Not only 'florid', Don. It is not Jim's style, but his content that puts backs up. It is not mere 'floridity' constantly to fling accusations of racism, prejudice, bigotry &c, at those who have manifested no signs of any of these erroneous attitudes. It is a simply counterproductive form of abuse on his own part -- an admission that rational argument has failed so that he must fall back on the animadvertive shibboleths of the left to cover his inability to make an actual argumentative point of his own. I am sorry to say that frequently appears to me to be his technique; and if one points that out, one is abused in one's turn for 'defending' those whose views Jim, in his absolute conviction of his own unassailable rightness and morality, has, in his own eyes, so successfully demolished.

I am, as I have said before, constantly reminded of John Gross {I think it was} on the literary critical method of F R Leavis: "that faintly ridiculous air of having triumphantly demonstrated what has merely been vigorously asserted"; together with the apparent [might one almost say 'paranoid'?] conviction that any who do not share his doctrinaire views must be part of some totalitarian conspiracy against what is, to all right-thinking people, the undisputed "good".

~M~