For those (non-political-junkies) without Twitter, what follows is the back and forth between me and Mr. Mandryk, about his column, starting with my original tweet at ~12:40 PM:

wip_of_sk@MMandryk Hubris? Last edition of your paper B4 #skvotes & no chance 4 my response bit.ly/ubLz5I 2U 2B in your paper #skpoli #sk2011
Link

MMandryk@wip_of_sk what is it you'd like to respond to? The column is about respecting the views all candidates put forward. I'd assume you'd agree.
Link

57dana @MMandryk Did you read the response bit.ly/ubLz5I? Are you insinuating I am running for the wrong reason? You only named 5 party's
Link

MMandryk @57dana oh for Pete's sake! No. I don't how you arrived at that conclusion. The column says precisely the opposite. Please re-read it.
Link

57dana@MMandryk 'whether PC, SP, GP, LP, NDP, we shouldn't discount the notion...all motivated by..."the Right Reasons"' No WIP in that list. Why?
Link

MMandryk@57dana it was a sincere omission. No offense intended. Sorry. That said, please understand that I don't take the WIP seriously.
Link

57dana@MMandryk Omitted sincerely? I could accept an apology for a sincere mistake; as your only product is words, your choice of them is telling.
Link

MMandryk@57dana My point, sir, is I don't take umbrage with WIP sincerity or commitment. But like 99.6 of this prov., can't agree with WIP premise.
Link

57dana@MMandryk Unlike 99.999% of this province, sir, you are an influential political columnist. And you dodged the question, omitted sincerely?
Link

MMandryk@57dana bull... What did I dodge? You're on the ballot. You should have been mentioned. But also think WIP is a joke. Honest enough for you?
Link

57dana@MMandryk You're still dodging. Was it "a sincere omission" as you said? Why the apology? Because I should have been mentioned but wasn't?
Link

MMandryk@57dana last tweet was clear. WIP is on the ballot and should have been mentioned in column. But I repeat: I and 99.6 think WIP is a joke.
Link

57dana@MMandryk "The column is about respecting the views all candidates put forward." Voicing your opinion that the WIP is a joke is respectful?
Link

57dana@MMandryk "I don't take umbrage with WIP sincerity or commitment" & "also think WIP is a joke" you do not see the contradiction here?
Link

MMandryk@57dana didn't say a damn thing about you, personally. Believe I said early your beliefs are sincere. I said WIP is a joke. Big difference.
Link

57dana@MMandryk The what was it you were apologizing for?
Link

MMandryk@57dana nope. No contradiction. Was talking about WIP candidates. That should have been obvious. I think WIP party/policies are a joke.
Link

MMandryk @57dana for not including you as an individual with the courage to put forward his views on the ballot. I disagree with your views, but ...
Link

57dana@MMandryk Only thing on the ballot is my name and the name of my party. The electorate relies heavily on the media to expose those views...
Link

MMandryk @57dana WIP not on radar because public think Sask. Independence is stupid. They're right. Not gonna waste ink to convince them otherwise.
Link

57dana@MMandryk And they will not be on the radar if you don't 'waste' ink on them. Most common response I get at doors is "no idea WIP exists"
Link

57dana@MMandryk In '05 or '06 people in the West were polled (by Western Standard) with ~30% showing as open to the idea of independence. Stupid?
Link

MMandryk@57dana either people are being polite or you're not asking: "Do you want Sask to be independent?" People don't take WIP premise seriously.
Link

MMandryk@57dana yep... Western Standard. Please. Here's my deal. If we hold a referendum and you lose, will WIP go away?
Link

57dana@MMandryk The name of the party was chosen to be obvious, and they are polite, open to listening, even if they don't end up voting for us.
Link

57dana@MMandryk "Please"? The Western Standard is (was) a joke to you as well? Here's my deal, you will get a single vote in the referendum.
Link

MMandryk@57dana don't want vote for you, eh? (Hope you're not offended by my Canadian accent. Damn proud of it, though.) Think that might be a clue?
Link

57dana@MMandryk Up to them to decide on their own who to vote for. Up to me to make our case. They all like the idea of a flat tax. A lot.
Link


MMandryk@57dana Somehow I don't think a flat tax is the WIP's defining issue, sir. Spit-balling here, but it might be that independence thing.
Link 

57dana@MMandryk Spit-ball noted. Education tax reform wasn't a defining issue either, but the SP govt. made it happen & the WIP first proposed it
 Link

MMandryk@57dana Look. I believe in One Canada. Our Oly. team needs Ont. forwards and Que. goalies. And 'Riders can't beat West teams.
Link

57dana@MMandryk Fixed election dates wasn't a defining issue either, but again, the WIP proposed it first & SP govt. made it happen.
Link

MMandryk@57dana Now it's YOU ducking, sir. Yes or no? Is the WIP prepared to go into the next Oly. without Crosby and Luongo? Well, without Crosby
Link

57dana@MMandryk No ducking, just can't take sports as seriously as election issues. Yes, no Luongo or Crosby. Can the Oly team win w/o SK players?
Link 

MMandryk@57dana OK, now I know you guys are nuts. Sask. boys can't win on large ice surface with no hitting and European refs. I am appalled.
Link
57dana@MMandryk Give 'em the same amount of time as every other team playing and practicing as a team, no matter the ice or the ref, they'll win.
Link 

There is no further response from Mr. Mandryk after 7:14 PM.

Here's the problem Mr. Mandryk, in your own words, in four sentences:

The column is about respecting the views all candidates put forward.
and
I don't take umbrage with WIP sincerity or commitment.
but
...please understand that I don't take the WIP seriously.
and
...also think WIP is a joke.

That last two are not at all respectful, just honest, and completely negate the first two.

I am (and your readers presumably are) led to believe by you that a candidate should be applauded for the courage to put forward their views, which are not a joke unless they are WIP views, a party you view as a joke, a party you do not take seriously. And when a party you do not view as a joke, that you do take seriously, adopts any of those views then they are presumably no longer a joke and you do take them seriously. Crystal clear Mr. Mandryk.

You of all people should know that words matter, especially coming from an esteemed writer like you, read by people who rely on the media to publicize different party's views for them, no matter who proposes them, or adopts them.