I figured out what President Bush is up to! The deterioration of Iraq, the lame Katrina response, the cronyism, the tolerance of corruption all around him, the inexplicable Harriet Miers pick… it’s all part of an evil-genius Rovian plot to deliberately lose the 2006 elections!!!
Why, you ask? Well, Bush and Rove understand that the public periodically has a spasmodic, largely irrational urge to “kick the bums out,” and that when one party controls the entire apparatus of government, that party inevitably suffers when such a spasm occurs. They sense that an anti-incumbent spasm coming on, and they know it’ll be like a political tsunami when it hits — unstoppable in its force and stunning in its power. They’re smart enough to realize they can’t stop it, so they’ve decided to try and hasten it by displaying as much incompetence as humanly possible!
Again, why? Because they also understand that, if the Democrats take back the Congress in 2006, they will have peaked too soon (just like the GOP did in 1994), and the Republicans will have a much better chance of holding onto the White House in 2008 (just like Clinton did in 1996) because the public will have exhausted its bum-kicking spasm and won’t have one single party to blame for the country’s problems anymore. Instead of outrage against the ruling party, abject cynicism about the whole process will once again reign supreme. Advantage: Rove!
Okay, okay I don’t really believe this… but hey, you never know… :)
P.S. Full disclosure: the day after the 1994 election, when everyone in the MSM was solemnly proclaiming the day’s CW — that Clinton was doomed, DOOMED — I boldly declared that, no, Clinton would be re-elected two years hence precisely because the Republicans had taken back the Congress. (I think I said this to a fellow eighth grader in the middle-school bathroom. Anyway, I know I said it.) After all, I reasoned, it will be harder now for the public to blame Clinton for everything, because he can just blame the Republicans back! This explanation of the 1994-1996 dynamic, out of the mouths of babes (I was 13), so beautiful in its simplicity, has not yet been accepted by political historians, but by God, I stand by it. :)
|
Categories: Uncategorized
|
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:42:38 pm
what? no link to a blog post circa 1994?
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:42:46 pm
Why would Bush want to give the White House to the Dems? If he were to do so, John Paul Stevens would abruptly retire and be replaced by another delusional, Lopez-dissenting fool.
Your theory is silly (as I’m sure you intended it to be). Bush wants John Paul Stevens to croak while the GOP is in power, and he’s not looking any sicker under Bush’s reign.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:44:18 pm
Patrick, you may want to re-read Brendan’s post.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:46:55 pm
Why would Bush want to give the White House to the Dems?
Re-read the post … my theory (which is indeed 99.9% silly) is that he wants to give back the Congress, but NOT the White House. Or, to be more precise, he understands he has no choice but to lose an election (because of the inevitable “spasm”) and he figures better to lose a mid-term election than a presidential one, when TWO branches are in play instead of just one.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:48:09 pm
what? no link to a blog post circa 1994?
Heh.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:49:09 pm
You know, Brendan, the historians haven’t accepted your explaination of 1994-96, but I certainly agree with it. And I can see the same thing happening in 2006, though in order for it to work, the Republicans will have to go with a more moderate Presidential candidate.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:51:59 pm
the Republicans will have to go with a more moderate Presidential candidate.
As a bunch of Notre Dame students once said: RUDY! RUDY! RUDY! :)
Dems take back the Congress in 2006 = Giuliani beats Hillary in 2008.
October 4th, 2005 at 12:13:05 am
Great we will get a guy who endorsed frickin Mario Cuomo for governor of Neeew Yaawk. He will give us the kind of intelligent, modest justices we need.
October 4th, 2005 at 12:21:40 am
So then why did Bill Clinton feel the need to sign DOMA…because he believed gays should be denied equal rights?!?
October 4th, 2005 at 12:26:24 am
I love how all sorts of irrelevant political pet peeves are now coming out of the woodwork. :)
October 4th, 2005 at 1:22:47 am
Gays have equal rights, they can marry already, just not each other :-)
Of course that situation has, in some cases created more rights for gays. Many work places have same-sex partner benefits, but since there is no official recognition of gay marriage there is no requirement to prove your actually married, so any two guys or girls can get benefits but you have to be married in order to recieve benefits if you aren’t gay. Quite interesting.
October 4th, 2005 at 1:29:03 am
Yes, and the solution to that problem is… legalize gay marriage. (Or at least civil unions.)
October 4th, 2005 at 1:34:56 am
I’m assuming that’s a yes to the second paragraph, not the first. And if so, I agree.
October 4th, 2005 at 9:34:48 am
I think what is happening is Bush is trying to shift to the center to prevent what happened to Clinton in 1994. If you will recall, Clinton stayed hard-left into the mid-terms and got burned. Bush is trying to appear centrist in an effort to prevent large Democratic gains in the mid-terms, ala Republicans in 1994. Don’t think it will work, though. The far right is what put Bush into office. More moderates lean Democrat these days, so I think Miers is going to hurt Bush with his base and with the mid-terms.
October 4th, 2005 at 10:42:57 am
Wow, Brendan, that’s great political sense at the age of 13!
My brother is pretty savy at 15, and was politically savy at 12-13 as well. ;) I don’t think I ever was that savy.
October 4th, 2005 at 2:13:30 pm
My fever is too high to read that many paragraphs.
October 4th, 2005 at 2:15:43 pm
Angrier, why do you say more moderates lean to the left these days? Is that just your observation? I am not sure I agree or disagree, and I have no survey or statistical data to make a cse either way, but I know many mods who do not lean left, yet do not lean right enough to like the right wingers. It is anecdotal evidence, of course, so I am just wondering if so is yours, or you have some back-up. Thanks.
October 4th, 2005 at 4:47:57 pm
A&A - how the $#@$@$@ can the “far right” put *anyone* into office - for one thing, there aren’t 3 million “far right” in this country … any more than there could be 3 million “far left” in theis country …
I would love to find some comparatively unbiased statistics as to “membership” in the “far left” and “far right” … as well as something to explain how each component subgroup of each merits being included in the “far xxx” …
Yes, the “far right” gets a lot of publicity - but it seems to be all the same old (VERY tired and old) faces being trotted out most of the time …
From what I can see, the “far right” only has the little power it has because the MSM chooses to give ‘em coverage … if the “far right” got the coverage it merited, it would be the 2 column-inches per week just beside the ads at the end of the newspaper … and 1.5 of those 2 inches would cover the Good Works that they do as part of their various ministries …
Answer me this - when did the MSM as represented by the NYT/LAT/WaPo last cover the “far left” in this country in *any* meaningful way ? Or does this country not have any “far left” ?
(grin)
October 5th, 2005 at 3:02:34 am
Brendan, I hereby Certify that you Did indeed put forth that analysis & prediction, ya little nerd. :)
As to ROOO-DEE! ~ I saw the astute & eminent Dick Morris :) on TV Touting his new Book about Condi vs. Hil ‘08. He stated that only Rice can stop Rodham Clinton. Allowed as how she will pull 50% of the Afro-Am vote from the Dems. This I doubt but still, maybe those Boots were made for Runnin’. :>
Perfesser Mike, there are more like you at home??? My God. (Hi Matt. :)
Patrick, a speedy recovery from your Fever. Stay away from them Swamps, boy, you’ll Feel better. :)
And now ~ Alasdair. Alasdair Alasdair Alasdair. :) “…the ‘far right’ gets a lot of publicity - but it seems to be all the same old (VERY tired and old) faces being trotted out…” Don’t Castigate yerself, Rob Roy MacGregor, yer Face looks Fine as ever was. ;> “…explain how each component subgroup of each merits being included in the ‘far xxx’ …” And lay off My clan too while yer At it there, wouldyez. :} [XXX-Files leer… :]