perennial candidates and perennial "losers"

Two friends/acquaintances of mine messing with each other-- HoosierPundit pointing out two cut-and-paste errors and Andy Horning responding (pointing to the trivial nature of the remark and some far larger issues)...

I agree with HP that such mistakes are regrettable. But I agree with AH that mistakes happen (especially in smaller budget efforts) and it pales against the far larger issues he'd like to raise. Excerpts:

For years now I’ve been called a “perennial,” “frequent” and even “habitual” candidate by people who won’t just come out and say what they mean. The fact, however, is that I have not run for office nearly as many times as most of our congressmen, senators, judges, dog catchers, etc.

And yet do we call Richard Lugar a “perennial candidate?” Certainly not. We call him “honorable.”

What the perennial, frequent and habitual cynics, blatherers, bloggers and “journalists” mean by their “perennial” sophistry is that I am a loser. I wish they’d come out and say it.

George Bush may be destroying America, but he’s a winner. I may be trying to set things right, but I’m a loser. Say it.

Those who spring onto the scene with fame, money, power and success are winners. The poor underdogs fighting for liberty and justice for all …are quite obviously losers....

Call me a loser. Call all of us embattled underdog protesters losers. I won’t mind.

I’ll be in the best company.

That is fact.