Shelley, thanks for the kind words, but Glenn's dismissive response, believe it or not, was welcome by me because it identified the issue for him, and allowed me to address it. I sent him pushback via private email and a short thread ensued, I told him I had been writing about political issues publicly since the inception of DaveNet in 1994. Glenn's politics and mine don't match up, but he has style and class, and a thick skin, and I admire that.

Dave, I'm glad you rec'd resolution from Glenn Reynolds and, hopefully, an apology. However, I do not share your high opinion of Reynold's class or style. As for a thick skin, my brief dealings with him don't necessarily show him as thick or thin skinned. Time will tell.

Actual case in point is the recent cross-blow with Eric Olsen and Reynolds not linking to my argument or other non-warbloggers.

Yet today he links to another of my postings in a out of context manner and with accompanying material that one could interpret as being condescending.

However, the man controls the flow of discourse and little I can do about this.

Thanks for the compliment, Shelley.

It's really easy to be "intelligent," having inherited that trait, but I've had to work hard to gain empathy, particularly since I've been known to have a temper, just like someone else whose blog I read regularly.

Loren

Loren, you couldn't possibly mean me (*batting eyelashes*), could you?

Speaking of which -- to all my virtual neighbors (i.e. blogroll buddies) I wasn't thinking of any of you when I wrote this. Just so you know. Don't hit me.

Intelliwhatsia?

Hmm. I read Loren's blog too. Now why did I assume that Loren was female???

Gee, maybe it's that ambivalent name that accounts for my empathy. Perhaps my mother had a premonition that I would need something to counteract my temper.

But don't feel too bad, Elaine. The college where I graduated in ROTC before they accepted women officers still puts MS in front of my name. I'm used to it.

Loren

Shelley, I think pseudo-intellectual is the word your looking for. Loren quite excellently points to empathy as a requisite characteristic of the intellectual (not that he puts it that way), a natural consequence of being well educated, well read, and thoughtful and alert, other characteristics of the real intelligentsia of all cultures, a group of folks I have at times shared a room with, but do not have the least pretentions to be a member of. I believe you flatter Glenn unnecessarily by using the term.

All bloggers make "vague, general statements" and "analogies, not arguments" from time to time. None of us maintain the level of rigor that one would in a scholarly article or a dissertation defense. It's inherent in the medium. Blogposts are comparatively brief, even the long ones, and bloggers shoot from the hip. Dave, I think, didn't intend his original post as a logical critique of warbloggers' arguments, but as an observation about their tone and demeanor.

Three days after complaining about Dave's "inapt analogies about playgrounds and bullies," Glenn Reynolds responded to Adrian Hamilton 's Independent column as follows: "You and which army?" If that isn't a playground taunt, I don't know what is.

Michael, I think you're right. Psuedo-intellectual is a better term. I know that intellegentsia is actually a complimentary term, but to me, it's always had negative connotations.

And Alan, you're correct, too. Interesting comment you pointed out.

I think that I had one of the most honest answers I've seen from Glenn Reynolds associated to the post titled "Wow, thanks, Glenn."

I suppose you could define intelligentsia as those who have to make a living being thoughtful and an having an authoritative opinion on things. It's like being on stage 8 times a week: sometimes you got it, sometimes you have to fake it, but the show must go on, and you need to weave yourself some kind of aura of intimidating greatness so that folks don't call you on it when you are being full of it. Blogs tend to get boring when the blogger starts to feel the pressure of being on, or gets a bee in her bonnet about going "pro" blogger, or for some other reasons stops just passing along what they know and their opinions based on where they stand in the scheme of things, content to add their two-cents worth to the communal pile in hopes it might add up to a dollar someday. Mostly, it seems like a matter of etiquette here: you can call someone on missing the point without implying their inferiority to you or otherwise being rude and uncollegial, I think. I was never comfortable myself with the whole "flaming" phenomenon for this reason.

*snort*