About my fascination with another blog

One of the parts of the movie, "My Fair Lady", has Professor Higgins writing to some organization to offer up Eliza Doolittle's father as being one of the great moralists of his time. An uncouth drunkard that otherwise would have been "the fool" of a Shakespearean play. "The fool", mind you, is not so much the one who knows nothing, but the one who can get away with saying the controversial things, sometimes the things which need to be said but can't by anyone else.

Indeed, this theme is evident by the tale of "The Emperor's New Clothes":

So now the Emperor walked under his high canopy in the midst of the procession, through the streets of his capital; and all the people standing by, and those at the windows, cried out, "Oh! How beautiful are our Emperor's new clothes! What a magnificent train there is to the mantle; and how gracefully the scarf hangs!" in short, no one would allow that he could not see these much-admired clothes; because, in doing so, he would have declared himself either a simpleton or unfit for his office. Certainly, none of the Emperor's various suits, had ever made so great an impression, as these invisible ones.

"But the Emperor has nothing at all on!" said a little child.

"Listen to the voice of innocence!" exclaimed his father; and what the child had said was whispered from one to another.

"But he has nothing at all on!" at last cried out all the people. The Emperor was vexed, for he knew that the people were right; but he thought the procession must go on now! And the lords of the bedchamber took greater pains than ever, to appear holding up a train, although, in reality, there was no train to hold.

In the end, perhaps one of the great moralists of my time might actually be the author of the blog "Violent Acres" and with whom I hold respect for calling out her own, so to speak, in her post Atheists are Snobs (Warning: adult language!). It's not so much that I should be biased to believe this one way or another, but that I could easily apply similar rhetoric to zealots of any type, including Christians. Reading her follow-up post, I feel enlightened further. While I doubt I'd be adequate fodder for any of her upcoming parties, I am quite intrigued to agree with her level of snobbery.

Also, I have to smirk a bit at the vitriol that she received on the former post. Not, of course, the mere fact that she received the attacks, but about the same realization that she constantly declares: she's not writing to please her audience. The humorous part, to me, is that snobs don't like being called out. When a radio talking head presented his belief of the thinnest-skinned group of people, those same people practically read him the riot act. Perhaps, on another post, I might be interested to discuss my viewpoints on why being offended should be a time to hold up a mirror instead of pointing a finger.

And VA, if you're reading, thanks for writing.