« The latest WSJ tax/income sophistry | Main | The latest treason-mongering »

July 12, 2006


Brendan: I certainly agree that to "make a claim about a new report that your experts contradict in the report is chutzpah indeed," but I think you have to see it as "strategy indeed." You're studying politics-- study this!

It's a hew kind of political strategy based on the insight that if you do make a claim like that, and you don't have to back off because the forces do not exist to make you, then you have, in a way, demonstrated your Administration's power "over" reality, and you can roll over other realities, other people, that way.

What if this method Bush has is a basic tool of governing? I think it is. Not a bug, a feature.

This is combined with another strange fact about the Bush White House. It is organized to make sure that a lot of "contrary" information never reaches Bush, which is the way he wants it. You have to re-draw the whole notion of "White House deliberations" for this group.

I don't think political scientists have any "rational actor" theories that truly explain Bush 43. Do you?

I posted my reply to Jay as a new post here.

Note to readers who followed Brad DeLong's link to Jay Rosen's comment above -- I hope you'll scroll up to read the post, and follow the link to my reply to Rosen.

The comments to this entry are closed.