My response to NBruce's response to my comment on her journal posting, here,
[quick time out to catch breath over that chain], should probably have been posted here instead.
Anyone who thinks all liberals are on a single "team" hasn't paid much attention to the Democratic Party. Anyone who puts me on that "team" is doing a black-and-white, fur-us-or-agin-us that I've come to accept is regarded by, oh, GregS* and NBruce and some others here as the Only Proper Way.
I'm not buying it. It's as ludicrous (in my not at all humble opinion) as asserting that anyone who disagrees with Bush's policies is a "Bush hater." (At this point, on one policy, that even includes Dr. Frist--but Repubs. don't get called "Bush haters.")
I've tried to stay reasonably apolitical here and at Walt at Random and even more so at Cites & Insights. Of course, my idea of apolitical isn't that of some readers. Clearly, for example, believing there should be some balance within copyright, based on the U.S. Constitution, is regarded as extremely political to some (on both ends of the political spectrum, in this case).
I don't expect to post a series of political posts here, on Wednesdays or any other day. Not that I don't care about politics; I just prefer not to let it control every aspect of my life, and there are too many people writing too many things about politics already.
I suspect I won't respond to any further responses on NBruce's journal, both because it's her podium, not mine, and because I don't see anyone's mind being changed or anyone being usefully informed by the discussion. Although I certainly found it informative to see that NBruce believes that David Duke and Timothy McVeigh can be equated with Ted Kennedy and Sen. Wellstone! (I'm not making this up--I don't think I could make that up: follow the link at the top of this post and look at the comments.)
I keep being reminded of why satire is so hard to write these days...