Not an "intellectual exercise"

Getting back to that Andrew Sullivan semi-maybe_not-apology for running the Betsy McCaughey article in 1994. He wrote:

In my view, it had many interesting points and as an intellectual exercize in contemplating the full possible consequences of Hillary Clinton's proposal, it was provocative and well worth running.

I read the article at the time. It changed my view of the Clinton plan for the negative. Why? Because it stated as facts things that turned out not to be true.

It is an intellectual exercise to review accurate statements about something. It is not an intellectual exercise to read blatant falsehoods and then make a judgment on a policy. That's a waste of time. If the reader is supposed to discern falsehoods, why not publish a blank piece of paper instead? It would be as useful a Sullivan-intellectual-exercise.

The reader was not in a position to look at the actual bill and consult with lawyers. So when McCaughey wrote that you could not purchase health care outside of the Clinton plan, how is anybody supposed to discount that lie?


posted by Quiddity at 10/08/2009 03:40:00 PM