If you have "no place to go," come here!

From the Department of It's About Fucking Time

Pundits losing faith in Bush (Great headline).

Of course, "pundits" are by definition authoritarian pundits, but let that pass:

For 10 minutes, the talk show host grilled his guests about whether "George Bush's mental weakness is damaging America's credibility at home and abroad." For 10 minutes, the caption across the bottom of the television screen read, "IS BUSH AN 'IDIOT'?"

But the host was no liberal media elitist.

How curious that the stenographer doesn't put the authoritarian talking point "liberal media elitist" in irony quotes, eh? I mean, I haven't seen one of those around since... Well, I can't remember how long!

It was Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman turned MSNBC political pundit.

Well, splendid. Perhaps Joe Scarborough has had a sudden attack of sanity? Read on:

While most conservative [sic] media figures have not abandoned Bush, influential [authoritarian] opinion-makers increasingly have raised questions, expressed doubts or attacked the president outright, particularly on foreign policy, on which he has long enjoyed their strongest support. In some cases, they have complained that Bush has drifted away from their shared principles; in other cases, they think it is the implementation that has fallen short. In most instances, Iraq figures prominently.

Remember, that to these guys, as to slightly revise Digby, authoritarianism can never fail; it can only be failed. Since all the followers can't be replaced, it follows that all success will require is a new leader. And the new leader is already being planned for.

Unfortunately for the authoritarian project, it's the followers that are their problem. The next Decider will fuck up just as badly as Bush did, because The Base will own the next Decider just as much as they own Bush (which is why McCain sucked up to Jerry Falwell, eh?).

In a later telephone interview, Scarborough said he aired the segment because he kept hearing even fellow Republicans questioning Bush's capacity and leadership, particularly in Iraq. Like others, he said, he supported the war but now thinks it is time to find a way to get out. "A lot of conservatives are saying, 'Enough's enough,' " he said. Asked about the reaction to his program, he said, "The White House is not happy about it."

So, even Scarborough's "had enough"? Maybe so. But enough of what, and what does he want next? I'd say he wants a leader with "sound conservative principles" who is "intellectually curious." Maybe even a vegetarian who's interested in architecture, likes opera (Wagner) ....

Now, that Scarborough and his ilk are willing to give Bush the heave-ho is good news for us; it means that we're having an impact; the correllation of forces is changing (though they will never admit this).

But in no sense does it portend the end of the conservative project to destroy Constitutional government and replace it with an authoritarian system; they will only surrender that goal ... Well, I was about to write, "when it's ripped from their cold, dead heads." But that would be too Coulter-esque. Let's say something like "when a more historically grounded and humane consensus about the role government should play in American life is achieved."

NOTE Curiously, or not, the stenographer, Peter Baker, quotes exclusively from authoritarians like Will, Kristol, and the rest of the usual suspects. A classic case of narrative trumping sotry--since the real point of the story is that even though Inerrant Boy is the total fuckup democrats have known him to be since 2000, only authoritarian opinions matter.

No votes yet