This graced the cover of the Washington Post's Sunday Outlook section this week. I really wish I had time to thoroughly debunk it. But to do it properly would take a week, at least. And that would be an inefficient use of my time. I've read it three times now, and there's not an ounce of reason or reality to be found anywhere in the article. Even more amazing, there are times when the author manages to make a single point, and still be wrong on several levels!

I understand that an opinion section is supposed to be a forum where folks from across the philosophical spectrum exchange ideas. But is"willfull ignorance" really a legitimate viewpoint?

Outlook is generally the most interesting opinion section in newspaper journalism. And the Post's op-ed page, with the likes of Anne Applebaum, Robert Samuelson, and Michael Kinsley, passed up the NY Times' pages a long time ago.

That said, it's awfully disappointing to see such a loathesome piece of opinion writing get front-page treatment.