Byrd is indeed a sleaze and a fool, but no more or less so than any of the other high-profile wingnuts--Republican and Democrat--that populate the Hill.
I just don't see how any of this relates in the slightest to the veracity of his statements regarding the possibility of war. It's like me dismissing the value of your post because you got drunk and passed out in your yard last Friday--so what?
How about dissecting what he had to say and attacking him on those grounds, rather than desperately grasping at things that have little to do with the subject at hand?
I never thought I'd say this...but where's Richard to cry "Bulverism!" when it's needed?
