Rah-rah e-mails sent to the wrong people

So I get this e-mail from a friend of mine. He obviously got it from someone else, and that person did too. It's about ANWR - the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and the controversy over drilling for oil there. The e-mail is obviously for drilling and is trying to convince you that the other side, the people who are against drilling there, are wrong.

But it looks something like this (just an excerpt):

NOW, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE LYING ABOUT ANWR?

REMEMBER WHEN AL GORE SAID THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD WORK TO ARTIFICIALLY RAISE GAS PRICES TO $5.00 A GALLON?

WELL…
AL GORE AND HIS FELLOW DEMOCRATS HAVE ALMOST REACHED THEIR GOAL!

NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LYING,WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

YOU CAN START BY FORWARDING THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW…SO THAT THEY WILL KNOW THE TRUTH.

Yes, in all caps. In that size font. This was my response to my friend.

I have two, somewhat off-topic, problems with this e-mail. I'm responding to you, dear friend, because I don't know (the person who sent it to him) and I think it would be rude to address a stranger. And that person is probably not the original author anyway.

If the authors of this e-mail have such a sound argument (and maybe they do, I'm not well-versed in the topic of drilling in ANWR), why must THEY SHOUT AT US? DOES THIS MAKE MY ARGUMENT LOOK MORE AUTHORITATIVE?

No, it doesn't.

And why, why, why must we resort to the name-calling? I don't go around calling people who disagree with me right-wing nutjobs or anything. By making the argument so obviously biased against a particular party and other certain groups of people, the authors shut it down.

Do they really think I'm going to listen to their argument as they call me a liar? Really? Because I'm pretty sure all those e-mails SHOUTING about the president being an idiotic baby-killer are totally making them give serious consideration about their stance on the war in Iraq, right?

Didn't think so.

But then, this wasn't put together to "educate" the general public, was it? This is to send to people who already agree with them. If not directly on ANWR then on their opinion about those "liars."

Sigh. Because it's so mean-spirited, I don't even feel compelled to look into their argument for validity. Someone like me reads this and thinks, "Ugh. What a jerk." And I'll bet you a dollar to a doughnut that the people they want to read it are thinking, "Heh heh. Stupid liberals." And not much more.

Aren't you glad you sent me this e-mail? :) Thanks for reading my little rant.