Bartlett Loses His BDS Pills

Gazing into his crystal ball, it becomes increasingly clear to Bruce Bartlett that the Democrats will win the next election. Thus he endorses Hillary! for President with the same aplomb that Neville Chamberlain showed when he signed over The Sudetenland for “peace in our time.” He must have been too busy crystal ball gazing to have watched Barak Obama in the latest Democratic Debate. Or to have noticed that Hillary! has nearly 100% name recognition, with negatives as high as her positives.

I was relieved to notice that Bartlett didn’t believe it was 1932. This is an astute observation.

In 1932, unemployment was 25%, not approximately 4.5%. Also, the GNP (used instead of the GDP in earlier years as a measure of national economic activity) had contracted by 20% since 1929. Currently, the US GDP is solidly over $13T in current year dollars and has expanded steadily the last three years. So if you ignore the total absence of a profound economic collapse, maybe Bartlett’s metaphor can be seen as something other than the tragic results of taking acid above the first floor and then landing squarely on his head.

Bartlett then discusses how Clinton’s economic policy made everything peachy. He launches this discussion with no reference to the Democraticization of The Internet while Bill Clinton was in office and with not the slightest mention of the NASDAQ crash as Clinton was leaving, or of the Attacks of September 11, 2001. Bartlett criticizes George W. Bush from a world as imaginary as the one inhabited by Dennis Kucinich and Grandfather Twilight.

A discussion of the economics of the 1990’s in North America with no mention of either NAFTA or of The Internet, is like discussing the economic history of Saudi Arabia with no particular attention to when The House of Saud first started selling petroleum. An entire new multi-billion dollar industry came into existence and began rapidly pumping revenue into the economy. The rate of international trade and imports into the United States accelerated in likewise fashion due to NAFTA. So President Clinton made one intelligent decision, backing NAFTA, and enjoyed an economic wind at his back that no President since FDR at the outbreak of WWII has benefited from.

He is equally selective in his reporting when he complains about increased regulation under George W. Bush without mentioning Enron or the 9/11 Attacks. Sarbanes-Oxley has justly earned criticism for overburdening small businesses for the sins of larger corporations. However, like many who pound the Bush Derangement Syndrome drums, Bartlett totally ignored the fact that corporations misrepresenting their financial position to the SEC and while forcing their employees to buy company stock was, in fact, a serious breach of ethical business practices and potentially a grave economic problem, if it happened on a widespread basis and went unchecked.

If Bartlett has a smarter idea than Sarbanes-Oxley to stop what was widespread and blatant white collar crime and fraud, against decent and loyal employees of a major corporation, I’d love to hear him suggest something better than Jihad Against George. Bartlett never has any of these suggestions. He finds it less strenuous and more fun to play Lou Dobbs and get “good and mad”, rather than going through the time and effort it would require to put together an intelligent policy to combat Enron wanna-bees that take advantage of the system.

So go ahead Bartlett, endorse Hillary! for President and undermine the hard work that Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan and all the other people you “Real Conservatives” supposedly lionize. If no groundswell materializes behind you, don’t die of shock. And while you’re leaving in as loud and a rude fashion as possible, don’t let the door hit you where The Good Lord split you. You are a pathetic cry baby, a sore loser and will not be missed by anyone supporting the GOP in 2008.