Somebody please explain this.

I don't know if what I'm doing here amounts to anything more than mental masturbation, because I don't know if anybody besides me is reading it. I did get one comment once, from Christina (which I appreciated), but that's all.

Anyway, I have a question, in case anyone is reading this. It is this: How does calling someone a "liberal" or a "right-wing nut" or anything related to that refute the assertions in that person's argument? After all, facts are facts, and the truth is the truth, no matter who says them.

Now, I have read enough from some columnists and commentators to know that they have precious little to say that I care to read or hear, but that does not rule out their being right on some rare occasion, does it?