Civil Discourse II

An engineer looks at his world through the eyes of an engineer. Pastors and counselors will look at the same scene and see it perhaps differently. As I look at the world I see truth as good, right and useful. I see 'not true' as flawed, failed and without merit.
So, when I read Frank Rich's piece in the Times, I breezed past his opinions without much reaction. Opinions are not about fact; they are just interesting. What I choked on was the mis-statement of fact. My own experience is different from that of Mr. Rich. I call his experience flawed and declare that he failed as an observer. I see no personal conflict here at all with him. I merely point out his error. I prefer suggesting he was not paying attention to the broadcast than to say he lied. Perhaps he read the work of someone else rather than do his own research. Perhaps the paper told him to say that.
Frank Rich and Glenn Beck frequently toss barbs at each other, each sharing his own opinion. I can see this as "conflict" although the word seems a bit too strong. Since neither is mean spirited, it seems more like banter than anything else. I'm sure the continued dialog is good for both mens' business.