[bullypulpit]

But may I suggest that you concede your failure to be persuaded of Cain's innocence is based solely on your gut instinct, because you have zero evidence that the contemporary process that exonerated him was insufficent to determine the true facts, or that the process was corrupt?

This isn't a court room. It's a presidential race. I pointed to clues that Herman Cain was reckless and arrogant. I don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I made my case, and it looks like a lot of people were either 1.) concerned that my editorial rang true and attacked me, usually in a non-serious way, or 2.) Agreed with me.

Welcome to the First Amendment, baby!

[fightinJAG]

Welcome to the First Amendment, baby!

Oh, please. Is that all you got?

When confronted with logical inconsistencies and internal contradictions in your statements, brush that off with . . . the invocation of the First Amendment.

Yes, you are right. The First Amendment does allow stupid speech, among other things.

Try something original.