When news readers turn editorialist:
Now we have John Harwood on CNBC going even further, arguing that "idiotic" critics are out of touch with reality:
So much of the commentary that I’ve heard has been really idiotic. Liberals who want universal health care ought to be thanking Harry Reid for getting this done rather than talking about what’s inadequate in the bill. I’m not saying the bill is a good bill.
But if you’re a liberal and you want universal coverage in this country, and think that you can do better, that Harry Reid can do better than he’s done that the White House can do better, they ought to lay off the hallucinogenic drugs because we’ve had a vivid demonstration of the limits of political possibilities on this issue.
Again: There’s a policy dispute underway. Agree or not, people who want to kill the bill see this as desirable because they think passing it would do more harm than good. By and large, they are not calling for the bill to be killed simply because they’re refusing to accept what can or can’t be accomplished. They think it’s bad policy on its own terms, and that it will have adverse real world consequences.
By contrast, those who want to pass the bill think it would do more good than harm. There’s an argument under way on this point. Each side is stating its case. Each side is impassioned. Each side is marshalling facts and figures to support its argument. There’s nothing wrong with this. It’s desirable.
Ah, hallucinogenics. See, that's code for dirty hippy, and that's who everybody who is anybody or wants to be anybody in the Village is happily punching away at right now.
Good for Greg Sargent, whose commentary that is above reacting to Harwood, for calling it out. But I guess it means he's not going to be invited to any of those Village cocktail parties this season.