Yes, excellent post if you ignore some of the glaring factual inaccuracies! When pointed out to him, he didn't bother to respond. Instead, he just posted a link to anothe article that bashed Santorum. Looks like someone knows they were wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. Won't be the last.
I let it go because I made my point and your responses weren't particularly relevant - that you don't support Berlusconi as much as you used to, and that Santorum wasn't a "bully" in this case. Both objections seemed pretty pointless and would just lead to back-and-forth with no conclusion, but I can close the loop now.
1. Berlusconi's been a corrupt bully for as long as he's been in office, not just since Bunga Bunga came out, but if you don't support him, then sub in Chris Christie and Tommy Thompson, they fit the bill as well.
2. It's your opinion he's not being much of a bully in this case. That's debatable, but whatever, he's a bully in his normal behavior, it's why he was such an effective vessel for Republican rage in 2012 until he started making truly stupid comments about college educations, it's why Kerrey made that comment that you disagree with so much, and picking on the disabled who were supporting this treaty isn't a profile in courage. You can disagree, but I disagree, and there's no glaring factual error.
3. But I got Rod Grams wrong! I mixed up my Dem 1994 revenge cycles. True true.
That's a nice comparison that does me more favor than I deserve. Memphis is a calmer guy than I am.