Predicting the Pundits: ESP or Psychology?
It never ceases to amaze me how easy it is to predict what neocons will say and do. Here’s an example from this recent article by Glenn Greenwald.
“Conservative” is a magic word that applies to those who are in other conservatives’ good graces. Until they aren’t. At which point they are liberals.’
… if you hold your head just so and look at Bush from the right angle, he looks an awful lot like a liberal.
Spooky! Digby must be a psychic!
Or, right-winger psychology is just really easy to understand if you just pay attention for a while. The basic tenets are quite simply. 1) Follow the leader. 2) Loyalty is one-way. 3) The spic–er, votes must flow.
Bush’s unpopularity is compromising #3, and since he’s a lame duck anyway the influence of #1 is on the wane. Thus, they throw him to the dogs to make whoever comes next look better.
I should probably mention that to a lesser extent Al Gore did this with Clinton in 2000. It wasn’t any better when he did it, although at least he was just subtly distancing himself rather than openly condemning his former boss and running mate or — the most reprehensible thing the pundits are up to now — pretending that he had been anti-Clinton all along after years of fawning adoration.
Update: I like what John Cole of Balloon Juice has to say about the phenomenon. It’s shorter and punchier than Greenwald’s article, as well, if you’re into that sort of thing.