2. Obama's health care initiative, though popular with the public, seems poised to go down to defeat because the Ben Nelsons of the world are vainglorious idiots who seize upon any increase in government spending as a reason to scuttle Democratic policies.
Now, Mickey doesn't have any evidence connecting #1 to #2 -- he must have left it in his other pants -- but that doesn't stop him. Mickey's patented brand of deductive reasoning tells him that health care reform is faltering precisely because ... of the things Mickey doesn't like about it. [Is that narcissistic or solipsistic? I can never remember the difference. -- ed. Narcissistic. A solipsist wouldn't invent a fictitious editor.] Mickey goes on to blame this crazy focus on cost-cutting on -- what else? --
All seemingly on the basis of a single article in the New Yorker that isn't nearly as convincing as it's made out to be.
Those of us who aren't veteran Kausfiles Konnoisseurs would expect a takedown, or even a link to a takedown, of the New Yorker article that basically destroys Mickey's position. But that would be too easy, so Mickey uses the article (on health care, remember) to take a nonsensical swipe at Democrat orthodoxy on education spending, and leaves it at that. What a pro!
I mean, it's not like he's just lazily repeating himself in every post and trying to wish that article (and the evidence against his poorly thought out position) away so that he can continue to attack a sensible liberal health care reform plan by repeating right-wing talking points verbatim and pretending that he's arguing in good faith, right?
Of course not. He'll roll out that great rebuttal any day now.
Any day now.
