Deep thought

It takes someone as shallow as Matt Taibbi to make Terry Eagleton look deep.

Adding: I was going to just do a short post about the fact that Taibbi doesn't seem to know the difference between atheism and agnosticism, but having read his post on the topic, it's clear that this is but one of many, many, many, many distinctions that Taibbi can't be bothered to understand.

And, to answer Taibbi's question about Eagleton's use of the phrase a priori, he used it there because it was fundamental to his argument. To miss this, and then go on to write, "As for the actual argument..." is to reveal yourself to be an ignorant fool.