[Vision2020] Archies on the Square

[Chasuk]

> Once it was explained to him, the appropriate reaction was not to yell
> at the person on the other end of the phone.

So, an incompetent caregiver phones his business and expects an
apology for a problem that he (the caregiver) caused, and anger isn't
a reasonable response?  Two faux pas occurred; the first being Tom
Hopper's impertinent phone call, the second being Jim Johnson's
unfortunate reaction.  If Hopper had not been an ass, he would have
apologized as soon as he realized that Johnson was unaware of Dan's
disability.  The course of events would then likely have included a
reciprocal apology by Johnson.

Johnson's crime was more lack of eloquence than anything else.  He has
explained this, but the lure of conspicuous righteousness has proven
more important than truth or charity.

I'm going to swear in the next two paragraphs.  For those who can't
handle it, skip ahead, or avert your eyes.

Jim might have said: "How was I supposed to know he was disabled?  He
wasn't wearing a fucking sign around his neck!"  It isn't surprising
that a self-confessed inarticulate man utters instead something which
approaches that meaning but is less acceptably expressed.

I am not a Christian, as I have made clear on numerous occasions, but
I do believe in interpreting the words of  those with whom I am in
disagreement CHARITABLY.  If Johnson had yelled to Hopper, while he
and Dan were still in the restaurant, 'Get that fucking retarded freak
out of here!" then a charitable interpretation would obviously be
difficult.  However, that is not what Johnson yelled.  Further, the
outburst occurred after the main event, and was the result of
considerable provocation.  Hopper's own ineptitude was the cause.

This has been explained ad nauseum, and I am not inclined to explain
it again.  The simple fact is that sanctimoniousness bullyboys have
crucified a man for losing his temper and expressing himself poorly.

For the first time in 10 years, I feel shame for living in Moscow.