It might make sense at first thought to try and "shame" an authoritarian into seeing the misguidedness of his or her "thought" process, but I believe in most of those cases the authoritarian gets reinforcement by being persecuted for their beliefs. Especially from people they already strongly disagree with. It's why shooter and tiberius come back here day after day. So in a sense, you're only fueling the fire by trying to do so. (On personal level though, it IS a satisfying way to blow off steam, even if it accomplishes nothing.)

George Lakoff breaks it down to three types. Those who were raised under a "Nurturing Family" model; those who were raised under a "Strong Father" model; and those who draw from a combination of the two, depending on the situation. Obviously, 9/11 forced the vast majority of this country to fall back on the "Strong Father" model. People who operate in that realm all the time are indeed "authoritarians," and are basically unreachable. But those who are able to access both models are worth a shot. People who strictly work in the "Nurturing Family" model are already liberals, by definition.

Jeez, guys. Don't you remember? War was declared on 9/11 by the terrorists! Any person who suggests that the attacks on that day had anything to do with how we conducted our foreign policy before then would be exhibiting a "pre 9/11" mindset. This, of course, is all according to that great book, "Everything I Learned About Foreign Relations, I Learned in Kindergarten."

You just underscored Glenn's point, and proved him right. Again. The fact that you can't see that, is only the punchline.

ps--By the way, I'm not going to bother citing all the polls since they don't matter to you, but the vast, vast, vast majority of people do NOT trust Bush or Cheney. Especially Cheney.

"Does that comment from you help explain why you are still here? After all, lesser men or women would have moved on by now after having been incessantly exposed as a failure in the arena of logic from day one to the present day."

Don't forget "being exposed as a liar," too. If he's just a idiot, that's one thing. I can live with that. But when he flat out denies posting something that he expressly posted just minutes or hours before--that, I can't live with.

It's frustrating enough playing whack-a-mole with our resident trolls and their unflappable ignorance in the face of truth and logic. But if they're gonna come here and just make shit up out of thin air--only to later deny they ever wrote it--then my patience has officially run out.

"Don't you think the mastermind of 9/11 should be caught and punished? Why aren't you up in arms over the administration's inaction on this front? I mean, Bush has made it as clear as he ever makes anything that he doesn't think bin Laden is a priority; but to me, his crime was pretty heinous.-- orbitboy"

It certainly was, but he isn't a priority at the moment unless of course, he goes to Iraq. Besides, the reality is, that if he were actually captured and brought to the US, a smart lawyer like John Edwards could get him off with time served. Then he would probably go on the lecture circuit and make a pile of money like Clinton did. Only Republicans go to jail. --shooter242

After being accused of not wanting or not caring if bin Laden is brought to justice, (by me and others) you followed up with:

I'm amazed you can get all that out of this...

Shooter -- "It certainly was, but he isn't a priority at the moment unless of course, he goes to Iraq."

* Is there anything about killing Iraqis? No.

* Is there anything about bringing terrorists to justice as unimportant? No.

* Did I equate Iraqis with terrorists? No.

--shooter242

At the very least, you are on record here as lying on the second asterisk point. This is no "gotcha." It's a clear lie. The exchange occurred @ lunchtime June 26.

Even still, I originally stated very clearly that we never hear from you that it's important for bin Laden to be punished for his crimes and brought to justice. We still haven't. Of course, for you to do so now after being publicly prodded, cajoled and outed as a liar, would ring pretty hollow.

Again, my patience with you has run out. From now on, you are nothing but a waste of my time.

You might have done us all a favor and suggested he "practice" his snark elsewhere. You left it kind of vague.

Something that's bothering me about all this is ultimately just how little it's bothering me. I really try not to be this jaded and resigned, but that's what it's come to with this whole affair. I think it's good to get mad--even enraged--over outcomes like this. But I just can't muster the energy to be pissed off about it today.

Hey, don't paint yourself into a corner or anything. That would be dumb.

Maybe if we all close our eyes, and click our heels together, she'll just disappear!! And while we are at it, we can just wish away things like world hunger, poverty and strife, global climat change, etc. Hey, how about "unhappiness" in general?

If you think that Ann Coulter is going away through some sort of collective "let's ignore her" plan, you are way more naive than you sound. The outrage from the left has never had any effect on her career whatsoever. It is maintained by those who agree with her. She would sell millions of books in a perfect vaccuum as long as there are millions of people who agree with her.

and the best we can do is "pray." It just doesn't get any more hopeless than that.

See, NOW is when Bush should be saying, "Bring 'em on!" That would be so bad-ass!