But still funny!
Any comment on the article?
You mean like the fact that it starts out with a lie in the second paragraph (that Barnes wan't all those people "fired")?
Well, it is a rather stark misrepresentation, but no one is going to read the article.
But it is a March 20 essay in the Wall Street Journal that suggests the neocons may be coming unhinged. Written by Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes.. calls on Bush to fire press secretary Scott McClellan, chief of staff Andy Card, political adviser Karl Rove, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Treasury Secretary John Snow – and Vice President Richard Cheney."The trickiest issue is how to handle Karl Rove," says Barnes.
Thread-A 'Third Term' For Bush
Aopinionjournal: 'Third Term' for Bush Condi Rice, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove need new jobs.
IMO McClellan should go. He’s ineffective. He’s fired. Of course only a “neocon” could come to that conclusion.
Hadley, Snow and Card get replaced. No word on what happens to them. Yeah, turned on big time.
Now to the bad stuff.
Cheney steps down to anoit Rice as the 2008 frontrunner. Fired, they’ve turned on him. And moves to head defence, which does mean Rumsfeld has to be moved somewhere, or retire. Yeah, the neocons have turned on Cheney and Rumsfeld. How about Condi, she’s a neocon.
Rove, aaaaaahhhhhhh. He switches places with Melman, “fired” by the neocons to run the Republican Party. Which puts him in an excellent position to manage the 2008 campaign. The neocons have turned on him. On Melman, a neocon, too.
Neocons, replacing neocons. If it happened, Pat would be howling at the moon about the neocons.
The more obvious question, beyond who cares about Pat’s opinion on the topic beyond his Patsies, who gets so excised about an editorial Fred Barnes writes in the WSJ. Or what William Kristol says. They aren’t exactly the driving forces of the Republican Party.