Thursday, August 16, 2007
Ultra-bipartisanship from David Broder:
In discussing a Fred Thompson candidacy, Broder writes
Thompson, like many of the others running, has caught a strong whiff of the public disillusionment with both parties in Washington -- and the partisanship that has infected Congress, helping to speed his own departure from the Senate.
Yup. No distinctions are made here. The public is disillusioned with both parties.
And there is the hoplessly partisan "Congress", which can mean Republicans or Democrats, but Broder is probably hinting at the party in power: Democrats. Hey David, Democrats have been in power for one measly Friedman Unit. Give Nancy and Harry a break!
Also, nice to see that Thompson departed Congress due to the partisanship that held sway while he was there - from 1994 to 2003 - when Republicans were in control for 6 of the 8 years
Is Broder saying that decade-old Republican partisanship is a reason for Thompson to run in 2008? To clean up the mess, as it were? Looks like it.
Broder will say anything that he thinks might help the GOP stay in power. Signed, sealed and delivered--Broder is a Loyal Bushie of the first order, and now seems to be lining up to be a Loyal Freddie.
Broder is doing the usual Act of Punditry -- filling space* with sentences that don't have to make sense or maintain a consistent philosophy; they merely have to seem ponderous and crafted; a triumph of style over substance. It's opinion so it doesn't have to be real!!
*column inches; tv time, radio waves, etc
I think reading goat entrails would be a more accurate form of prognostication than listening to wankers like Broder.
Right, Broder, the Republicans weren't partisan a bit during the last almost seven years, and since 1994, disemboweling the usual fairly respectful congressional traditions and practices, excluding Democrats from meetings to consider legislation that Democrats, when in the majority, had allowed Republicans into, and relegating Democratic assemblages to pipe-filled basement rooms.
No, Broder, you're right, partisanship can be practiced only by Democrats. How silly of me to forget. I'll try to remember from now on. And if I forget again, I'll just consult the latest Broder pile-of-crap, partisan-biased, corrupt-establishment-loving so-called analysis.
Broder, your hypocrisy is sickening. Are you really so hypocritical, or are you just stupid from years of thinking yourself so smart? I think it's the latter, and for that you deserve pity - not empathy, but pity, which is reserved for only truly pathetic situations and people.
Broder, the dean of pathos. Poor David, but, alas, we knew him way too well.
Broder is incoherent, as usual. These people spin little fictions for a living. They are professional myth makers. In his case alzheimers appears to be striking early.
Thompson left the Senate before the 2002 election during our 9/11 induced unity and before Rove/Bush decided to use war as a wedge issue. He left because he's lazy and felt like making more money in Hollywood.
Actually, I think Broder actually does lean a little to the left. That's why he's always tsk-tsking to Democrats. Democrats Ought To Know Better. Moreover, Democrats must emulate the white-hatted good guy in all those old Saturday-morning cowboy shows. No Matter What Weapons the GOP Uses, Democrats Must Fight By The Queensbury Rules Of Fisticuffs.
Somebody with lexis nexis should do a "broder partisan" search, and see how many times he complained the Republican congress was too partisan, versus 1FU worth of the Democratic.
And the jackass above who's saying Broder is a member of the I-only-beat-you-because-I-love-you crowd should be on domestic violence watch lists.