Bill, I really don’t need you to tell me that the leading Democratic candidates for president are hesitant to discuss the relative benefits of the troop surge in Iraq.
I seem to have read somewhere that the surge is working. That’s good! It’s important to take care of stuff in Iraq! But you know what? I really don’t give a shit what Obama and Clinton are or are not saying about the surge while they’re reaching out to primary voters. What, you expect them to suddenly change their messages in the middle of a campaign? You were once Quayle’s chief of staff — you should know how this stuff works.
I suppose there is the idea that it is somehow funny to use the Times’ op-ed pages to even out the playing field in American public debate about Iraq, but I can read this in so many other places that it just seems like a waste of space. You have a year to make your point — is this really what you want to leave as the record of your tenure?
I still happen to think the Times op-ed page is an important forum. You cheapen it by sounding like a syndicated writer. And quit using it as talking points for sparring with Juan Williams. If I wanted to watch Fox News Sunday, I’d wake up in time to do it.
I never thought I’d say this, but Paul Krugman was so much more interesting this morning.