I thought we did in his credibility over on Off-Topic. His rant about "The Left" was ill-conceived, sweeping and paranoid.

Now, we all have been told by our True Believers that in the US "The Left" consists of liberals, often Democrats. We are informed over and over that "the left", including liberals and Democrats are socialists, Marxists and communists at heart, if not dues-paying, card-carrying members. (Reminds one of J. McCarthy, doesn't it?)

Now, part of what leaped out at me was this statement: "It set the theme which was to endure for more than a hundred years: that the familiar world is not worth fighting for."

Seems to me that in just one instance a lot of American Democrats died 60 years ago to preserve a familiar world. And, if one thinks about it, a helluva lot of communists died to preserve their familiar world.

How did the author ever think a statement like that could withstand any sort of scrutiny?

Or was it intended for the choir, to be newly revealed gospel, and the Truth because the author has convinced people He can walk on water?

Arf