Brian Kotowski: Angry Left


I wish to express my gratitude for Christopher Lohmann's anti-Ann Coulter tirade, as it helpfully spotlights the Angry Left in its natural habitat.

Mr. Lohmann indignantly bristles at the suggestion that he is taking a stab at censorship. A quick surf over to reveals the following definition for censorship: deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances.

It would appear that that is precisely what Mr. Lohmann is trying to accomplish, with his initiative to levy "punishment against owners, employees and co-workers," regardless of whether they agree with him.

The greatest failing of Socialism, and of collectivism in general, is that it demands conformity. Those who refuse to conform must be "punished" - even if it penalizes those who may be happily in lockstep with collectivist orthodoxy. The American left is one of the most aggressive purveyors of this malevolent doctrine, and Mr. Lohmann reveals his true colors with his attempt to deploy it here in Steamboat.

I am an occasional participant in the Steamboat Pilot & Today's online reader forum, where the Ann Coulter vs. Maureen Dowd issue has been discussed at length. My impression is that the Steamboat Pilot & Today's decision to run Ann Coulter's column was the result, at least in part, of reader demand.

What others in Steamboat wish to read in their community publication is clearly of no consequence to Mr. Lohmann. They are at odds with his own elitist dogma, and must be "punished" until they submit to his vision of what is appropriate.

Mr. Lohmann is free to ignore Ms. Coulter's presence in the Steamboat Pilot & Today, of course (just as I am free to ignore Maureen Dowd's column on the same page), but he evidently believes angry browbeating to be the better part of valor.

I am optimistic that the grownups among us will win the day.

Brian Kotowski

Routt County


OneFly 9 years, 6 months ago

Yes I do get a bit annoyed when this country invades another for lies. Since I'm so malevolent it's my fault and I just don't understand the big picture I guess like Regressives do. The same old crap, fear and smear.


OneFly 9 years, 6 months ago

I grasp things just fine better than most actually. I hear bananas are really good this time a year.


JazzSlave 9 years, 6 months ago

OK, I'll bite.

What were the "lies", and who told them?


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago

Sure, why bother defending or supporting your assertions? Leveling accusations you are unwilling or unable to substantiate the two most likely reasons would be stupidity, or cowardice.


OneFly 9 years, 5 months ago

Yes it would be quite stupid to get in much of the debate with those of you who support this insanity. I get more enjoyment out of seeing how little it takes for you to spew your hatred. But I keep forgetting with democracy marching forward in Iraq maybe I should have more of an open mind. Coward hardly.


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago

"Coward hardly."

But you don't deny stupidity. Works for me.

Incidentally, how would you characterize someone who talks smack, but won't back it up? Just curious.


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago

One other thing I'm curious about: what portion of Kotowski's letter, and/or the ensuing commentary constitutes "spew[ing] hatred"?


dogd 9 years, 5 months ago


You always seem to go for condescending, but you come off as immature, overconfident, and, just like Coulter, sarcastic.

Here's the news Big Bubba: "The left" comprises only a fraction of the people who wish Axis Annie Coulter would go away. You and she are the sad development in conservative politics: the attack-pig juvenile, The Karl Rove style, and we've all had a chance to see where it leads us-down the toilet.

Jazz, you are obviously Brian. The uninformed and tiresome use of labels, and the self-satisfied attempts to be sarcastic are unmistakably similar. (yeah sure..anybody who dislikes the twisted divisiveness of Coulter must favor collectivism)

The "angry left" that you and Coulter use to describe ALL detractors actually comprises a lot of Republicans and moderates, most of whom are probably more informed and productive citizens than you are.

Please do not use the word "grownup". You ain't there yet.


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago


Another angry little screed from an angry little man. You write:

"Jazz, you are obviously Brian."

Congratulations! You got something right, for once. At least are no longer attributing statements and convictions to me that I have never expressed. Oh, wait you are:

"The "angry left" that you and Coulter use to describe ALL detractors:"

I can't (and don't claim) speak for Coulter personally, I find her tiresome more often than not but I am happy to acknowledge what I do say on behalf of yours truly. You might want to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. My letter to the editor was a specific response to Christopher Lohmann, and his call to boycott the Steamboat Pilot & Today, which would enable him to:

"...instigat[e] punishment against owners, employees and co-workers (many of whom are friends and acquaintances) who have no real options concerning where they advertise."

Even Mr. Lohmann's FRIENDS must pay the price for the SP&T having the temerity to publish opinions with which he disagrees. Mr. Lohmann may or may not be an according-to-Hoyle collectivist, but his zeal to purge a community's only newspaper of a controversial editorialist reeks of collectivist doctrine and tactics. Back to the dictionary:

"Collectivism: The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a central controlling authority."

That definition excludes "ownership and control" of media outlets, but only the deliberately uninformed could be unaware of the role control & suppression of the media has played in every collectivist state from Biblical times to present.

But perhaps you have a point when you excoriate me for using the collectivist "label." "Totalitarian" may have been more appropriate. Even Mr. Lohmann's friends must be punished for transgressing however unwillingly or unwittingly against his worldview. What "label" would YOU append to such an initiative?

Finally, as tiresome as I may occasionally find Coulter, and as "twisted[ly] divisive:" as you believe her to be - at least she is not the documented liar that Maureen Dowd is.

Apparently, Mr. Lohmann (who sings Dowd's praises) finds a proven liar to be preferable to a rabble-rousing talking head. That says more about him (and you, if you share Lohmann's sycophantic ardor for Dowd's "intellect and mental acuity") than it does about me.


dogd 9 years, 5 months ago


I was not really doing much in the way of praising or agreeing with Lohmann. I just feel that YOU are getting a little superior and outspoken beyond what I see as reasonable, whether snakes or Coulter or whatever.

I do not think that Dowd has the same bad effect on the conduct of this nation as does Coulter. Dowd has never really had much effect on the way that I think.

What I fear is that the poisonous Coulter actually steers people away from wanting to engage in a discussion of some pretty reasonable and important fundamental ideas. This is a bad time for that.

I don't have time for much of Dowd or Coulter, but I think the truth is never sacred to EITHER. When Coulter showed up to vote at the wrong precinct in DC. her live quote was not oops, I goofed, but that the election judges were all crackheads.

Little? That seems to be your worst epithet. Got something little that kinda bugs you bubba?


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago


If you're at the point where you find yourself speculating about another man's genetalia, the time has come for you to get help. Or, possibly, just go with the flow and re-locate to San Francisco.

Angry Little Man is not an epithet - it accurately describes the tenor of most of your contributions here (at least, when you're dealing with me). I leave epithets to others - guys like you, for example. Juvenile name-calling and gratuitous insults are your signatures, not mine.


dogd 9 years, 5 months ago


You are the didactic newcomer around here, not me. If anybody should find a new "starter home" in San Francisco it's you pal. As for "epithets", the only name I called you is Brian. The BIG Bubba refers to your standard tendency to characterize anybody who does not agree with you as "little". One of the things which formerly was great about this place was the relative lack of right-threaded or left-threaded wingnuts who figure everybody should hear from them very very often.

You DO call people names who diverge from your point of view. I'd bet Zoomie could put your "Sunshine" and "Sparky" where the sun don't shine if he felt threatened by you. (rattlesnake thread). But all you threaten is civility.

I was (and am) too busy to even re-register for this thing, Jazz, so I envy your leisure. But when you start rhetorically hauling people off to the collective farm ala AJ....

The conclusions you draw, and the amount of protest you spew forth about the word 'little' is as revealing as your usual lack of comment on the actual text of my post.


JazzSlave 9 years, 5 months ago

dogd writes:

"As for "epithets", the only name I called you is Brian. The BIG Bubba refers to your standard tendency to characterize anybody who does not agree with you as "little"."

Wow. Contradictions and lies in only two sentences. Apparently, the "BIG Bubba" doesn't count, because of your infantile "explanation."

Evidently, you've forgotten about our first encounter here. I can only assume that "real-a-snake" means "Brian" in your native tongue. As I recall, you got pretty worked up in that thread, and I am quite certain that "real-a-snake" was among the more benign epithets you came up with. It's too bad the old forum & its archives no longer exist, or I could cite chapter and verse (just as I was able to do the last time you posted lies & misrepresentations about me), and demonstrate for everyone here the lengths you will go to in service of your tantrums, and expose your pretentions of civility for what they truly are.

Can you cite a SINGLE other instance of my using "little" to characterize anyone else in this forum, and thereby highlight my "standard tendency"? Of course you can't, because it's never happened before. dogd lies again! You're good at that: fabricating imagined predispositions and actions based on a single statement.

You write:

"You DO call people names who diverge from your point of view. I'd bet Zoomie could put your "Sunshine" and "Sparky" where the sun don't shine if he felt threatened by you."

Why do you think he would feel "threatened" by me, and believe that you have to speak for how he might feel compelled to retaliate? Why is retaliation even an issue, and why do you bother bringing it up? Zoomie seems a capable, articulate guy. I doubt he needs the likes of you to stand up for him. Why do you feel it necessary to do your angry little man dance on behalf of a stranger? But that's neither here nor there.

When you're right, you're right. I do indulge in name-calling, from time to time. But it's not because someone "diverge[s] from [my] point of view." Typically, it's when people (like you) accuse me of making statements I've never made, and/or prosthletizing on behalf of convictions I have never held. In Zoomie's case, he posted that I was trying to impose an "animal free zone" (not true) and that I advocated killing rattlers "for the hell of it" (damn lie).

As for the text of you remarks, there is little to comment on. Just your standard-issue whining about the manner in which my positions are stated virtually nothing about the substance of those remarks. I'm too "outspoken." Well, goodness gracious me. Please accept my most abject apologies. It was never my intent to bruise your delicate sensibilities (and for the record, those last three sentences are an example of sarcasm which IS a standard tendency of mine; freely admitted and happily owned).


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.