Gillespie on Radio Right About Now…

|

If it's Monday, it means that I'm yammering with Alan Nathan, Tony Blankley, and Cathy Antrim on Radio America's Battle Line program.

Go here to listen live.

NEXT: Le Journal de Bridget Jones

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Is this colloquy or is it not counterproductive to an in-progress swelling which some parties were heretofore unaware of how it was relevant to a fundamentally flawed concept because it is at the mercy of an often unattainable determination, then by consequence this is an applied consent that, I sort of rambled a bit but, without losing sight of the pretext to preemptively do the unthinkable, which whether that is being incrementally correct and fair I’m not really concerned, or if you will, that most assuredly those criteria were no longer relevant to other directions that are antithetical to conclusions drawn therein, then certainly we would have to draw points of criteria and focus on those despotic regimes that are of such sufficient motility that we can’t be so myopic as to ignore, the idea of just simplistically thinking of that scenario, by which of course I’m harking back to a previous iteration; so just to recap the scenario, isn’t it injurious to us to act in a way which, had we so acted, we would not have been countenanced, or is this aversion so difficult to quantify?

  2. I’m waiting for the folks who’ll attack Alan as if he’s dead serious.

  3. (I should have waited more quietly!)

  4. Nobody on H&R attacks other people or their writing styles just because they don’t get the joke. And even if they do, they graciously admit their mistakes afterward.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.