Mike Adams basically is the Chris Mathews of conservatism. Although I support much of what he does I do think that he gets little to much pleasure out of just being plain out obnoxious. The counter argument is that the other side does it so why can't he? I would simply say, isn't the reason he goes after them because they act the way they do? Why then does he decide to adopt their tactics? Seems illogical to me...

In addition, my comments are not meant to be insulting. Rather I wish to pose a question to the other users. This question asks a hard consideration of who we allow to direct and input the ideas we live our lives by. Is Mike Adams someone you respect, and if so why?

When you discuss the ideas brought forward by an individual you should really take a close look at the person coming up with the ideas. Now everyone says you shouldn't attack the person, just attack the message. Usually I would agree, but in this case the person in question does attack others and, as of late, acts very much like those who he is supposedly at war with. I have personally met Dr. Adams and although he is a talented noise maker I seriously doubt the idea that he is any sort of intellectual. I supported him for several years, but recently decided to test him by challenging him directly. The result of my test was clear. Dr. Adams is immature and posses a fragile over-inflated ego. Are his ideas worth our attention?