Point taken. But sometimes it takes several paragraphs before one gets the full intent of the article. My goal is to get optimum readership of the entire article.
Actually I don't think you have to excerpt from Worldnet Daily. Anyway, people can click the link. The arguement that anyone opposed to Pat can't or didn't read is a strawman.
Ew!
What's that gurgling sound?
Is it allergy sufferers dealing with pollen?
Is someone or something being choked to death?
No.
That's Pat Buchanon spitting on 50,000,000 soldiers' graves.
I guess hindsight isn't 20/20 for everybody.
I think you got optimum denunciation of the article and author based entirely on the short piece you include by people who did NOT read the thing.
If I go and excerpt 3 or 4 sentences from a bush speech, I can inadvertently or deliberately distort the message of the speech as a whole. That is a big part of the type of responses you are getting here.