There really is no other word to use at this point.
David Broder, in a chat with Washingtonpost.com readers last week:
New York: Will you and the media ever apply as much scrutiny to the Giuliani marriages as you have done to the single Clinton marriage? David S. Broder: I plan to leave both subjects alone.
David Broder, today:
No one who has read or studied the large literature of memoirs and biographies of the Clintons and their circle can doubt the intimacy and the mutual dependence of their political and personal partnership.No one can reasonably expect that partnership to end should Hillary Clinton be elected president. But the country must decide whether it is comfortable with such a sharing of the power and authority of the highest office in the land.
And then, this:
The former president's intervention -- volunteered during a campaign appearance on her behalf in South Carolina -- raised the second, and largely unspoken, issue identified by my friend from the Clinton administration: the two-headed campaign and the prospect of a dual presidency.In his view, which I share, this is a prospect that will test the tolerance of the American people far more severely than the possibility of the first female president -- or, for that matter, the first black president.
As my friend says, "there is nothing in American constitutional or political theory to account for the role of a former president, still energetic and active and full of ideas, occupying the White House with the current president."
Got that? It's not going to test the patience of David Broder and others like him. Oh no. It's going to test the patience of "the American people."
Just like, I suppose, how it tested the patience of the American people when Clinton was impeached over a blow job. Broder is right. The data doesn't lie. Clinton was never more popular than at the end of the impeachment process. People were fed up - with the actions of the Congress and the people who supported them. You would think Broder would remember this given that he was one of them. [More from Matt Y. here]
Seriously though, what does someone have to do to lose their job as a pundit? Broder isn't just often wrong. He's often spectacularly wrong.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
