Reply #10: Yes it was.. [View All]

[Grins]

It was great!!

This guy writes this drivel and, typically, doesn’t illustrate or justify a single argument he has with Krugman. I haven't read Krugman's book, but I assume that he never said a word about the government giving THE AUTHOR'S money to drug addicts. I assume the writer meant drug “treatment”, but you never know. Besides, Rush is taking the place of a lazy drug addict anyway.

And, of course, I also loved it when he said "...Clinton caused the Moslum(sic) threat"!!!

What I most enjoyed was this goober from Anchorage, Alaska (Can't you just picture this guy in your mind? Huddled in some cabin in the woods cleaning his arsenal of guns for the time when the “gummint” dares to go “git him.) saying that liberals are too (oops...sorry, should have been "to") stupid to read, but he never catches one his (many) misspellings or errors in grammar, i.e., "lieing" NY Times, "soicalism", "The Krugman and Al Franken are", "traiters", "talliban", "Michal". It’s just my opinion, but I believe that doing a lot of reading improves your spelling. Could his poor spelling and grammar be the result of only reading Coulter and Savage?

This guy never had an original thought in his life!