David Crisp prides himself on saying a lot with a few words. He’s pretty good at it too. I wish I could do that. I’ve been trying to think of a three or four-word remark that would convey my attitude that Crisp masks the many failings of American journalism behind professional condescension.
Ok. Here goes: …
Damn! Can’t do it. I do not have his economy of words, “addition by subtraction,” as he says.
We apparently agree that Dave Budge is a “schmuck” (Budge’s word). An exchange between the two David’s led me to the following exchange between Budge and Jim Larson. The subject at hand is a Scott Brown campaign video Budge posted, a collage of sound bytes surrounding Obama’s painfully obvious statement that no one makes it on his own*.
Larson I’m sure Dave, that we both disregard a lot of what we hear.
Neither Kennedy nor Reagan argued for higher taxes, and I am glad not to pay higher taxes, but what they argued for doesn’t change what was.
What I would like to hear is your cogent explanation of how the high tax rates of the sixties and seventies coexisted with a juggernaut American economy.
I don’t make the request rhetorically. It’s been awhile since I’ve visited the blog, but I can remember reading some illuminating economic commentary here when you took the time to write something other than a glib reply.
Budge: What I would like to hear is you finding me arguing for lower taxes in the current environment – ever. In fact I’ll pay you $1000 if you can find such an argument that I’ve made. In fact, read this.
What your doing is arguing a point that isn’t made either by me or in Brown’s ad.
I’m not in the mood to argue something that I don’t subscribe to.
Larson caught him in one of those moods. Budge exhibits an authoritarian nature, unwillingness to confront evidence that everything he knows is wrong, and clumsy deflection.
*American campaigns offer up stuff like this to allow American journalists to talk about American campaigns without delving in substance.