Citing the irrelevant is a sleepy trick

A neat trick in American politics is taking advantage of our collective unwillingness to really pay attention to what’s being said.

So, when they talk about a real problem, attributing it or at least insinuating it’s due to some nefarious plot or stupidity by the other side, we nod our heads and sleepily agree when in the next sentence they offer a solution that is completely unrelated but liked by their own side.

They’re relying on us to be long-blinking right past the propaganda, especially in the dog days of summer.

That’s like naming a column after what we’re likely concerned with right now, bending it to fit the opinion fodder they’re offering, like calling giving it a back-to-school theme, when it’s really just a screed yelling facts we all lament, like inflation effects, then tying it to an irrelevant argument, like offering a debate on future energy policy as a means to address today’s inflation.

Ridiculous if you’re not just nodding along, even if we don’t consider that America’s parents aren’t just worried about how much a three-ring binder costs right now. They’re also hoping there’s a decent future left for their children to enjoy through adulthood, a future put in jeopardy by the energy policies just presented as a remedy for today’s inflation.

We may be sleepy in the last half of a hot August, but are we actually as stupid as a presenter of such an argument would presume?

Scott Hunter

editor and publisher