Oops... I missed this post..
Now, see, I'm glad I read this, as it obviates that 'humorless' thing: I got a big kick out of the phrase: "...a healthy suspicion of the motivation of others..."
Why use the term 'suspicion'? I tell all that I believe liberals, progressives are wrong in thinging and in behavior and not good for the future of the country.
Then I post indicia of same.
Get it?
For most normal folks, "a healthy suspicion of the motivation of others" usually doesn't mean fantasizing about, maligning, denegrating those that one doesn't agree with.
Of course, the old saying "one can only judge others by oneself," might suggest that you have misplaced the nasty things that you say...sort of like a boomarang.
By my lights, if one disagrees, it behooves same to offer counter arguments. In short, you might appear more intelligent if you spent your time defending your position rather than attacking your opponent.
You might try that when you get really bored.
Now, write soon!
hmmm, you attack me for attacking you because you attack Obama, liberals, Democrats based on opinion ("indicia", pleassssse - I suppose that counts as a sense of humor). My healthy suspicion is based on years, decades actually, of interviews of suspects, victims and witnesses, each may or may not have had an agenda.
Why would I bother to read one of your 'tomes', the theme is always the same and the end never varies. To debate or present an argument to you (from my experience in reading your work) only results in a glib, arrogant and self righteous response. Much like GWB you will never examine your own agenda or admit anything you've done is wrong. Much like those suspects I interviewed for oh so many years who deny they've put their hand in the cookie jar even AFTER being confronted with photographic evidence.
1. "...interviews of suspects..."
I'm a suspect? OK, buddy, read me my rights!
2. "...may or may not have had an agenda..."
Aren't you paying attention: I told you my agenda- fighting thugs and libs!
See how the OP follows from that?
3. "Why would I bother to read one of your 'tomes'..."
Let me count the ways...they might appeal to you. They are clever, insightful, well documented, direct, educational, and might just re-direct you onto a more fruitful and efficacious path in life.
Oh, yes...and well written. And humorous if you look in the right places.
BTW, I notice that you do, read them, pretty regularly. Caught ya'.
4. "To debate or present an argument to you (from my experience
in reading your work) only results in a glib, arrogant and self righteous response."
(sigh)...probably true... but that is because I'm glib, arrogant and self righteous.
Still, your using that as an excuse to not answer my posts, which clearly antagonize you, is kind of weak.
By now, you must know that personal attacks merely encourage me.
On the other hand, I do like battle with a well equipped opponent, but you probably don't want to give me that satisfaction...
It's your call.
5. "...you will never examine your own agenda or admit anything you've done is wrong. "
First, the protocol is for YOU to examine my agenda and find the weaknesses....otherwise I'd just be arguing with myself. But I have given hints to weaker opponents and even posted counter evidence for them to use.
And second, I have not only admitted errors, but often given reps to opponents when they find me doing so...but, of course, I'd rather not advertise those errors.
6. "...even AFTER being confronted with photographic evidence."
Yikes...you have pics of me!
(Ya think I could get a wallet size...?)
Tata.
Ball's in your court, Inspector Javert.