and my grandbabies call me “grammoof.” Using Moof is far more honest than going by Doris, a name I only use when I have to sign some sort of official paperwork.

I guess that anonymity is also something you don’t understand. When I comment on someone else’s blog, I always leave a blog address, whether I’m giving them kudos, or a good roasting. And when they follow the link to this blog address, they’re welcome to search for my “given name” - (and they will find it, along with my address, if they want it) - or to simply reply to me in a blog comment.

I am not anonymous. I personally stand behind whatever I say - wherever I go, and am freely accessible to those whose blogs I’ve commented on. I’m not like some cowards, who snipe at bloggers from the shadows, and then run away before the consequences of their own words catch up with them.

And Matt, I’m not going to touch the “free speech” issue with you. I’m going to sign off on that one by saying that better than a dozen med bloggers have pulled in their welcome mats, or closed down shop completely, in the last few months. Whether you’re aware of it or not, there’s a pervasive feeling of fear and intimidation across the medical blogosphere. That, my friend, is what I’m talking about. I won’t address this subject with you again, so don’t bother trying to goad me, but I didn’t want to completely skirt the issue.

Why aren’t you over on Kevin MD, or DB’s Med Rants? I would think that the posts and comments on those blogs would be far more entertaining for you.

Is your given name Moof?

Good to see you’re being a bit more honest by using your name now.

I’m not going to engage you in battle, since we’re not going to agree. You won’t convince me, and I know better than to try to convince you.

Isn’t it something to have someone recognize you just through your attitude?

Flea’s scenario is no different than if I you and I were involved in a car crash, and each claimed the light we had was green. If I claimed in an “anonymous” blog that I knew mine was red, why should that not be brought out at trial? Short answer - it shouldn’t.

Imagine all you want - the answer is nothing. Reality does not match your paranoia.