Huh. ER gave me the same lecture today on another thread. He was correct. And it got me to thinking.

We all like TB. I usually get a warm feeling when I see he's posted something. Usually. And I've come to realize he really, really only sees the world the way he posts. Extreme views, aggressively presented. TB has street-fighting verbal skills. The finer, learned parts of debate and logic are not part of his repertoire. Nonetheless, he's a fine asset, both for his character and contributions.

And ER has a different set of skills. He's able to back off and see an entire issue even though he generally lands on the liberal side of the line. He is able to debate, knows the rules thereof and usually follows them.

I think you're implying that TB deserves free rein because he's TB, and an effort to systematically counter him would be stalking, a vendetta. That would be bad.

I think ER is saying, in a fit of high pique, that he will counter the political aspects of TBs posts wherever he finds them, that the rest of the world deserves the other side of the political story. I don't think ER means to argue with everything TB says.

I believe it would be fairer to encourage TB to separate the wheat from the chaff of his posts than to lean on ER to stop blowing away the chaff. It would be hard for TB, and that's the way it goes.

And much more than a little bit of what I've said about TB applies to me. Not the character part, but the tactics.