yes, I was mainly referring to the font tags, however; some people make it a habbit to lay a site out with tables when they should be using css.
i'm going to absolutely disagree with you (and the w3c/wai) there. content
is data; and until there's an effective replacement for tables, there's no way to do certain things without them.
for example, to make a page that fills the horizontal width of a screen always, has blocks of text and fixed sized blocks:
tables expand downwards rather than jump underneath each other, if the text is huge, the table compensates and all other parts of the table reflect that, and they degrade well if you're careful. They separate a page into clear areas, and you know they'll always be in the correct (relative) position, rather than having to "lock" or "push" things into place with css, which imo should be something that other people can change safely without knowing the inner workings of the designer's mind.
EDIT: i gotta add, table cells in xhtml strict/xhtml transitional/html 4 strict/transitional are possibly the only blocks that support vertical-align:center; that's a big thing.
solutions i've seen to split pages up how i'd like with divs/css have tons more markup than solutions with tables and css.
that one line by the wai is somewhat overquoted... the w3c have a good side and a bad side.. the good side provides a wealth of technical information and guidelines, and brings unrelated projects into a cohesion... the bad side trys to promote those guidelines as irrefutable law.