[Overpaid Slacker]

Mat -
Thanks for the advice (sincerely). But I'm a "National Review" kind of reader (meaning plain presentation and substance over, if not to the exclusion of, gloss) and I'm not trying to pitch a "Newsweek" audience who wants glib soundbites and cutesy little graphs. Substitute "Wall Street Journal" and "USA Today" for NR and Newsweak, respectively, if you're not a magazine kind of guy.

Having linked to Jonah's column wouldn't have changed its substance; I assume you'd have still found it long-winded and unsatisfactory. Or, ifyou weren't inclined to read it (for whatever reason -- National Review is EVIL, Jonah Goldberg is EVIL, it's too looOOOOooonnnnnng) you wouldn't have read it once you linked anyway. That's not my loss.

At the end of the day, I can't (and wouldn't try to) convince someone who is not interested in a topic to read something of any length about it. If you're interested in a topic, or if you, having read pieces I've written or seen the nature of what I copy/paste/post, give me some benefit of the doubt and give a piece I write or post a few minutes of your time -- great. If not, I'm cool with that. I'm not even trying to lead the horse. Let him find his own damned water.

I might just add BC04 to everything from now on, though!

JP