[bvw]

I want to side-comment on your snark: "But I forgot, name-calling is an acceptable substitute for substantive commentary on the Internet these days-- even at FR."

POLITE DISCUSSION, or rather the insistence that only it is valid, is a major factor in allowing us to have a Clinton, and then an Obama.

And further ...

TODAY, WE ARE AT WAR FOR OUR VERY LIVES AND POSSESSIONS. Few have the patience, or should have, for polite discussions.

[spacejunkie01]

That really sums it up. The elite RINO’s want to have ‘polite’ discussions with those that want to DESTROY US!! This is war and those that don’t see it need to open their eyes.

Rove is the poster child for what is wrong with the GOP...truly. He’s not alone either, unfortunately. McCain, Graham, Snowe, Collins. Gingrich was falling into the same spot but now wants us all to believe he’s uber conservative because he’s tossing about a run in ‘12 and knows the base hates his guts for his liberal tendancies and his chastizement of us that aren’t ‘polite’ to the libtards while they’re smashing us in the face with a bat.

[Clara Lou]

Calling names will help us win the WAR FOR OUR VERY LIVES AND POSSESSIONS! Right??? So, let's call names!!
Here's the truth: Name-calling = nothing to say. A six year-old can call names. Middle-schoolers are professional at insulting and calling names. Wow. And now you tell me it's a tool in the war for "our very lives and possessions"? Stunning.

Are you calling a vanity in which the author says "He's on with Hemmer/Martha and he thinks Palin was out of line using 'cojones' to describe what's needed and what the AZ gov has and Obama doesn't! Rove stinks. And his amnesty push does too." valid political discussion?

And what about the so-called "snark"? Do you deny either part of it? People are either 1) able to state their position and support it in clear terms, or 2) unable to state their positions and call names and give insult instead.