On the whole this site concerns itself with top-shelf newspaper punditry primarily because as one descends into syndication things get pretty bad. So bad, at times, one wonders whether it's even fair to bring our very undergraduate skills of logical analysis to bear. But sometimes, however, it's just entertaining. If anything, Bill Maher's Religulous shows us that. Someone could do the same thing for the poltical world. Here's one place to start:
An e-mail: "OK, I'll say it…I believe today's massive decline was, in part (and maybe a big "in part"), in fear that the debate tonight won't go well for McCain and the implications that will have for an Obama victory. The likelihood of a recession has been talked about and, probably, factored in to a lot of folks' thinking already… …if tonight's debate tracks well for McCain, you'll see a positive response tomorrow; if it doesn't, hold on; it won't be pretty. Call it: 'Flight to Safety (from Socialism).'"
That's an email an editor at William F.Buckley's National Review thought important enough to repost online–without howls of laughter or at least notes of compassion for the person's diminished intellectual capacity. So here's the problem, if one were to do a Religulous of politics, where would one begin?