Alric,

I don't post very often, so I'm not well versed in the rules of the message board. Is the rule that if we want to reply to one post, we must reply to ALL posts by that person? I don't think I'd have the time for that, if so.

I also don't understand the "You do not have what it takes." comment (although I feel as if we are hearing the middle of a conversation you started earlier). What it takes to do what? Are we being graded? Is there possibility for remuneration for superior message posters?

Let me add my encouragement to those of you who may be unfamiliar with "Charade" to rent it post haste. Because of a clerical error, it went into the public domain for a long time, so the later generations may not know of this fantastic movie.

It has everything in it. Romance. Murder. Action. Adventure. Spying. Plot twists. And LOTS of laughs (although no pirates or sword fights). It is full of excellent dialogue, 60s kitsch, chemistry between the two leads like you wouldn't believe, and it has a great ending. Oh, and did I mention, Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn!???!

It is my #1 favorite movie of all time.

3) You are correct, I was not "referring to football". I was "thinking" of football when I wrote it. When I read your comment, in my mind I heard Rick and Bubba say "Football is an awesome sport but it makes a lousy God." It honestly would not have occurred to me while reading your comment except that I hear them say it so much. No, I do not worship football, but THEY do... which is why they say it all the time.

You said, "most folks I know don't categorize watching football as worshipping." You obviously don't live in the SEC.

4) Apology accepted.

2) I'd be interested in exactly what you read in ANY of my comments that remotely constituted "I'm better than you". I just reread them to make sure, and didn't see anything that could lead an objective person to that conclusion. The person that you think I "deem less worthy and relevant than [I]" who had more thumbs up points was a spammer... I mean an actual spammer... with comments such as "How to sue if you get the flu shot [URL]" in an article about Ricky Gervais. I had just joined the board and I LITERALLY didn't understand the points system (and still don't) and legitimately was asking someone to explain it to me. It's quite a stretch to get "less worthy and relevant than I" from: "Could someone explain this points system to me? Jason is always posting off-topic spam-crap, yet he has 58p?" (exact quote of entire comment) much less that you would interpret that comment as "lamentation".

1) Had you given my comment history more than a cursory glance, you would have discovered that I have NEVER criticized OTHER COMMENTERS on this website for their grammar. I understand that there's a difference between comments grammar and publication grammar. What I HAVE done is call for a dedicated proofreader for the journalists/contributors on this website because the articles are frequently rife with terrible errors, which I feel makes conservatives look stupid to those who are just looking for any excuse to say we're dumb bubba's who dropped out of sixth grade to marry their first cousin. I stand by the position that a proofreader would be a good thing, and I don't think there are many who would disagree with me.

I actually was when i wrote that!!! My favorite radio hosts, Rick and Bubba, are always quoting someone who said "Football's an awesome sport, but it makes a lousy God."

Defensive much? They aren't mutually exclusive and oddly enough, I never said they were. I was as devoted to Lost as ANYONE is to Dexter, and I wish that I myself had as much enthusiasm for going to church on Sunday.

I think you need to look up the definition of self-righteous. It is a sad day in America when simply expressing the desire that we be enthusiastic about worship and fellowship pegs us as "self-righteous."

Wow. Wouldn't it be great if we all felt "Sunday can't come soon enough" because we looked forward to worshipping with our chosen community of believers as much as we look forward to our favorite tv show?

I had copied it as well when I first posted. It has been corrected since, which is unusual. Yay!

Perhaps you could explain what we could do to make Bush's scalp MORE Henry Waxman... How about LESS?

I believe you have done (and the two other people who gave you a thumbs up by the way) what the author did... you read the "THAN" that he intended to insert between "more" and "Henry" even though it wasn't there.

My point is not to point at Nolte and giggle... I LOVE his articles, perhaps more than any other writer here on BH. My point is that EVERYONE makes mistakes when writing, which is why EVERYONE should have SOMEONE ELSE look at their work before hitting that "publish" button, ESPECIALLY a website that is aiming to inject some legitimate and intelligent conservative discussion into the national culture.

It's too common for the other side to intimate that conservatives are dumb hicks who dropped out of sixth grade to marry their first cousin. So again, I'll say (because I'm sure not everyone reads every article and comment on BH) that there are far too many just waiting to jump on every mistake and sign of deficiency in conservative media. Let's not give them ammunition by having articles strewn with misspellings that even a cursory glance would have caught. It makes BH look amateurish, which IT IS NOT, which is why it bugs me.

(For the record, this one mistake does not constitute "strewing", but there are frequently MANY stupid mistakes in BH articles that go uncorrected. I mentioned it in this article because I thought the picture it conjured was funny. Perhaps to make his scalp more Henry Waxman, we'd have to sit old W down, shave his head, rub oil on it to make it all shiny, and then make it say dumb stuff. Some creative use of a Sharpie is called for as well, I think.)