And there's no getting around it.

What we know about anus-moose so far (that's relevant):

1) Believes in a reality composed almost entirely of words and what they mean to him at any given point in time.

2) Believes in a dual universe of dark and light, not realizing that either light makes dark possible, or the other way around. Like many, he speaks of the former, but lives the latter.

3) Anus-Moose's binary thinking extends to his moral and philosophical convictions galore. Either everything a person says is evil, or it is good. Perhaps this is due to his lack of grey matter. He can fake ambivalence, but his binary-addled intellect demands that he take a stand no matter how self-defeating or contradictory that position actually is.

4) Anus Moose can not bare to gaze at his own moral repugnance and, instead, projects that ugliness onto targets both willing and unwilling, rather than simply taking responsibility for his own problems.

5) It would be unfair to characterize Anus Moose as an individual who comprehends a value greater than 4, his emotional age, so we will the count at a manageable 4.

...I'm here.

"Vile," is not in a five year old's vocabulary. But I guess that doesn't matter as long as I'm wrong and you're right.

I'd say that this suggests I hit a nerve, but that would presume that you have a human nervous system. Demonstrably, you do not.

Why anyone bothered to hatch you at the zoo one can only imagine.

Go someplace quiet and evolve. Or subdivide. Whatever it is your kind does.

If I was so damn "funny," I'd have more company than you to spar with.

Admit it to yourself, single-celled organism with ED, I am a guilty pleasure left over from your YEARS of working on your "daddy" issues to no avail.

The real joke is Salon and a cabal of its writers who have not only sipped, but guzzled, the KoolAid.

Amazing how out of 500 million spermatazoa, you were the winner. Obviously a merciful god took pity on a world filled with serious thinkers and gave us you that we might feel better about ourselves.

On more than one count.

It is sad that Salon, as a publication, has lost the lustre that used to feature writers like Joe Conason and Sid Blumenthal. Now these writers must take a back seat to the rest of a popular "culture" that includes gossip columnists who skewer otherwise unsuspecting human beings with unbalanced hit pieces, or attempt to increase their lagging credibility by making fun of sick people.

Putrid, proto-Nazi reverence to a main stream media whose wheels have long since come off the proverbial wagon.

That you continue to sit behind your toob and portend to defend this tripe speaks precisely at who is slow in the uptake. Perhaps even retarded in some pathological manner.

An admission of your own profound emotional disturbance would be enough to inhibit my further engagement with you.

I don't beat up on sick people, make sport of them, nor do I seek credibility from engaging the mob of popular "culture" to rationalize or justify internecine behavior that has no place in a formerly serious publication.

...portend is a transitive verb/verb!

Sorry, charlie, that sentence structure is valid, nevertheless. Creative, stretching the limits, but still legitimate English.

You are a lachrymose pedant who can think of nothing more to say than to criticize everyone in your path that dares to challenge your "arrangement" of reality.

And let's not bring wives and family into this. You tried to better me, long ago, on the non-issue of emotional and mental stability and boxed yourself into a very deep canyon.

Yet I, forever the more evolved person, gave you a pass on that issue and retained focus on the issue at hand.

Your gnat-like attention span causes you to lash out in every direction when your ego is threatened or you find you're not getting your way.

A much better solution would be to simply reflect on your reasons for stealing the precious oxygen your more worthy brethren require to tolerate your imperious pedantry.

To summarize (for your benefit, not mine):

1. Anon is an unevolved pedant who consistently disappoints real humanity with his pretentious pomp.

2. Eric Schaeffer is an ill human being subject to spasms of narcissism as a symptom whose cause might best be described as "boomeritis buddhism."

3. Anon feels that illness is a permanent condition that justifies branding by permanent label, not unlike the approach used by the National Socialists of WWII Germany with respect to ethnic identity.

4. Volaar finds the projections by Anon of Volaar's alleged hypocrisy amusing, to say the least, and Anon's appetite for pedantry worthy of confrontation.

5. Volaar wins the debate by 1) Refusing to fund Salon's plunge into the depths of gossip-mongering; 2) Having the last word in an exchange that will forever be more painful and exhausting for Anon than it can be for Volaar.