A noteworthy exchange between Liz Mandelman and an observant commenter…


Matt says:
August 8, 2009 at 12:41 am
Elizabeth

In this story, Donna mentions an abusive ex-husband who had a worse temperment than her father.

Yet, on her personal blog at http://blogdc.donnacarrick.com when talking about her history with domestic violence she only mentions her father. In fact, in an earlier blog posting where she is discussing gun control she posted the following:

“I am not anti-American. My ex-husband, a gentle man, was born in Louisiana. Despite his non-violent nature he believed, as do many Americans, that an armed population is a free population, and that only by remaining armed can a population expect to remain free.”

Why no mention of the abusive ex husband on her personal blog? It may lead a sceptical person to ask if she used some of her writing skills to create one for your blog.

Elizabeth Mandelman says:
August 8, 2009 at 7:57 am
Matt, If you had read the narrative with open eyes rather then skepticism from the start, you wouldn’t be making such an offensive accusation. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that he stalked her for years, and she’s had to make sure he’s unable to find her, whether that’s in person or on the web. Or maybe it’s because talking about the abuse of her father was difficult enough for Donna. Whatever the reason, you have no right

Karen says:
August 8, 2009 at 10:17 am
Actually Elizabeth, Matt DOES have the right to question the facts of Ms. Carricks story. We have freedom of speech in Canada, just like you do in your native USA. And as you have pointed out in an earlier entry here, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

You didn’t answer the question.

On her blog, her ex-husband is described as gentle and non-violent.

On your blog, he is described as a drug and alcohol abuser, more violent than her father.

So by your assertion, it was too difficult to talk about on her blog about 10 days ago, but not too difficult to talk about her ex-husband on your blog in an attempt to bolster your opinions.

Matt says:
August 8, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Really Elizabeth, ENOUGH with your theatrics and “outrage.”

So you think my “accusation” is offensive? First off, it was not an “accusation” but a question about a rather glaring discrepancy between the two versions of the same story.

What I find offensive is that you, as an American, think you have the right to come to my country and tell me or anyone else what we do or do not have the right to comment on.

Now to your point about Ms. Carrick still being scared about being stalked either in person or on the web, by her abusive ex-husband. I’m afraid you’ll have to come up with a better reason than that to explain away the glaring discrepancy. Because if that was indeed the reason,the question then becomes WHY ON EARTH WOULD SHE:

a) Open her own personal blog on the internet using her real name;
b) Use that blog to tell everyone about herself;
c) Post pictures of herself, her husband and children on that blog;
d) Let everyone know not only what city she lives in, but also the area where she has a rural residence;
e) Come to your blog and post details about what this person who stalked her did to her.

These really don’t sound like the actions of someone who is afraid of an abusive ex-husband/stalker finding her.

Elizabeth Mandelman says:
August 9, 2009 at 5:29 am
Karen, The ex-husband she describes as gentle and non-violent is her second. Her first husband, whom she was involved with at the age of seventeen (as described in her ‘questionable’ story), was abusive. Donna included the fact that she had been married two times prior to her current marriage, but it’s the one sentence I deleted, as I can only imagine what the pro-gun community would say to her about that. After seeing people on gunnutz talk about the recent shooting in Pittsburgh and say “I wonder what some woman did to him to make him shoot a bunch,” I was weary of the reaction she’d get. The pro gun community is one of the most paranoid bunch of people I’ve ever encountered in my life, and obviously the reason you find it necessary to bring guns to places like the grocery store or restaurants.

Elizabeth Mandelman says:
August 9, 2009 at 5:36 am
Matt, Refer to the comment I left in response to Karen’s comment. And yes, Matt, your accusation is offensive, not to mention another unfortunate and unfair attempt to discredit a credible person

Matt says:
August 9, 2009 at 8:20 am
Hold on a second Elizabeth

You consider asking a question about apparent discrepancies between to postings of the same story an “unfair attempt to discredit a creditable person?”

I call it an attempt to seek clarification. I call it an attempt to seek the truth.

Am I to assume that you always accept what is put in front of you without question?. Unfortunately for you, I and many others here have not lost the ability to think for ourselves.

 
As a budding policy wonk in the US and on the global stage?
Mzzzzzzz. Mandelman is doing an excellent job of shooting herself in the butt.
Don't Tread On Me

Advertisements

About CGN Nightmare

I've been around the block enough to not care about PC idiocy. My writings may cause manginal irritation. That is YOUR problem.
This entry was posted in Educating the Public, Fighting the Propaganda, Gun Control is a Mental Disorder, Socialists - Know the enemy of freedom and decency and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s