« Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 206 -- Riotous French. | WILLisms.com | Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 207 -- Lower Taxes, Higher Growth. »

Eleanor Clift Gets It Right(?)

Eleanor Clift is one of the more obtuse pundits out there. I cannot recall a single prediction of hers coming true - for example, her bold prediction that John Kerry would win the election last fall, in the face of all polls showing to the contrary, was a typical bit of Clift wishful thinking triumphing over cold hard facts.

Reading Clift columns is very useful though for trying to get a handle on the thoughts of that mushy liberal base of the Democratic Party that thinks Michael Moore goes a little too far, but also thinks Ted Kennedy is a moderate. From Real Clear Politics (the most well-trodden link in my bookmark arsenal) we find this piece from her today entitled Pick Your Battles that outlines some of the self-deluding smugness going on among Dems today. Surprisingly, Clift says the Democrats should forego a scorched-earth attack on Alito, saving the Stalingrad offensive for the fight to replace 85 year-old arch-liberal John Paul Stevens. I give her points for actually being right about this - and I hope her squishy readers approve.

Clift makes a lot of questionable claims in her piece, such as Harry Reid 'shamed' the Republicans by invoking Rule 21 earlier this week. I am not so sure that 'shamed' is the first emotion Republicans felt when Reid pulled this stunt. I think the phrase 'seething outrage' would have been more apt, Eleanor (and 'pathetic desperation to stop Bush momentum' would accurately describe Reid's motives).

Clift also described the Plame Affair as a 'crisis of government', which, if true, must be the quietest and best-hidden crisis any government has ever had to undergo. Again, wishful thinking prevails.

Finally, she invokes the obligatory ghost of Watergate (but oddly forgot Vietnam) to describe the ultimate liberal wet dream: impeachment. Sorry, you can gin up all the outrage you want over the 'lies' that led us into Iraq, but the (yawn) Plame Affair is hardly a cancer on the presidency, and Iraq is not Vietnam.

How odd it is to think that liberals would actually be comforted by a repeat of the Watergate/Vietnam era. Makes you wonder where their priorities lie.

Posted by Ken McCracken · 5 November 2005 09:16 AM

Comments

Posted by: Zsa Zsa at November 5, 2005 11:48 AM

Posted by: Zsa Zsa at November 5, 2005 11:57 AM

Posted by: Eneils Bailey at November 5, 2005 04:14 PM

Posted by: Zsa Zsa at November 5, 2005 07:06 PM

Posted by: Giacomo at November 6, 2005 06:08 AM