Some Republicans have very poor observation and/or reading comprehension skills.

Every once in a while I actually get comments from Bush supporters. However, they never seem to address what I wrote in the post to which they are responding. For instance, on October 24, 2004, I posted A response from a Bush apologist on funerals. I wrote a whole series on Bush and funerals (see the series summary and links to each post here), and the Bush apologist responded to one of the posts in the series. However, that response did not even address issues raised in that particular post.

So I check my email this morning and see that I have an "Anonymous" comment posted to this blog (another characteristic of Bushie replies--no one ever has the backbone to be anything other than "Anonymous"). I had trouble figuring out what post elicited the comment. Here is the comment:

He won't be re-elected again. He can't serve more than 2 terms. That doesn't seem like a good argument to make at this stage in the game. Even if everything he said about Bush is true (its not). He needs to make comments about thing he can currently have influence over and not elections gone by. I think it shows why he was not elected.

(emphasis added, otherwise no editing). I at first thought this person was referring to Kerry, especially since I said five days ago in my Dennis Miller post that nobody cares about Kerry anymore. However, the rest of the comment did not seem to be relevant to anything I have posted in months--and that turned out to be an accurate assessment.

I clicked on the link in the email, and it took me to a post entitled Wes Clark sums up Bush, in which Clark explained why Bush is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief ("...he broke faith with our men and women in uniform. He has let them down.").

Let me be clear...Wes Clark sums up Bush was posted on October 27, 2004. That date appears in blatantly plain view directly above the post (both on its separate page and on the archive page). Consequently, it is beyond dispute that CLARK'S COMMENTS WERE MADE BEFORE THE ELECTION. That means that 1) Bush had not been re-elected when Clark made those comments, and 2) Clark was not referring to an "election gone by."

Un-freaking-believable.