He's the worst kind of blogger because he is intellectually disingenuous. Not because I disagree with him (and I do) but because he refutes strawmen of his own making and because he floats random, as if it was relevant. His pontifications are asinine.

I like reading people I disagree with, when they are well written. But Scott Adams' stuff wasn't well written. It was just snark. "they're all terrible" is unhelpful, when it morphed into "but I back this one" and he picked the one with the most overt problems, yet somehow Hilary was "worse" .. C'mon, please. do not insult your reader. You were never neutral, it was a pose.