Matt Yglesias says my windmill column was funny but doesn’t go anywhere. Let me correct him: it wasn’t funny but it does go everywhere. No wait, scratch that. He writes:

WHY CHOOSE VICE? Jonah Goldberg has a funny column about rich liberals on Martha’s Vineyard trying to block the construction of an environmentally sound windmill project that will mess up their views. The trouble is that Jonah’s argument doesn’t really go anywhere. He wants to make fun of windmill opponent Ted Kennedy because that’s the sort of thing conservatives like to do, but to say that Kennedy is in the wrong here is just to say that the environmentalists are right, which isn’t the sort of thing a right-winger wants to say. But the environmentalists are right — rich people’s concerns about their ocean view shouldn’t take precedence over sound energy policy.

Me: Two points: It does not always follow that to say a hypocrite is wrong means the principle he’s betraying is right. If I endorse robust bestiality with ferrets but I only get jiggy with sea turtles, there’s no correct position to be found in the entire sordid scene. A hypocrite, as I understand it, is merely someone who endorses one principle for others but betrays that principle in his own life. Nowhere does it say that the principle being betrayed must be correct.

Second: I did say that I think windmills have more potential than their critics suggest. I got a lot of email from folks explaining to me why I was wrong. It was pretty persuasive, but I’m still taking it under advisement. But, let’s stipulate that windmills like these are bad public policy. That doesn’t make Kennedy any less of a hypocrite, does it? I mean he’s been trying to impose bad public policies he doesn’t adhere to in his private life for decades. Moreover, he’s endorsed good public policies which he’s violated in private too. I assume I don’t have to explain which ones I’m talking about.