Didn't love it :). Seems like the initial list of complaints he's responding to are chosen to be the most superficial (and easily argued against) ones. And th

Didn't love it :). Seems like the initial list of complaints he's responding to are chosen to be the most superficial (and easily argued against) ones. And things like this: "these self-assured statements are being made by Americans who spend an AVERAGE of 5 hours per day watching television," Again, seems like he wants to create the weakest possible version of those he's debating against. It's irrelevant to the argument. In articles like this, I'd prefer to see the author present the strongest possible case for the other side of the debate, and then argue against _that_. It doesn't make me want to examine his counterpoints very deeply if he's manipulating the argument by positioning the other side as foolish or easily disproven.