Good writing does its job effectively and subtly, gracefully guiding the reader along. Bad writing, however, is like a nest of termites in your wall. You never see the damage it does, but your clients and customers notice. Go here to see how G.D. Gearino can help.

I won’t rehash the Journolist flap here. Too many bytes have already been sacrificed to it, and I’m disinclined to add to the carnage. (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, type “journolist” into your search engine and start reading.) Still, there was a local note of interest to be found in the affair.

One of the members of Journolist is a lefty writer named Spencer Ackerman, whose contribution to the ruckus was a now all-too-public message to his fellow Journolistas in which he suggested that a right-winger have his head smashed through a plate-glass window, and that a photo of the “bleeding mess” be sent out in a Christmas card “to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear.” (Ackerman added, “Obviously I mean this rhetorically.”)

It didn’t take long for someone to track down a photo and background information on Ackerman, both of which were found in a 2006 interview he gave with a media website. In it, Ackerman doesn’t look like, nor come across as, the type of guy who’d get the best of any brawl occurring in front of a plate-glass window. He’d be the smashee, if anything. One commenter at the site described him this way: “Woody Allen’s little brother.”

But for my money, the funniest thing in the interview was this earnest question and answer:

When’s the last time you volunteered? Where? Three weeks ago I helped out with the Really Free Market anarchist swapmeet in Carrboro, North Carolina.

How do you mock someone who’s already turned himself into a parody?

I received an email message today from Bill Randall, the Republican candidate for Congress whom I called a “loon” in a recent post. Not surprisingly, he objected to that characterization. But Randall gets points for his restrained response. Under a subject line which said, “Seeing that you believe I’m a loon …,” here’s his message:

Dan,

Good day to you.

Your 23 Jun article titled: “None of the above is looking good” raised my eyebrow; not my ire.

If you’re amenable, feel free to call me directly (at your convenience).  This Congressional race is far too important for some to feel that I would be a wasted vote.

Thank you.

Bill Randall

And here is my reply:

Bill,

Thanks for your recent note, and for checking in at Words Assembled Well. I’ll pass on your invitation to interview you, largely because I have no pretensions of being a political writer and analyst. Instead, I’ll make a counteroffer.

But let me make a couple of points beforehand. First, congratulations on your primary victory. I didn’t think you’d pull it off, frankly. It’s nice to be reminded that ordinary people still have a shot (albeit a long one) at breaking into what is increasingly a professional political class. Second, I’ll concede that my calling you “a loon” didn’t exactly do much for maintaining a civil tone. Also, your response — that it “raised my eyebrow; not my ire” — was graceful. Nice touch, that.

With all that said, though, the central point of my previous post stands: Your suggestion that the Obama administration colluded to cause the Gulf oil spill causes me not to take you seriously as a candidate. C’mon. We’re at one of history’s crossroads here, a moment when the political decisions that are made in the next few years will resonate for generations. You don’t inspire confidence that you’ve got the temperament and gravity for the job when you indulge in loony conspiracy theories.

Oops, sorry. There’s that word again.

Anyway, here’s my counteroffer: If you want to address the concern I state above (which means taking another whack at the oil-spill issue, basically), I’ll be happy to publish your thoughts here at WAW — in full, assuming you don’t drop a manifesto in my lap. Until then, you suffer my doubt.

Regards, GDG

Stay tuned.

If I were king of the world — and if not me, who better? — I’d order that the following words be printed upon every voter-registration card. (Yes, I’d still allow elections, even if my royal responsibility would require me to ignore the more foolish whims of voters.)

Beware when the political class preens about protecting us from “special interests.” The most powerful, persistent and anti-constitutional interest is the political class.

That’s a passage from a recent column by George Will, in which he writes specifically about campaign reform. But Will’s observation applies much more widely. Elected officials, when crafting legislation, appear to live by a customized version of the ancient medical oath: First, do no harm to yourself.

In short, what’s good for the people somehow never turns out to be bad for politicians. Funny how that works out.