Best description of a wingnut ever ?

[eppur_se_muova]

This is from Roger Welsch's "It's not the end of the earth, but you can see it from here":

Just as some insist that there is a public right to know, Royal Cupp insisted that there was a public right not to know. On one occasion, typical of daily occasions, he expressed his pride that he had voted for Ronald Reagan, a man who had submitted eight balanced budgets in a row. I knew better than to argue politics with Royal, but I could not suppress my natural reaction to correct such a glaring inaccuracy.

"Royal, you idiot," I explained, "Reagan didn't submit a single balanced budget during his entire derilict two terms -- not even close -- and then he didn't even bother to apologize for lying."

Royal countered, "Reagan submitted eight balanced budgets in a row."

"Why, the hell he did. I'll write Congresswoman Smith -- and she's a Republican just like you -- and ask her about Reagan's budgets. Even she will be honest enough to admit an obvious, undeniable historical fact like that, I'll bet."

"In that case, keep your information to yourself," Royal said, clearly not amused, and he left, slamming the door of the cafe as he stormed out. When it served his fruitcake politics -- and it usually did -- Royal preferred ignorance. He demanded his right as a modern American not to know, not to see the obvious, not to acknowledge the undeniable, not to accept the evident, not to realize reality, not to see the truth. Royal knew that right there in the Constitution, immediately following the provision that {e}nsures our right to own hand grenades and flame throwers, there was the explicit right to remain ignorant in the face of all information to the contrary.

No one argued with Royal about anything because there wasn't any use to it. He made up facts as he needed them and discarded them when they conflicted whith what he believed, no matter how obvious they might be. When the evidence was overwhelmingly against him, he would simply say in a superior way, "There you are. The exception proves the rule," and walk out, having convinced no one but himself. That was all right because no one was more important to Royal than himself, and he felt that if he had made his point with someone as intellectually superior as himself, then no one else really mattered very much. It's not easy for the ethical debater to outmaneuver a technique like that.

Lots more of Roger at http://www.agriculture.com/ag/files/welsch/roger/books.html

Doesn't this remind you of -- well, everybody on the fringe right?