Why Bush Will Be A Winner

I challenge anyone who thinks David  Broder (of the Broder Bump fame) is a hack  to produce a dumber column than the one Bill Kristol wrote on July 15 2007  with the title

Why Bush Will Be A Winner

and the prediction

George W. Bush's presidency will probably be a successful one.

I didn't try to  find the worst Kristol column. That would be a lot of work, with so many to choose from. Simply used the google and the internets to look for one from a year ago. I could have done this on any given Sunday and found equally hilarious results. If I had looked in October I would have found
Kristol: Is Rudy the most electable Republican? Yes, Rudy.  I didn't make this up. Check out the link for yourself before you tell me about the Broder Bounce.

Back to the July column. It  starts dumb. And then gets dumber.

Let's step back from the unnecessary mistakes and the self-inflicted wounds that have characterized the Bush administration. Let's look at the broad forest rather than the often unlovely trees. What do we see? First, no second terrorist attack on U.S. soil -- not something we could have taken for granted. Second, a strong economy -- also something that wasn't inevitable.

There has still been  no second attack on US soil, as much as McCain and Charlie Black are counting on it for a boost. But the US economy? Now, you say it is  unfair to ridicule Kristol for not being able to predict the course of the economy. But remember,  the man is pointing to it as the saving grace of the Bush Presidency. And it is no throw away comment. It is one of the main things he predicted would make Bush a success.

The economy first: After the bursting of the dot-com bubble, followed by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, we've had more than five years of steady growth, low unemployment and a stock market recovery. Did this just happen? No.

No. It didn't happen. Except in the minds of neo-con idiots. The rip roaring success of the US  economy in 2007 was just a mental erection ( the opposite of Gramm's mental depression ) that had no connection to reality even back then.

Bush pushed through the tax cuts of 2001 and especially 2003 by arguing that they would produce growth. His opponents predicted dire consequences.

And the opponents were right. The dire consequences are a recession, a mortgage crisis and bank failures.

Not in  Kristol's mind:

But the president was overwhelmingly right. Even the budget deficit, the most universally criticized consequence of the tax cuts, is coming down and is lower than it was when the 2003 supply-side tax cuts were passed.

No,  the deficit did not come down. In fact Bush added more to the debt than any previous President. Look at the graph. The dip down was during Clinton Presidency. The rise after that is all Bush.

Then Kristol plays his trump card. After all,  he is one of the people who goaded Bush into invading Iraq.

But wait, wait, wait: What about Iraq? It's Iraq, stupid -- you (and 65 percent of your fellow Americans) say -- that makes Bush an unsuccessful president.

What about Iraq? The Prime Minister there has just called for the US troops to be withdrawn. If not immediately, then according to a Timetable. The Ebola virus was  more popular than Bush and his war  back then. And then it got worse for Bush. He has to be smuggled in and out of Republican fund raisers to avod embarrassing their candidates.

And what happens when voters realize in November 2008 that, if they choose a Democrat for president, they'll also get a Democratic Congress and therefore liberal Supreme Court justices?

Voters like an all Democrat Government now. Like it  lots.

Many Americans will recoil from the prospect of being governed by an unchecked triumvirate of Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. So the chances of a Republican winning the presidency in 2008 aren't bad.

Hillary Clinton is the one  they were planning to run against. Obama is only mentioned just once, in passing. Reality is a bitch ain't it.

. Find anything by Broder (or anyone else)  that is worse than this. I dare you.