...yes, he missed that only the nomination process was sales-only. Reti rightfully pointed that out, and I thought he did a good job.
He was referring to one "religious screwball" in this case, and I don't think we can assume he's talking about all people of faith in this case. Yes, he has indicted religion before, but you can't bring yesterpost's argument into this one. (And that's a rule I have a hard time following, so I understand completely reacting to a previous trend.)
Also, in the middle paragraph (something even Reti missed), I believe he was drifting into discussion of a different book on Limbaugh's, and in context, one that meant to be nonfiction. I don't know which book that would be, since I don't follow the guy's literary forays, but I assume it also came out sometime in the last year.
Plus, correcting wwill (which Reti did) and reacting badly and starting an assault (which it veered dangerously close to after robertltux's post) are two very different things.
Attack the argument, not the person. "He started it" doesn't really work for adults any better than for kids. :) |
