Right wing wacko Roger mounted an attack on a Liberal and wrote:
>

[snip]

> > (1) By your standards then, far left-wing wackos think that
> > because another newspaper is "Washington Post", that it's credible.
>
> It's credible because it's credible. Because it has a history of being
> credible.

That's incredible.

> > (2) I'm neither a Moonie or a right-wing wacko,
> > and I find the Washington Times at least as credible
> > if not more so than Wash. Post and NY Times, so
> > part of your wacko theory is out the window.
>
> You're probably more right-wing wacko than you think. Or more gullable.

Impossible. I am a Liberal.

> >
> > (3) The Washington Times might owe it's credibility to
> > the lack of credibility exhibited by the fish wrap newspapers
> > such as Washington Post and New York Times, which is no real
> > compliment to Washington Times, and does not speak well of
> > Washington Post and NY Times.
>
> If you think the NYT and WP are "fish wrapers", you are a right-wing wacko.

Impossible. I am a Liberal.