« Bad economics at National Review | Main | Hoekstra and Santorum: WMD found »

June 21, 2006


I know nothing about the merits of the controversy, although I have tentative views. But procedurally, Kos's comments appear entirely consistent with one another. In the second passage, he is recognizing the prevalence of the technique, not endorsing it. When he and allies are in a position to present a comprehensive case, they plan to argue the point intensely enough to angle the media into a measure of objectivity on the issue. So where's the inconsistency? I hope I'm not missing something too obvious. Could you clarify?

The comments to this entry are closed.