First, we have Charlie. Since the New Hampshire primary, during his radio show, he has been gloating over how all the pundits and talking heads got it wrong, especially on the Democratic side of the vote. But then turns around on his blog and crows about how he is going to do some punditry on TMJ4. Is he so desperate for attention that he has to rip on himself? That's not good. That's our job.
Not to be outdone, McIlheran does it to himself in the same comment thread. In one of his posts about voter
I presented evidence. The other side presented feelings and slanders. If that's what you prefer, then there's not much I can do for you.
Then, later in the thread, in a period of selective outrage, we see (emphasis mine):
Here's another thing: Where do you get off with this "pimping for the Republican party" nonsense? What, exactly, do you mean by that? Are you saying these aren't really my views, that I'm tailoring them for some kind of gain? Or that it's inconceivable anyone would come to view vote fraud as a danger without getting orders to do so?
Good heavens, I grant the sincerity of the critics' views -- in fact, that's the point of the blog, to contrast their bad-faith view of my side with the fact that I'm not throwing corresponding accusations at them. Yet you seem unable to concede that I might have come to my view honestly -- you feel a need to say I'm "pimping" for someone?
Now, please excuse me, I have to go lie down. Trying to follow their tripe gives me a such a headache some days.