I committed to speaking out against twitter bullying and journalists. Having been on the receiving end of a bizarre assault by @vanonselenp last night, I'm doing just that. I apologise if this is a bit long but context is important. If you take the time to read this, thank you. I appreciate your interest.
I responded to a tweet posted by someone I follow that was directed to van Onselen. It read.
"You can't be serious, means testing Dr visits > @vanOnselenP
It's none of the doctor's business how much the patient does or doesn't earn!"
I replied. "@AyesHavit @vanOnselenP That has to rank amongst the 'dumbest' suggestions of all time. True, not their business & how do you administer it".
Now, in the context of doctors doing this which is how it read, it is a dumb suggestion. That's my opinion. Note I didn't call Mr van Onselen dumb, merely the suggestion.
That in turn generated at a reply from Mr van Onselen. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit it was a reference to who would qualify for a Medicare card. Pretty simple really, not done by doctors individually. @Kate3015 @AyesHavit ...and it was the Drs suggestion anyway, not mine. It would be no different to any other means testing Coalition wants"
Fine. Clarification. But then he went on. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit but agree or disagree with it, that's fine. Calling his idea dumb is knee jerk thoughtless frankly."
OK. I concede it was perhaps a tad knee jerk but thoughtless? Remember I was addressing the idea, not the person. We are adults, or so I thought. But I did reply.
"@vanOnselenP @AyesHavit If people pay for Medicare &; have private insurance as well why should they be penalised? @vanOnselenP @AyesHavit I'm over the 'assaults' on certain groups. So if you think that's knee jerk thoughtlessness fine. It's how I feel."
It could have ended there, but that in response I received this. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit exactly what I said to him...the levy would need to be baked into the tax system. Now u are debating like an adult. @Kate3015 @AyesHavit sadly I won't see further adult tweets bc I've blocked so as not to read your other rubbish, sorry. Bye." ..
I responded to a tweet posted by someone I follow that was directed to van Onselen. It read.
"You can't be serious, means testing Dr visits > @vanOnselenP
It's none of the doctor's business how much the patient does or doesn't earn!"
I replied. "@AyesHavit @vanOnselenP That has to rank amongst the 'dumbest' suggestions of all time. True, not their business & how do you administer it".
Now, in the context of doctors doing this which is how it read, it is a dumb suggestion. That's my opinion. Note I didn't call Mr van Onselen dumb, merely the suggestion.
That in turn generated at a reply from Mr van Onselen. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit it was a reference to who would qualify for a Medicare card. Pretty simple really, not done by doctors individually. @Kate3015 @AyesHavit ...and it was the Drs suggestion anyway, not mine. It would be no different to any other means testing Coalition wants"
Fine. Clarification. But then he went on. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit but agree or disagree with it, that's fine. Calling his idea dumb is knee jerk thoughtless frankly."
OK. I concede it was perhaps a tad knee jerk but thoughtless? Remember I was addressing the idea, not the person. We are adults, or so I thought. But I did reply.
"@vanOnselenP @AyesHavit If people pay for Medicare &; have private insurance as well why should they be penalised? @vanOnselenP @AyesHavit I'm over the 'assaults' on certain groups. So if you think that's knee jerk thoughtlessness fine. It's how I feel."
It could have ended there, but that in response I received this. "@Kate3015 @AyesHavit exactly what I said to him...the levy would need to be baked into the tax system. Now u are debating like an adult. @Kate3015 @AyesHavit sadly I won't see further adult tweets bc I've blocked so as not to read your other rubbish, sorry. Bye." ..
What an attempt to belittle that is. "Now U are debating like an adult." Hopefully I always try and debate like an adult. Blocking me so as not to read "my other rubbish!!!"
I should have left it that point, told him to take a flying leap and just walked away. I didn't.....I replied.
"@vanOnselenP @AyesHavit Oh dear Peter you R a bit sensitive &; a tad pompous to block me for what I said. lol hopefully someone will RT 2him."
Well some people did defend me & RT'd. They were also threatened with blocking. Sad.
If Mr van Onselen blocks me. I'm can live with that lol. I'm not a follower, I don't regularly watch his show & I occasionally read his column. But Mr vP didn't block me. But he went on to label me a 'nut-job', accused me of constantly demeaning him (that one stumped me), of belittling journalists (didn't say who) and even condemning JG (not sure where that came from)..my last post on JG referred to whether she'll regret her verbal assault on Ralph Blewitt given the RC. He labelled me a troll and even mentioned to some else who spoke up for me (when he blocked them) that associating with xyz (referring to me I assume) you pick up their bile. Now this is pretty nasty stuff.
I did suggest he had me confused with someone else. You see the last three exchanges I've had with Mr vP were. One earlier this month in response to a question he asked about that vile Abbott T-shirt. Only picked that because of @WDallasBrooks. Unfortunately as a part of that reply I picked up a rather nasty little individual ASSASSINS. Despite the foul language directed at me I thought my replies were fair. They were directed at ASSASSINS not vanOnselen.
"@vanOnselenP @AyesHavit Oh dear Peter you R a bit sensitive &; a tad pompous to block me for what I said. lol hopefully someone will RT 2him."
Well some people did defend me & RT'd. They were also threatened with blocking. Sad.
If Mr van Onselen blocks me. I'm can live with that lol. I'm not a follower, I don't regularly watch his show & I occasionally read his column. But Mr vP didn't block me. But he went on to label me a 'nut-job', accused me of constantly demeaning him (that one stumped me), of belittling journalists (didn't say who) and even condemning JG (not sure where that came from)..my last post on JG referred to whether she'll regret her verbal assault on Ralph Blewitt given the RC. He labelled me a troll and even mentioned to some else who spoke up for me (when he blocked them) that associating with xyz (referring to me I assume) you pick up their bile. Now this is pretty nasty stuff.
I did suggest he had me confused with someone else. You see the last three exchanges I've had with Mr vP were. One earlier this month in response to a question he asked about that vile Abbott T-shirt. Only picked that because of @WDallasBrooks. Unfortunately as a part of that reply I picked up a rather nasty little individual ASSASSINS. Despite the foul language directed at me I thought my replies were fair. They were directed at ASSASSINS not vanOnselen.
They read:
"A comment like that is not worthy of a reply"
"If you are going to comment at least try to sound intelligent. Is that to mush to ask"
- Kate3015 @ASSASSINS_OY @vanOnselenP If you are going to comment at least try to sound intelligent. Is that too much to ask..
- Kate3015 @ASSASSINS_OY @vanOnselenP A comment like that is not worthy of a reply. Goodbye
So there you have it. People do object to what I say at times. That's to be expected. I have strong opinions on many things. However, I try to be professional when expressing them. I wasn't the one labelling people 'nut-jobs'etc. Thank you for reading if you made it this far. As far as Mr vanOnselen goes, I suggest he takes a good look in the mirror. But he's blocked me so he won't get to read this. Please don't copy to him with this or like others he'll probably block you as well.
Now it's time for me to move on.
