Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
3. Exactly!
Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:34 PM
Dec 2012

It's the new bullshit tactic: Make idiotic claims seem like trial balloon.

If you go to Chait's piece, it starts out like this:

Yesterday, Greg Sargent asked Nancy Pelosi about the prospect of raising the Medicare retirement age. Pelosi chooses her words very, very carefully, so read her answer very, very carefully:

I am very much against that, and I think most of my members are,” Pelosi said in an interview with me today. “I don’t see any reason why that should be in any agreement.” …

<...>

Chait goes on to present his thinking.

Enter Ezra Klein with this characterization of Chait's thinking:

That’s not a policy I like much, but New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait accurately conveys the White House thinking here...

Really? If you don't like it, why the hell are you pushing it. Better yet, why the hell are you claiming Chait's idea "accurately conveys the White House thinking" when no one in the WH is pushing this?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Krugman: I Hope This Isn’...»Reply #3