http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/merchants-of-doubt/?smid=tw-Nytim…

If you are at all interested in the further exploration of the technique, the rhetorical subterfuge masquerading as argument, that Mr. Chait and Mr. Krugman have been discussing,although it might seem far of field, read Minding The Law by Amsterdam and Bruner published by Harvard University Press. They present through the critique of selected Supreme Court decisions, an holistic critique that embraces Rhetoric,Narrative Theory,Hermeneutics,Critical Legal Theory and an analysis of the law to produce a complex, deep analysis of legal reasoning :that is nothing less than devastating to the Justices, that engage in arguments that seek to promote an ideological position, and expect that their  authority, as members of the Supreme Court, will indemnify them against criticism. The various strategies of argumentative styles are systematically exposed:  Amsterdam’s and Bruner’s methodology is something I attempt to use in my own thought and writing, because I think that the use of public reason is part of a continous inseperable process of reasoning,in service to an achivable act of claification, not an act of ideologically rationalized obfiscation. Amsterdam and Bruner’s great critical work inspires an aspiration to critical honesty exercised within the frame of the cultivation of civic republican virtue.

Polititcal Observer