- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Every year that goes by renders pundits like Broder increasingly irrelevant. In a small way, that is sad. Broder really does have a background as a working reporter who does a workmanlike job of sorting things out.
But his background and personality make him incapable of understanding just how radical Bush and his cronies are. It can't happen here! I think the comment by Krugman, quoting Kissinger, to the effect that revolutionaries are often so far from the prevailing norm that most people cannot believe what is happening applies to Broder. Kissinger's example was Napolean.
Our example is the modern Republican party. Broder thinks it is politics as usual, and that it is important for "the president" to "succeed."
This president has already failed and is now a dangerous wounded animal. All that is left is resistance. Broder's yards and yards of breathless pro-Bush commentary sails right over Broder's own head. Broder cannot see what he has done and will, forever, shake his head in wonder at how his world is slipping away.
