He displays characteristic learning and verve when he argues that America is turning into a theocracy.
This tweet, when he argues that Medicaid spending will go up under the BCRA.
David Willetts is right when he argues that a return to grammar schools won't solve anything.
Bolton is persuasive when he argues that other nations take this instrumental view of international organizations.
But when he argues that data also show that money doesn't matter in electoral politics, he slips off track.
So perhaps Vanney is right when he argues that Saturday's head-to-head is not yet a must-win game.
But this claim isn't entirely persuasive, as becomes clear when he argues that manners be made more positive, more proactive — that we should engage in "lovely gestures".
That certainly is true, and Sammy could be right when he argues that "once we eliminate those bad sessions, then we'll make progress".
Paul Weiler, the Harvard labor-law professor, is correct when he argues that unrestrained free agency is not the best possible regime for professional baseball".
He is less convincing, but no less entertaining, when he argues that John F. Kennedy was killed by the accidental discharge of a Secret Service agent's gun.
But when he argues that "the increasing distrust between different cultures" form the barrier to "an enduring and collective security" he's on shaky ground.
