Worth a post, rather than just a comment

anonymous commented thusly at my All That Glitters Is NOT Gold post:

"maybe you will always be a self-obsessed adolescent crank, eowyn, but thankfully you no longer represent the majority in the u.s. your country has matured in this election in ways you personally might never achieve. but there is always hope, and always the ability to learn. here's an opportunity for you to grow up, and learn more about obama:

"http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2008/nov/05/obama-road-to-white-house1"

Okay, point one: Guessing you're British, or at least not a U.S. national, I'm not so sure asserting yourself as more knowledgeable or authorative than a U.S. national to make assumptions about U.S. politics is either wise or productive. (I sometimes have plenty to say about British politics, but you will notice that I back up my observations with British sources.)

Point two: Invective like "adolescent crank" not only is discourteous, but also unproductive. It's an instant guarantee that, were I really an "adolescent crank," I'd hurl back more invective, and true discourse would grind to a halt. And if I weren't, I'd make the assumption that you can't argue WITHOUT resorting to invective, and I'd have to ask myself whether I want to make the effort to go further.

As an illustrating example, my friend E.D. Kain, of Neoconstant and Indiepundit, once said to me that he considers posting under the moniker "anonymous" craven, if not cowardly. I replied that there are some isolated incidences in which it's necessary to post so; but we both agreed (as does the blogosphere at large) that a good reason notwithstanding, most people's credibility meter plunges when an anonymous makes an assertion about something. But you notice I'm not accusing you of cowardice. I'm even making the effort to assign you equal credibility with more openly named posters, so we can move the discourse forward.

Now. Having said that, I watched the video at the link you shared. It was quite well done, as is everything produced in Britain, by and large -- (and I lived there three years, so I feel confident in making that assertion) -- and factual, insofar as some aspects of Obama's life history go. But here's one rub:

I searched guardian.co.uk for John McCain Road White House after watching the video, to see whether the Guardian had sponsored a similar (and complimentary) documentary on Obama's opponent. After four pages of links to mostly Obama stories, I gave up.

The other rub: There remain several under-the-radar aspects of Obama's career that smell fishy. Sorry, but there it is. Never smoke without fire.

Now, if these observations make me an "adolescent crank," I can only say this: Adolescent? Being on the wrong side of teenage, don't I wish! Crank? Guilty as charged, on some days. Send the constabulary right over. I'll meekly surrender.

Add to that the charge of First Degree Wishing Not Only To Make An Observation, But Also Learn Something Without Having To Sift Through The Invective Filter First.