Is simply the most offensive idea a human might invent no matter what one's ideology. The casualties of the war on terror include:

: 4000 US Soldiers killed in the line of duty

: some 70,000 soldiers wounded

: anywhere from 50,000 to nearly a million Iraqis killed

: thousands dead from Islamic terrorism

: hundreds of thousands of Iraqis injured

: two countries in a political and social shambles

: one country on the brink of social, political and economic collapse (US)

Among others. But they do not include inner circle, torture-enabling, power-worshipping, unethical, spineless, bureaucrats, protected from all legal ramifications of their actions by a criminal executive administration. That's probably clear to about 95% of the US public.

We'll have none of this terribly offensive, strident language - oh this hateful use of strong words does hurt his tender eyes!

Observe carefully which among you meets his standards of decorum, children, and follow suit. After all, remember that it is much more offensive to use an adjective that commits violence upon his mind than it is to ostentatiously wag your finger at any who speak too "obnoxiously."

For me, reading tommy1733's other letters was instructive. I recommend it.

This amateur shrink will gladly defer to your general Dx of character disorder.

I'm just a psychological Diogenes, looking for people honest enough to confront this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337.story?coll=la-home-center

and take its implications seriously.

That's two for the pathology hypothesis. One more and we'll be a movement.

I believe that there are many things more worthwhile than shooter that you could celebrate.-- something stinks

Yes, you're probably correct.

I could, if I so desired, assemble a collection of your inane and mostly off-topic oral flatulence here and up-load them to the web and then celebrate the fact that for someone who quite obviously has to dedicate much of his intelligence to the mere act of breathing still hasn't suffocated.

Why, if I wanted, after the Website became well known, I could pickle your brain, put it in a jar and join the carnival circuit and make $millions of dollars exhibiting proof positive that in your case, Darwin was wrong.

As a matter of fact, there is some room on Pg.3 of the Wog (in case you missed it, the site is a parody) for just such a project.

I'll give your Most Excellent Suggestion precisely the time and energy it deserves.

Thank you.

For the sake of your own peace of mind, perhaps you would feel more comfortable at sites like "Common Dreams" or "The Huffington Post", which subscribe to the mush-and-milk standard of "civility" you advocate. They unilaterally censor and ban anyone who comes across as too mean, uncouth, or caustic-- especially when comments challenge the blog's received wisdom.

In fact, given your predilection for parsing and analyzing hate speech, you would make a fine moderator at those sites.

Because the sad truth is that here, both Glenn and commenters feel free to express thoughts and judgements that might be seen by more delicate readers as a tad harsh or unduly hostile... snark and sarcasm are invoked, too, but I'm getting tired of typing HTML tags.

I have neither authority or inclination to ask you to leave, so don't misunderstand me. But I am convinced that Glenn will never adopt the mature graceful tolerance and acceptance of arrant stupidity stipulated by your lofty standards.

This is why the Unclaimed Territory Badminton Match ended so badly-- there were crushed shuttlecocks and shredded cucumber sandwiches everywhere!

Oh!, truly. Laugh out loud!

You see, here on this blog and other "leftist" cesspools of American demagoguery you will see that hate is an emotion evocative of rabid, partisan, liberal-sounding affiliation.

Note all Glenn's yesmen/women like myself who feel inclined to comment vociferously on any lawless, hypocritical practices that would undermine the original intent of Founder principles of justice and equality for all (the aristocrats, too)- see the "venom" of attempts at rational thought with a modicum of emotion, but pleading our case nonetheless.

Accuse us of bigotry or of hate, but not of passivity toward what is American justice as an end.

Write for Tommy1733 thirty times on the chalkboard his standard that the language, illogic, and style of argumentation that Shooter employs must be defended from the comparatively awful behavior of Glenn and most of the other commenters here.

Then we will break for self-importance tea and hypocrisy crumpets.

I got to see a talk by Klein recently in Austin, and admire her work. I've not read that book yet but need to--thanks for the ref.

but I was about to say something a bit less pleasant to you. Your quote makes the claim that Glenn has engaged in a personal attack. I believe that this is shooter our are quoting? And so typical. Politico is not a person, it is an organization (sort of). So Glenn's attack is not personal, and some of the other claims are questionable. Shooter is a kind of professional. So do not think that attacking shooter is like picking on your kid brother. And be careful about thinking shooter believes everything he says, or could back up what he does believe with any facts. Glenn earns the right to his style with hard work. Shooter also earns the crap he gets here, in a different way.

I would like to nominate Sysprog as UT's "MVC" (Most Valuable Commenter) for 2008. I cannot imagine how much time he must spend digging for the gold that he finds and passes on to Glenn.

I don't know what you do for a living, but if you do it half as well as you contribute to this blog, you've got to be a spectacular success.

Good work, sir or madam. I admire your sleuthing and research skills.

Happy New Year to all the fine folks here, even the trolls.

Acts which, when ordered by Liberians, are "criminal torture" meriting life imprisonment magically become, when ordered by Americans, mere "aggressive interrogation techniques."

"Another thing that that inquiry, if it ever takes place, will have to deal with is the magical properties of names. Nearly all human beings feel that a thing becomes different if you call it by a different name." - George Orwell

And,of course,

"All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side ... The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell, Notes on Nationalism