urnalist, I'll list just three goals: top hats, top hats, top hats.

Posted by: Matt Welch at October 2, 2002 11:01 AM

Uh, he was referring to the lack (in the article) of people on the Left dissenting from the views of Benjamin, Scheer, et al., not to the larger debate.

Posted by: Dan at October 2, 2002 11:05 AM

I don't know about you guys, but I can't WAIT to see Ann Coulter's hysterical rant about Bonior and pals. I'm ready to laugh just thinking about it.

Posted by: Howard Veit at October 2, 2002 01:05 PM

If we'd gone in there on 9/12, THEN maybe there'd be a case that it was just "revenge and retaliation."

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 2, 2002 04:03 PM

And if YOU had been wearing a Top Hat on 9/13, Treacher, THEN maybe you wouldn't be out fondling the private parts of flowers!

Posted by: Matt Welch at October 2, 2002 04:17 PM

Pardon me, Matt. I think I understand your point. If the writer is going to profile the subject or subjects without warts, or at least without real voices behind their counterpoints, he shouldn't then turn around and use unattributed set-up paragraphs to smear the people he didn't bother to represent. Fair enough.
And thank you for the response.

Posted by: Scot Donaldson at October 2, 2002 04:33 PM

Scot -- No problem, sir. If I could write more clearly, we'd all, uh, camp more happily.

Posted by: Matt Welch at October 2, 2002 04:39 PM

Huh? I think I don't know what just happened!

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 2, 2002 05:10 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






/body> document.comments_form.bakecookie[1].checked = true; } //--> /body>