I read an article by a Roman Catholic theologian who wryly observed that the quality of Western atheism had gone steadily downhill since Nietzsche.

Oh god not another one of these lame JOan Walsh religion apologetics. I got through the first page of O'Hehir's piece and saw that the insult-argument-ratio was an undefined quantity so I haven't yet bothered reading the rest.

But let's take this claim I have quoted here. It's a crock. Nietzsche was a very lively writer but his arguments don't hold a candle to the Mackies, Flews, Ayers etc. who came after him. The 20th Century is clearly the HIGH point of atheistic argumentation. In fact, it is so good that anyone who is not persuaded deserves to instantly lose intellectual credibility.

Literally!

Glenn's typically devastating analysis leads to at least one conclusion: Brian Ross has no credibility as a journalist.

That should be devastating to a journalist's career but not among today's media whores. Seriously, after crying wolf so many times, why would anyone believe a story peddled by Brian Ross? The guy simply doesn't know how to do investigative journalism. He is constantly getting played.

And interstingly, his errors are not random. They are always beneficial to the same political faction. Fairly unbalanced, as they say.

He can vote with us if he wants to but I look forward to seeing that opportunistic, grandstanding, little asswipe get his ass handed to him in the primary.

Well under George Bush the sun rose 2,920 days in a row -- a perfect record!

C'mon, y'all. Get over yourselves. You DON'T have any "secret knowledge".

Warning: Garrison Keillor's fatuous column may be hazardous to your moral health.

They tortured people. They KILLED people by torturing them to death.

Your views are morally degenerate and counterproductive. Does letting bygones be bygones work? No.

Insetad it encourages more of the same and worse. We let bygones be bygones with Nixon and we got Iran-Contra. We let bygones be bygones with Iran-Contra and we got a WND hoax that led to an illegal war of aggression that got a million people killed in Iraq and led to the use of torture and torture-induced murder.

And you want to let bygones be bygones?

Sorry Garrison. You're a friendly, homespun guy, but I got four words for you: shut the fuck up.

Seriously, his cloying sentimentality and provincial schtick always struck me as unbelievably lame. And surprise, surprise the lame guy has a lame position on a public policy question that serves the dominant power structure. No one could have seen that coming.

Yeah, I'm a fanboy. So what? Glenn is like an addition to my own brain. I can be a lazy fuck but Greenwald will do all the work for me, the same way I would have done it myself.

Thanks again Glenn for telling it like it is.

yeah, I'm not a fanboy. So what? Shooter, you're really not convincing.

Even if he occasionally asks a good question, he's nothing to be proud of. I wrote him off after reading his biased anti-Gore coverage of the stolen presidential election of 2000.

I tried to tell everyone I knew.

Here's what Wikipedia says about Hamilton:

"As chairman of the Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran, Hamilton chose not to investigate President Ronald Reagan or President George H. W. Bush, stating that he did not think it would be "good for the country" to put the public through another impeachment trial."

He proved his bad judgment there. It was precisely that kind of decision that led to George W. Bush.

And Sandra O'Connor? You mean the woman who helped engineer the stolen presidential election of 2000 that led directly to, well, George W. Bush?

Nuh-uh.

If there is an investigation and it is led by Hamilton and O'Connor that means it is a WHITEWASH faux-investigation. That would only make things worse.

I lost a line in that previous post.

The first line should have been: Don't blame me.