PERSUASION: I'm a bit hesitant to post this excerpt from AP writer Frazier Moore's recent column on the dying art of political persuasion, because, inevitably, the readers that I enjoy hearing from most will mistakenly believe it's aimed at them. Still, as a blogger who's been fortunate enough to generate a controversial post or two over the years, I can assure you that the phenomenon that Moore is describing here is both real and (kinda sorta) amusing, so I'm going to pass it along:

I am someone who aspires to change a few readers' minds with what I write. And I . . . sometimes have to wonder if I'm breaking through.

In particular, I am perplexed by how much of the e-mail I get seems uninformed by the piece I wrote that spurred it. I am struck by how, instead, what I wrote often serves only as a trigger for readers to sound off on what they already believed, with no reference to my article apart from referendumlike praise or condemnation directed toward me ("you're great" or "you're an idiot"), based on whether or not we seem to agree. [Emph added]

PS: The Matt Miller column that inspired Moore's musings is here.

PPS: Just so you'll know that I'm not simply picking on those who have the temerity to disagree with your not always humble correspondent, here's an example of the kind of comment I genuinely enjoy -- and sometimes even find myself, well, persuaded by.