But maybe I can have the last word.

I'm sick to death of hearing "reasonable" "liberals" patiently explain that Bush is not an idiot or a sociopath . . . and that labelling him as an idiot or sociopath is counterproductive and discrediting.

He is an idiot.

He is a sociopath.

And I, for one, think there's value in calling a spade a spade here. How are we to discourage idiotic and sociopathic behaviors when we aren't allowed to identify instances of willful idiocy and sociopathy?

A substantial portion of this country thinks -- and announces, constantly -- that I and my friends are wicked sinners who are going to burn for all eternity in hell (after we spend a lifetime trying to destroy America). And I'm not allowed to call Bush a sociopath?

And to the people who have, in that teacher's-pet tone I can't stand, pointed out that "Draper is only stating the obvious -- that Bush is a human being": I think the frustration you're hearing from other commenters here is the shocked recognition that Bush is not as much of a human being as we would like him to be. His policies on torture, for instance -- and his glibness when confronted with the disasters he has caused at home (New Orleans . . . ignoring the "Osama Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." memorandum) and abroad (take your pick) . . . these are not evidence of "humanity" as we use the term in daily life.

Inhumanity should be condemned when it occurs in humans.

By the way, I assign some ofthe blame for all of this to liberalism -- specifically the touchy-feely education reforms that insisted that "smart" was no better than "dumb," that children and, I guess, adults) shouldn't be stigmatized for their lack of intellectual discipline and -- yes -- incuriosity. Smart is, in fact, better than dumb. Educated is better than ignorant.

And, again:

1) Bush is an idiot.

2) Bush is a sociopath.

and

3) Inhumanity should be condemned when it occurs in humans.

I hope Kathy Griffin doesn't eventually issue the standard apology -- though I'm sure she will.

The only thing more exhausted than literal-mindedness is faux literal-mindedness. When will it cease to be cool for adults to pretend to be slow-witted children?

2 Qs: Would Jesus really be pissed off about Kathy Griffin's quip? Would Mohammed be pissed off about some irreverent editorial cartoons? My own readings of the New Testament and the Quran make me think both answers are no.

PS: You're right, Glenn: Opus = woefully unfunny. Those lame Mohammed cartoons, too. Not funny.

"watching MTV throw this bleeding hippopotamus"

Also, Sonia, sorry about that weird "well said" echo. I must have posted right after you did. I swear, I wasn't stealing your heading!

"Ur-nightmare" is exactly right; watching MTV's throw this bleeding hippopotamus to the piranha reminded me of the famous prom scene from "Carrie." In real life, of course, the bloodied and humiliated prey doesn't get to set the world on fire via telekinesis. (And it's probably for the best that Britney Spears doesn't have telekinetic powers.)

I second, also, the comment that Britney looked just fine in a bikini. It seems odd to me that there's now a 1.38 lb. weight range that women are allowed to inhabit; sink too low and the "concern" trolls will set upon them with "well-meaning" speculation about their anorexia; bob above the upper limit, and they'll be castigated for being "fat." It also seems to me that a lot of these rules are being created and enforced by other women; the truth is, any frat guy would be licking his chops if he ran into "fat Britney" on the beach.

In conclusion: blecch.

Whoa -- obviously, I don't have the hang of this whole formatting thing. (The slender column at the bottom of that last post was my own comment; the stuff before it was quoted.)

Biographer Robert Draper explains that Bush has a surprising intellect but is incapable of curiosity and owning up to mistakes.

Nick R.:

Sorry - if you lack curiosity and are not self-aware, you are not intelligent - bottom line. Enough of this garbage ... Bush has "scruffy charms" only if you believe having an emotionally and intellectually stunted 11 year old for US president is a good thing. Most of the country would disagree.

Nick, word for word, that's the comment I was going to post.

Incuriosity and a strong intellect are mutually exclusive; they don't happen in the same head. If Draper's apology is to work, we'll have to redefine "intellectual" in a more Bush-friendly way . . . much as the Dems have helpfully redefined terms like "torture," "spying," and "criminal trial."