Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

How to Write a Laurie Roberts Column

The Wall Street Journal has pointed out that employment benefits are so high that some people are making more money while unemployed than while working.  Economists argue that these benefits might sound great, but it makes it hard to get the economy moving again once the stay at home restrictions are off.  

State Sen. Sylvia Allen and James T. Harris discussed this point on a recent show and naturally the Republic's Laurie Roberts took the opportunity to mock them.  I was planning to point out some obvious fallacies from her column when I realized that her column didn't have any actual arguments.  It was comprised entirely of fallacies--ad hominem attacks, name calling, irrelevant points that she thinks are rebuttals, fabricated quotes and invented ideas that she "speculates" are in Sylvia Allen's head. 

Then I realized that the current column is not the exception. It's a model column.  Everything from the name calling, terrible profile picture, fake quote, references to irrelevant prior stories--they are all standard Laurie Robert's points.  What's sad is that I don't think that she realizes that she's just listing together a string of fallacies and irrelevancies.  I think that she actually believes that she has made an argument, or at least written something coherent.  I'm not offended because Laurie is Liberal.  I'm offended because she simply can't write.  She's an embarrassment to the paper.  

Here's her entire column with my narration.  For you journalists out there, how do you think this would do as a Cronkite school midterm project.  What grade would you give it?  Here's the original column.  Click here  a PDF of my response.

 

Even her compliments are insults.

Laurie Roberts proves that she can't even give a complement without wrapping it in an insult.  I'm thinking that there's some deep psychological baggage here.  The problem with Laurie is not just the shrill negativity, it's the poor quality of the writing.  There are a couple dozen people at the Republic who could write a better column.  

 

Did KTAR and Brahm Correct this Hoax?

Remember this?

The story was too good to be true.  The truth, of course, was much darker.  The woman certainly not a Trump supporter and certainly wouldn't have followed his "advice".  Then there is the question of whether foul play is involved.  So where's the Republic coverage? This is yet another example of an international story that happened in Arizona but did not get local coverage.  I mean that it didn't get any local coverage as soon as the local media figured out that it wasn't an anti-trump story.  

 

Real Professions Police Themselves.

Journalists like to blame the current level of toxicity on talk radio and  social media.   The mythology goes that in the Golden Years before Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich poisoned politics professional journalists ensured that political discourse was conducted with a certain level of civility.  The latest chapter of this myth says that there are now two types of writers--trained professionals who follow ethical and professional guidelines and amateurs empowered by Blogs, Facebook and Twitter who have heightened the toxicity far beyond ways that Rush or Newt could have envisioned.  

Like most myths, this one is largely bunk.  If you think that mainstream journalists follow professional standards, or hold each other accountable, take a look at this cartoon from the Star's David Fitzsimmons.  

 

That's right.  Republican Governors as goose stepping, MAGA hat wearing Nazis marching their states into a COVID grave because Donald Trump orders them to "Do your duty."  Is it possible to be more offensive than that?  Well, if you look closely, it CAN get more offensive.  Notice the shape of the grave?  It's actually an underground room--and if you have seen Schindler's List, you will recognize that the Nazis are walking their states into a gas chamber.  

Real professions police themselves.  I'm waiting for someone in the media to speak out against this unbelievably offensive depictions of these Governors....I'm not hopeful, but I a waiting.

 

Montini Channels McCain Again.

EJ Montini hated John McCain and trolled him for years.  Yet, since the Senators' death, Montini--clearly on the wrong side of history--has mad a habit of pretending that he was a big McCain fan.  He also likes to channel the late Senator by writing column after column of "McCain would do this..." in order to make his points.  This type of tasteless journalism has become so rampant that Meghan McCain finally tried to shut it down. 

 

Montini didn't get the memo and is once again trying add much needed credibility to his writing by relying on the "what would McCain do" shtick.  

I pointed out a few days ago that Montini's greatest sin is not that he's a shrill partisan who can't seem to make a decent argument.  Montini's greatest sin is that he can no longer make an ORIGINAL argument.  His reliance on the tired and offensive "what would McCain do" columns are just one more piece of evidence that Montini's days as a columnist are long past.  

 

 

 

 

 

I thought there was a consensus?

This can't be right.  

You mean that different models are coming up with different results?  These models can't be that complex.  After all,  creating a model for the virus would only include a handful of variables--and the time period is only a few months or maybe a couple of years. 

Compare the virus to, say, the climate.  Climate modeling has hundreds of complex variables and takes place over the course of decades yet those models are so accurate that we know just what the world will look like in the year 2050.  In fact, the climate models are so accurate that they account for everything.  Is it super cold this year?  Hmm.  That's in the model.  Is it super hot this year?  That's in the model.  Dry?  Wet?  Lots of storms? No storms? Locusts?  Tribal conflict in Sudan?  Yep.  Climate models are so good that we can explain all of that stuff. 

Furthermore, if we would only spend a few trillion dollars and shut down a few industries--construction, cement production, oil drilling--and make some real sacrifices we can prevent the global catastrophe that is going to arrive on October 14th of 2052. 

Follow the models.  Go with the scientists.  After all, there is a consensus.  The Science is settled.  

 

The Greatest Sin of All

Can you spot the two logical fallacies in this headline?

The first fallacy is easy to find.  Montini is not making an argument, He is making an accusation.  This is part of an Ad Hominem attack.  Rather than actually argue against Biggs' desire to open up the economy, he accuses him of having a death wish.    The second is a little more tricky.  Montini is committing the False Dilemma Fallacy.   Montini is (falsely) claiming that there are only two choices:  keep the country in its current state of lock down, or let everyone die.  So Andy Biggs is not advocating choices along a spectrum, he has a "death wish for citizens".

However these fallacies are not Montini's greatest sin.  Check out this parody from the Babylon Bee and then see my additional commentary below. 

Babylon Bee is national parody site.  They are mocking what liberals all over the country are saying.  Montini's column is simply a local version of a national theme.  He could be replaced with a bot--or an intern--who inserts local names into today's national leftist theme.   Sure, Montini has lost the ability to make a rational argument, but that's not the greater sin. 

The greater sin is that Montini has lost the ability to be original.  

 

 

 

  

The Virus doesn't care WHY you attended the Rally.

The media are hailing ICU nurse Lauren Leander as a hero for protesting at this weekend's rally.  Meanwhile some members of the media are calling the demonstrators idiots for not maintaining a social distance.  Of course, the virus doesn't care WHY you attended the rally.  Lauren Leander was as much in the social mix as the protesters.  The only difference is that Lauren Leander is a Vector.  She works in an ICU and is more likely to have come in contact with COVID patients, so her stunt may have exposed the entire crowd.   Furthermore, if she was exposed to the Coronavirus, she is much more likely to be in contact with a highly vulnerable ICU patient.  

So the person who took the biggest risk and may cause the most damage is the one person who should have known not to attend the rally.  And naturally, the one whom the media are declaring a hero.  

Einstein goes to Heaven.

This Tweet reminds me of a joke.

 

Einstein dies and goes to heaven only to be informed that his room is not yet ready. "I hope you will not mind waiting in a dormitory. We are very sorry, but it's the best we can do and you will have to share the room with others" he is told by the doorman.

Einstein says that this is no problem at all and that there is no need to make such a great fuss. So the doorman leads him to the dorm. They enter and Albert is introduced to all of the present inhabitants. "See, Here is your first room mate. He has an IQ of 180!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss mathematics!"

"And here is your second room mate. His IQ is 150!"
"Why that's wonderful!" Says Albert. "We can discuss physics!"

"And here is your third room mate. His IQ is 100!"
"That Wonderful! We can discuss the latest plays at the theater!"

Just then another man moves out to capture Albert's hand and shake it. "I'm your last room mate and I'm sorry, but my IQ is only 80."
Albert smiles back at him and says, "So, where do you think interest rates are headed?"

We have no idea what stock prices are going to do.  Harris isn't educated enough to know what he doesn't know.  That would be fine except that when he's not giving financial advice, Harris spends his time writing about Charter School Finance--which is also a topic about which he is ignorant.  

Compounding this tragedy is that his ignorance comes with a populist mean streak.  That's why he Tweets about "Charter School Millionaires."  

Mean spirited and ignorant is no way to go through life son. 

 

 

Here's how false stories spread....

Fresh back from furlough, Laurie Roberts has a breathless column about Democrats challenging Rep. Bolick's signatures.  Unfortunately, Lauri doesn't understand the electoral process.  Check this out.   

The only other candidates running for the two House seats in Legislative District 20 are Republican Rep. Anthony Kern and Democrat Judy Schwiebert, though a write-in candidate or independent still could get on the Nov. 3 ballot. 

Roberts thinks that if Bolick gets bounced, Republicans will only be able to have one candidate for the General Elections.  Therefor, they will automatically lose a seat.  Then she goes into how tight the margin is etcetera.  

The problem is that Laurie doesn't understand the process.  I'm sure that Rep. Bolick will be fine, but if she does get bounced, the Republicans can run a write in candidate.  In fact, I think that Bolick herself can run as a write in candidate.  If that candidate gets the same number of write-in votes as she would have needed in signatures, then she is on the General Election ballot.  So Republicans are definitely going to have a candidate in this race and it's most likely to be Shawna Bolick.