From: "Mark" 


"John Cuccia"  wrote in message
news:0nnjg1pnctnuggf28o8ee2i1bhtg9ce5j8{at}4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:53:35 -0500, "Robert G Lewis"
>  wrote:
>
>>Overall I consider you to be rational with some good points. Just too
>>optimistic in regards to the current administration.
>
> Not optimistic so much as willfully naive w/r/t accepting the
> pronouncements of the GOP spin machine.

That really wasn't worth responding to, as you knew when you wrote it John,
but this is such a good response from James Lileks, that I can't resist:
=====
Please get this straight: there are no marching orders. There is no
RoveHive to which everyone buzzes in the morning for a scrap of Royal Jelly
we carry off to our blogs. If there sometimes appears to be a unaniminity
of subject matter, that's because certain ideas appear, flower, bloom, take
root, and spread. Like kudzu. But kudzu is not taking orders from some dark
shrouded mastermind made entirely of cellulose and chlorophyll. If you
honestly think that everyone to the right of Noam Chomsky is part of some
dark soulless cabal dedicated to extirpating all photons and replacing them
with negative matter that strips the flesh from the bones of the poor, I
envy you; the world must make perfect sense.
======

He's got some WMD stuff too:

======
"It may surprise you, but I actually have heard that argument before.
The one about WMDs. Also the one about "shifting rationales."
It's come up from time to time. Consequently they do not leave me
open-mouthed in stunned surprise, unable to craft a response. So it's not
the show-stopper you think it is, alas." 
http://www.lileks.com/screedblog/05/08/082305.html
======

But don't please don't bother to read the rest John, as it is clear that it
is *you* that follows the liberal party-line du jour (du jour, because they
don't seem to last longer than that, as they depend upon whatever the
NYTimes et al. publishes day-to-day).

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5