"

Say I take you out for dinner and pick up the tab. Whether I can afford it is irrelevant; you still get the free lunch. So why are liberals so obsessed with the incomes of others?

Indeed, for Occupy Wall Street and the Democratic politicians supporting them, raising taxes on the rich remains an article of faith.

"

This is the opening of an Jason Lewis’s actual opinion piece in today’s STrib.

This shit is off the nonsense charts. First, obviously, if Jason can’t afford lunch, he can’t pick up lunch for me. Second, THAT IS 100% TOTALLY RELEVANT. Dude, if you’re trying to get the lunch without being able to afford it, you should tell me right away so we don’t go to lunch and it’s not a huge awkward deal when the check comes.

Also, I know Lewis says things that only logically operate in his wacky conservative discourse, but not only is the idea that “you didn’t pay, so it’s free to you” not equate to something being “free” — that’s just basic — but linking this inaccuracy to “liberals” is baffling.  I have now idea how liberals or Occupy or Democrats or even Republicans or the rich who want fair tax rates has anything to do with that opening analogy.

Look, I know that Lewis is an established local “politics” personality, so the STrib doesn’t edit him. Par for the course. It’s how it works. Get a following, say whatever you want because eyeballs are the goal, not conveying accurate or actionable info. But it’s still a shock to see such egregiously wrong writing in a newspaper.  

  1. mediation posted this