Ronald Reagan died last week. I didn’t happen to mention that fact in last Friday’s free edition — which “naturally” brought a grumpy complaint from Jeffrey in Florida:
I thought you were a class act. I have read your free version for a couple years now, was about to upgrade to premium for my Wife’s birthday… but no longer. You are going to say that this is overly sensitive, but I don’t think it is. Your failure to even mention the passing of President Reagan in your weekly newsletter establishes once and for all that you do indeed have a political agenda. I have defended you in the past, despite the fact that your stories slamming conservatives always outnumber (and outplace) ones which gently chide liberals… the stuff you come up with is by and large so good I had blinders on. But now you have spoken volumes more with your silence than you ever did with your verbiage. I am disappointed that you let your partisanship stand in the way of paying even the slightest respect to a man who I am sure a great many of your readers idolize. My next email unsubscribes.
If True was indeed a partisan political publication, and a liberal one at that, why wouldn’t I have used my bully pulpit to lash out at Reagan? That would be proof that I have “a political agenda.” That I didn’t do so is indeed proof True is not political, let alone partisan.
I do mostly respect Reagan, and took most of Thursday off to watch his procession and state funeral, but who cares what I think about him? Yeah, I could have given space on Friday, nearly a week after he died, to mention Reagan’s passing — but that would be political indeed, jumping on a bandwagon about something everyone already knew about. That’s not what True does, and never has.
But I did have a one-sentence mention that Ray Charles died, even though was wasn’t featured in the Honorary Unsubscribe in that issue. Why? He only died the day before — in the middle of wall-to-wall Reagan coverage. I got several notes from people who found out about his death in True Friday. Everyone already knew about Reagan’s death, and appreciated that someone took the effort to tell them something they didn’t already know.
As for Jeffrey’s “and GOSH, I was THIS CLOSE to upgrading!”, yeah yeah yeah. People pull that all the time, as if hearing that will change my mind. Yeah, sure — I’m really going to sell out for a few bucks. Sorry, but I don’t believe that he was reaching for his wallet. And Jeffrey crows he “defended me”? I think I have sufficient grounds for appeal….
Is there more conservative bashing at the moment than liberal bashing in True? Well yeah! Who’s in power? We have a Republican president, a Republican-controlled Senate, and a Republican-controlled House of Representatives for the first time in how long? And he’s surprised that there’s more commentary about conservative politics? Hello?
When Clinton was in power, it was exactly opposite (duh!) So much so that I got lots of complaints that I was a “Rush Limbaugh conservative.” Anyone who thinks about it ought to understand that I of course talk about stupid things that are in the news now, regardless of the culprits’ political affiliation. I wouldn’t have it any other way, and neither would most readers. To think otherwise is — yep — just plain stupid.
- - -
This page is an example of Randy Cassingham’s style of “Thought-Provoking Entertainment”. His This is True is an email newsletter that uses “weird news” as a vehicle to explore the human condition in an entertaining way. If that sounds good, click here to open a subscribe form.
To really support This is True, you’re invited to sign up for a subscription to the much-expanded “Premium” edition:
Q: Why would I want to pay more than the regular rate?
A: To support the publication to help it thrive and stay online: this kind of support means less future need for price increases (and smaller increases when they do happen), which enables more people to upgrade. This option was requested by existing Premium subscribers.