(and you will never know what that means, RZ)
now get a grip, take a pill, and you’ll be welcomed back for interesting discourse, not to be confused with your aforementioned drivel.

@Pedonator: cocksucking dumbass

BTW. So pleased to see RZ off on a tear about AS. So glad it’s not just me.

Oh and also, the headlines: excellent. ‘Qudzu’? Superdoubleplus.

/cloud of flies gathering over horse carcass

Yer a class act, Noj. No shit.

What puts somebody irrevocably beyond the pale? If O’Reilly really turned a corner, would I find myself respecting him a year from now? Two years? Was Teddy’s later service enough for us to forgive Chappaquiddick? Those Southern politicians who disavowed their Jim Crow pasts — do we let them off the hook?

Here’s where some would go Jesuit: Fine, but what about Nazis? But extremes don’t prove the point they’re intended to. Gray areas are the tough calls.

And besides, I’d probably just sing a Tom Lehrer song in response.

As for the “class,” well, you’ve been around long enough to deserve more than a quick comeback, even if I didn’t hit all the bullet points. And the late-to-the-party line stems from a question I’m always asking myself: If I wasn’t blogging, would I give a shit about this issue? Would I really care that some buffoon from a rag I never read said something egregious? Sometimes you have to go there (deadlines is deadlines), but I’m happier when I’m addressing something that has a practical consequence, even if it’s the next tea party on the calendar.

In any case, I don’t mind at all being challenged — that comes with the turf. And it’s interesting being challenged from the left on what is, in effect if not in purpose, a lefty blog. I like being interested.

Mark my words, if these same people are allowed to remain in our public discourse, with their reputations unsullied (heh, that is just a great word to use on this topic, I guess I am the one millionth person to figure that out), then they will be cheering on the next war within a decade or so.

But I know its a really poorly defined line, when does linking to these bastards make one a total traitor!!11! and when should it be acceptable. At the same time, if there is no price to be paid for cheer-leading a total failure of a war, then we will never get anywhere, that’s for freaking sure.

Anyway, you have handled this with total class, not easy I would assume, on your own site. Thanks for that. I tried pretty hard not to insult you, (I don’t feel anger towards you or even a heck of a lot of emotion about this issue, I just think its a serious problem that we have to solve), just Sully, but perhaps we could find a little slight or comment that could bring offense (the comment about how long you have been reading Sully was just intended to make the facts clear, I have been blogging for even a shorter period of time than you have, I certainly did not mean you were somehow late to a party). Sorry if that is the case.

And SFL’s perhaps intemperate comments are understandable, given the close relationship and friendship between you.

Like I said, its that time, take care and good luck going forward. See ya.

I’m not obligated to engage every point you make. And you’re just as free to insist that I do. And either of us, at any time, can decide that we’re just talking past each other.

I’m also not interested in winning arguments. I am, however, interested in the perspective of those I disagree with. Yours is becoming clear, and it’s not my place to dissuade you; I find it more interesting to understand you.

I have no interest in “defending” Sully. I find what he does very useful, and yes, I find his conversation honest. Which isn’t to say that I hang on his every word about atheism and religion, to take a recent example — usually I ignore it, since that’s among the most pointless topics imaginable. And when he blockquotes Megan and others, that’s precisely the point — that’s the digest of the chattering class. One-stop shopping.

I could care less about most of the chattering class, by the way. I’m not personally interested in the sins committed by the WaPo editorial page. But since I’ve taken it upon myself to crank out a post every morning, I like to know what’s happening out there.

Your reference to Roy is interesting, since I recently touched on the very UT scientist at issue there. Yes: Sully was wrong. He worked up a deliberately misreported out-of-context passage in a 36-page paper into a “Lefties are crazy too” post. Fine. I never said I felt compelled to agree with him, and it’s fair to use that as a counterexample to “honest broker”.

And yes, I am late to the game. I’m an Accidental Blogger. I pay more attention to the bloviators now that I normally would because I have to crank out a post every morning. I knew Sully by reputation before, but I never felt compelled to actually pay attention to him — or many, many others. It’s so much Crossfire out there, everyone shouting at each other — on both sides — just to hear themselves.

But again, in the time I’ve been following Sully, I’ve found him very useful, with a refreshing minimum of cant. And if, for some reason, I ever stop blogging, I’ll start ignoring him again.