The Washington Post’s David Broder, generally considered the “dean” of the DC political establishment, has been off his game lately. It’s hard to say for sure what exactly got Broder off track, but it seemed to start shortly after the start of the 110th Congress, just a week or so after Nancy Pelosi took the Speaker’s gavel.
In early February, for example, Broder smeared Democratic activists, baselessly suggesting that they’re anti-military. A week later, Broder said Bush had begun to turn his presidency around and was on the comeback trail. A few weeks after that, he argued that Dems shouldn’t take the prosecutor purge scandal too seriously, because it may not pay political dividends. More recently, Broder recommended a “compromise” between the White House and congressional Dems over war funding, in which Bush would get everything he wants.
Today, Broder directed his ire at the Senate Majority Leader.
David Broder, the sagely insightful “dean” of the Washington press corps, attacked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) today over his claim that the war in Iraq is lost.
Speaking on Sirius radio, Broder said that Reid should “learn to engage mind before mouth opens,” and suggested that Reid’s Senate allies “have a little caucus and decide how much further they want to carry Harry Reid” and his “bumbling performance.”
Asked if Harry Reid is “an embarrassment,” Broder said, “I think so,” since “every six weeks or so there’s another episode where he has to apologize for the way in which he has bungled the Democratic case.”
Despite all of his recent errors of fact and judgment, I still expect better from Broder. This was cheap, unnecessary, and wrong.
Let’s count the problems here. First, I can’t think of anything Reid has had to apologize for. The only thing that comes to mind was last June.
RS: You’ve called Bush a loser.
HR: And a liar.
RS: You apologized for the loser comment.
HR: But never for the liar, have I?
It didn’t sound like Reid was “bungling the Democratic case,” to me.
Second, what “bumbling performance”? He said the war is lost. As TP noted, this is largely the same opinion “shared by President Bush’s regular military adviser Henry Kissinger and several senior U.S. military officials, as well as a majority of the American people.”
Third, Reid couldn’t be too big an embarrassment — his approval rating is about 12 points higher than the president’s.
And fourth, as Atrios noted, Broder seems to be buying into cliquish media hype. “[T]he fact that Republicans whine and screech and cry and carry on is not, in fact, evidence that someone has said anything wrong,” Atrios said, adding, “The disconnect between elite opinion in Washington and reality continues to grow. It’s frightening.”
It’s sadly typical. Reid describes the state of the war, the right engages in name-calling, and the media manufactures the smoke and the fire. Here’s a question Broder didn’t address: does it occur to the media establishment that Reid might be right?