[Springfield Reformer]

Does “More ill defined bombastic insults” qualify as an analytical response, or an “ill defined bombastic insult?” Curious minds want to know ... :)

[Revolting cat!]

Well, look. Read through this pitiful thread to see that any disagreement with Saint Limbo returns nothing but insults. No one, not one poster would defend the statement that this popular radio personality made defining the Pope's paper as "pure Marxism", which is what I and a couple of others objected to, and asked about, and which in my opinion invalidates anything else this popular entertainer has to say on the subject, regardless of what one thinks of what the Pope had said. Bombastic nonsense, yes!

Only insults, like when somebody posts an article by Peggy Noonan or Pat Buchanan, only insults against these two, no discussion of the ideas they present. And then, there'll be all those insults directed at the posters who try to focus on the ideas presented, however minor.

It's entertaining, sure, to be called a liberal, Alinskite, anti-Catholic, who hasn't read what the Pope wrote (these psychics know everything about you, and they seem to be very concerned about you), but it all tells us more about the insulter than about the insulted. All in all, pathetic.