In the Wall Street Journal, a comically frustrated Karl Rove tries some serious asskicking logic:
[A] GPS poll tested the key arguments put forward by advocates of defunding and Mr. Obama's response. Independents went with Mr. Obama's counterpunch 57% to 35%. Voters in Senate battleground states sided with him 59% to 33%. In lean-Republican congressional districts and in swing congressional districts, Mr. Obama won by 56% to 39% and 58% to 33%, respectively.
But, my dear Mr. Rove, logic to tea-party types is like confection-laced poison to rats. There's a real, lethal sting in what you say, but to the Great Defunders its intrinsic doom is nothing compared to the brief ecstasy of mindless gnawing.
Besides, what would they care if they did find themselves back in a House minority? Their special-interest money would still flow, their government checks would still cash, and their cataclysmic virtue would be honored by gerrymandered denizens of nihilism, just before those swing-district congressmen have to pack their bags.
Sure, the old logic of politics is simple enough: win. But to the tea-party crowd "winning' means something exotically new: get everyone to eat the poison, just after you polish off the antidote.