Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
PM Carpenter, your host. Email: pmcarp at mchsi dot com.
Screenshot 2023-10-21 at 2.03.43 PM
In Sausalito overlooking S.F. Bay with my uncle, Lucky Strike nonfilters and a case of Bud. Those splendid days are long gone.


  • ***


« Dear Mr. Chait: Wanna bet? | Main | SOTU 2014 »

January 28, 2014



So basically the writer had no real arguments just an overwhelming need to show the world what a nattering nabob of negativity he is?


As I have said and will continue to say - the best way to understand the way that today's "conservatives" argue is to remember that they start with the conclusion or first principle and work backwards.

Medicaid expansion = evil is the conclusion. So, working backwards looks something like this:

Kasich wants to expand Medicaid, so he's evil (or, at least, giving in to evil on this). Lying is evil, as is the Medicaid expansion, as is Kasich. So Kasich must be lying, or must have lied at some point.

Pointing out an actual lie is inconsequential to the structure of the argument. If there is an actual lie to plug in, sure, why not, can't hurt. But it's not needed.

Same formula applies to any conservative "argument" about tax rates and the Laffer curve, or Keynesian deficit spending, and a modified version can apply to neocon arguments for WAR WAR WAR, wherein "we have to DO SOMETHING" is the conclusion and the war they want is, natch, just the SOMETHING we need.

With respect to taxes and the economy, there will often be an "everybody knows" tacked on to the beginning of the false assertion about taxes or Keynesian economics. It's a tell that a wholly discredited piece of trickledown or Randian bullshit is forthcoming.

Peter G

If only they would keep it down to a dull natter Anne. They have, at Redstate, only one volume setting and that is eleven.

The comments to this entry are closed.