You know, if that happened, I might feel sorry for the Saudis for the first time in my life?

Don't read them. I got put off during the heroin chic/waif-ware craze when one editor or other scolded readers for saying that the models were too thin by saying that they ate like horses.

In other words, we were BAD to say anything.

So I stopped reading them. Now, if they're at a hairdresser, I'll pick one up, flip through it, and put it back down.

Less said the better.

...flashing the country while wearing a Burberry.

Shut it DOWN.

T.S. Eliot calls it Erhebung, a kind of rising exhilaration, in his Four Quartets.

You've got it? Cherish it for what it is. It will come when it does, and if you lose it, you'll try to regret it.

Enjoy the moment and get on with your life.

That's a lot of rationalization, name-calling, and bragging.

I think I'll call BS too.

Where's your tin-foil hat?

Those were some of the silliest generalizations I've ever seen.

Well, kidservative is ENTITLED to use words like that. He's not female, so why not use "pussies"? Isn't as if he has to be PC. Au contraire, he gets to bait people who aren't supposed to react because that would be PC. He gets to say "libtard" because he's smart (if you don't believe it, ask him) and, of course, it's always okay to smear the disabled (NOT) who cannot defend themselves verbally, not to mention liberals and, again, he's not PC.

"Democrat party"? Oh God, is that stupidity from back in Roosevelt's day still around? Boring.

The thing is: this sort of language has poisoned the environment. What's happened is that the people he's tried to take down have avoided reacting for fear of other charges such as vitriol, not being grown up, and we're talking IDEAS.

I see that as a double standard.

If it's too hot for kidservative and some of the other beneficiaries of this verbal double standard, get out of the kitchen. Or appoint brightstar or MMM or one of the others as your proxy.

Now that you've invoked the dread "English Teacher" spectre, are people who've gotten tired of people like kidservative calling people names and using shoddy logic and, in general, flouncing about like an egotistical ideologue (jg) and have decided to treat him to a dose of his own medicine supposed to shrivel up and shut up?

Not a chance. Besides, anyone who invokes Samuel Johnson deserves whatever he gets. English orthography codified a great deal since Johnson's day, although Netspeak is shaking it up considerably. Today, he's remembered for biographies and aphorisms that get quoted in an attempt to prove a point. Besides, ANY academic or former academic would tell you that Wikipedia is fallible and not an acceptable source.

Just talking ideas, just as you requested. For example, the idea that conservatives of any age have been able to pollute the linguistic environment, but when other people take action, that is "vitriol." Do you know what Vitriol is? It's H2S04. Not being a computer expert, I can't do the subscripts. It's -acid-. It's also the word at Salon by people who get tired of people who've gotten tired of the double standard.

But in this case, "vitriol" is the acid test -- eating away at the fog of rhetoric and vituperation.

You used wikipedia for the definition of "ad hominem." As soon as you did that, kidservative promptly called someone "granny." Do you want to try "ad feminam" -- even though the rhetorical technique does use the masculine noun?

Here's another: the "tu quoque," which translates very roughly as "I know you are, but what am I." kidservative is more than adequate at this one. -I- spoil words. Another woman is -projecting-. It's never him.

Tsk. I thought conservatives were supposed to Take Responsibility for their actions (oops, orthographic error, but adapted for Netspeak). kidservative simply twists ideas.

Oh, and your own "discuss ideas"? How come you have ideas and I have vitriol? Mind you, I don't mind having vitriol. In alchemical terms, it was thought of as the philosopher's stone.

Hey, don't I wish?!

Are these enough ideas, whether or not you like them?

This time you made even less sense than usual. Yes, I analyzed your text, and it didn't stand up. Neither do you. It was a great rant, though: that your negative connotations were a fact, but I'd "spoiled the word" and was jealous.

WHAT kind of logic is that? Didn't they teach you in Baby Bigot 101 that presenting an emotionally held view as fact doesn't work? No, probably didn't. They probably told you that if you yelled loudly enough, you might not be outed.

Ooops. Caught you. Maybe you need a refresher course. Older and meaner types have tried this. It doesn't work. If it doesn't work for the people you follow -- and Palin's verbal messes are great example -- it's not going to work for ideological cannon fodder like you.

Some of us think it's pretty penny-ante. I know I do.

I was college faculty many years ago. I was damn good at what I did. I'm afraid I can't say that about you.

His Holiness the Pope just HAD his innings with Obama on such things as a woman's right to choose (he's agin it).

Your choice of adjectives is unlikely to be accurate. :)