Do I agree that it’s hypocritical to call for the resignation of the president of Harvard for public statements while screaming “censorship” over the plight of Churchill? Absolutely. Much of what Sajak has to say is an important call to arms for progressives in this country. Not a call to censor him or organize protests. But like so many other critics we must use his analysis to help shape the movement. To help frame our message and go about the business of trying to convince people to vote our way, rather than yelling at them.

But does that mean I can read such and indictment of the Left and not respond that it is a half measure? Absolutely not. He has sage advice, but he’s left out at least half the story.

I tend to think the vast majority of Americans fall somewhere in the middle, and they pick a party based on which platform they agree with more. In some cases it’s abortion, in other cases it’s all about fiscal conservatism, but I’m betting few people buy a party’s message hook, line, and sinker.

That said, I agree with Pat Sajak. I like talking politics, but it’s not interesting or worthwhile if there’s no give and take in the conversation. I’m just lucky to hang around with people who agree with my point of view.

Anyway, FWIW, I wasn’t (and I don’t think Pat Sajak was either — not that I’m one to speak for Pat Sajak) trying to make it a matter of speaking of the Left versus speaking to the Right, which is how you’ve taken it.

As someone who does talk a lot to pinko commies, I do often find myself frustrated when trying to understand their views or positions. And not from arbitrary talking heads, but people who I know should know better. (It might be that last bit that gets me the most.)