"...when it supplants rational thought..."    That's certainly a singular observation from one who seems to be virtually entirely governed by his limbic system, has a dial always set on outrage, and is a wonderfully clear example of knee-jerk response other than on the Right. It's truly remarkable how many phrases, concepts etc. call forth apoplectic spluttering from the poster.

I'm sure we're likely to see more quite soon.






Another topic entirely:

The WSJ "opines".    Would that it were so.

Sorry, Amos, I do respect your political views and I appreciate your postings of editorial opinion etc.   But words do matter. The WSJ "opines". I'll have to respectfully disagree.

It's emphatically not the WSJ which "opines" here but Thomas Franks, the resident liberal columnist, possibly put there to stimulate letters to the editor by predictably outraged Republican stalwarts.

There's a sizable difference , to put it mildly, between his views and those of the editors (and editorials).

I love reading his columns. They are well-written and the wit is often delightfully sharp.   But as I have been manfully trying to for years to try to make clear to Mudcatters, there is a huge difference between the WSJ editorials and the reporting. And of course between the editorials and the views of the token liberal columnist, the position Mr. Franks now has the honor of holding.

If anybody would like to point out a criticism of Sarah in the actual WSJ editorials, I'd love to see it.