I think it’s interesting that social conservative analytic arguments have a very good track record. Racial conservatives argued that abolishing slavery would eventually lead to political equality. Most racial liberal poo-pooed that, but the conservatives were right. And, again, it was said that after political equality, next thing you know some black dude would be marrying your daughter. Poo-poo, again, but again the conservatives were right. You’ve seen much the same thing with sex-and-gender issues. Probably if everyone in the United States circa 1960 had known that taking modest steps in the direction of feminism would, in fact, lead during their lifetimes to the legalization of sodomy, to gay men marrying each other, to a small but growing number of fathers staying home to take care of the kids, to legal abortions, etc., etc., etc. the public woud have overwhelmingly rejected those early steps. But the poo-pooers won the day, the people did not believe, and now majorities support most of those developments, and all signs are that the unpopular cause of gay marriage will grow more popular after some generational turnover.
Not to be too anal (heh!) about this, but the onomatopoeic verb expressing contempt or impatience or belittlement is spelled “pooh-pooh”. “Poo-poo” is what small children call their own less literary productions. Is Yglesias’ subconscious signaling what he really thinks about lying for political advantage? Using (and misusing) the word three times in one paragraph seems excessive, even obsessive. JYB repeats the misspelling, but only once.
By the way, if anyone needs a freelance copy editor, indexer, or proofreader, please e-mail: I am available for large or small jobs.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.