David Broder thinks Bush got his groove back, and Joe Gandelman and James Joyner discuss the merits of Broder’s piece. Personally, I think Joyner nailed it:
Given Nixonian poll numbers and the most unpopular war in more than thirty years, simple regression to the mean should bring Bush’s public standing up.
Regression to the mean is a phrase I think we will hear a lot of when the Bush presidency is finally over.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
That Broder article is probably the spoofiest thing I’ve ever read in a mainstream American newspaper.
Broder is the very essence of centrist spoof. In that regard, he even surpasses Tom Friedman.
rachel
Regressing to the mean? I think he’s just boxing clever; he’ll revert back to form once he thinks the heat’s off.
cleek
wait, Bush is already mean and regressive.
Jill
Dream on, Broder, et al. Bush is a bad President b/c he is not intelligent, not curious, and he has incompetent and arrogant people advising him. What has he accomplished in the last 6 years that wasn’t a lie or a fiasco? Not much. the American people were lulled into thinking this guy was something special after 9/11. Let’s face it folks, the easiest thing for a leader to do is to look good in a time of tragedy, that’s why Bush’s numbers were so high after 9/11. The farther we get away from 9/11/01 the more we see the real Bush.
Andrew
Well, it’s not like we needed any more proof that if you can simply make up things that are completely detached from reality, you’re qualified to write op-eds for major newspapers, as long as you are moderate and centrist-y. But I guess it’s just another arrow in the quiver for a future historian to ridicule the whorish Washington press corps.
What does regression to the mean have anything to do with Bush, by the way? Are we flipping coins that say “War in Iraq” on one side and “Bush doesn’t care about black people” on the other, and we’ve just had a long streak of “Iraq”?
Zifnab
Man, he’s practically his own Press Secretary. Perhaps because his actual Press Secretary doesn’t fucking do anything.
Steve
We’ve been cracking jokes about the “Bush bounce” for like a year or two now. But it takes more than that to separate a fossilized pundit from his beloved narrative!
Jake
See moonbats? Bush is actually better than Clinton because Bush, through no fault of his own and completely by accident placed our army smack in the middle of a civil war. Honestly, Bush sent more than hundred thousand troops into Iraq to get a bag of pretzles and suddenly those crazy Iraqis flipped out or something. And it’s not like Bosnia or Somalia at all!
rachel
Oh, my. Maybe the last 4 years have all been about Bush regressing to the mean. Maybe +/- 30% is his natural mean.
dreggas
This is the whole “It can’t get any worse” meme but of course it can and speaking of Broder, He was just quoted on the house floor by a republican from FL and he is saying that Broders words tend to be more sympathetic to the Democrats…huh?
Jill
David Broder will be talking questions and chatting on washingtonpost.com today @ 12.
Zifnab
He is a member of the media.
grumpy realist
Broder shows exactly why so many self-claiming “centrists” give the term such a bad odor.
Walker
Read the comments on Broder’s WaPo article. He is taking a beating.
Punchy
Demi? Help?
Andrew
Fantastic comment at WaPo:
Zifnab
It’s just a matter of time before they shut those comment boards down. An online newspaper can’t exist with this much printed common sense being tossed into the debate. Maybe they can start issuing punditry licenses to curb this rampant intellectual elitism. Too many smart people with internet access and an opinion. That shit is dangerous.
Otto Man
Broder’s getting brutalized over there. Couldn’t have happened to a more clueless guy.
Frank
Yeah rich people who own newspapers, are stupid, thats why they hire factually challenged people who just so happen to hold positions that help rich people hold on to money and power. It has nothing to do with self interest.
Keith
If the press is finally willing to call the Bush Administration out on its lack of credibility on the state of the war, when is someone going to call out these people who, every 3 months, write that Bush’ standing with the people is turning the corner again. And is 3 months now “a Broder”?
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
Interesing idea. 1 Friedman= 2 Broders
Now we just need to be able to measure weight, distance, etc. with pundits, and a new American measurement system is born.
(I nominate using Coulter and Limbaugh for weight. Probably some others we could use, too.)
dslak
Should a Limbaugh be three Coulters, or four?
Paddy O'Shea
After the many disasters brought about by Bush’s incompetence and terrible judgement, we should all take sit up take notice because old chicken head Broder thinks Georgie “has his groove back?”
I’m always amazed at the amount of slack this clown gets cut in certain quarters.
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Meanwhile, The Reid/Pelosi Congress, in their honeymoon period and bolstered by the Miraculous 100 Hours That Changed The Universe, clock in at a enormous 32% approval in the latest CBS poll. So maybe it’s not all about Bush, eh?
Zifnab
We don’t govern by polls, EEEL. Why do you hate America?
chopper
no, it’s also about the GOP. which is still part of congress, you know.
Otto Man
Oh no! 32%? That’s only double what congressional approval was last year!
The Democrats should be ashamed. They’ve been in office for a month and a half, and they’ve only managed to be twice as popular as the previous Congress!
Cyrus
First assume a spherical Limbaugh… oh, wait.
Jake
O’Reilly for length: He puked a stream of vomit three O’Reilly’s long.
Mike
Geez…one gasbag versus another….so hard to choose…
RSA
On regression to the mean: Think of it this way–Bush is in an airplane, descending, and we’re all watching the altimeter. There are slight fluctuations upward and downward because of air currents and such. Who’s going to argue that, after some period of time, Bush is going to end up at the average altitude he had over the entire course of his flight? Crash-and-burn is just as reasonable an outcome.
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
No sale.
The CBS poll for that Oct 2006 timeframe had the number at 29%. NBC/WSJ’s 16% looks like an extreme outlier, looking at all the other polls from that time period. ABC’s poll for the same week was 31%. But go ahead… try to sell that the Democrats are so wildly popular that during their honeymoon, they boosted the approval figure by a whole 3% (within margin of error).
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
That’s so dumb on every level that I didn’t even have to look to know who wrote it. Awesome.
fwiffo
I anticipate feeling the exact same pleasant sensation you get right after an ice-cream-headache goes away.
Otto Man
No, I’d rather sit here at watch you argue about how the numbers going up — no matter what poll you cherrypick — is evidence that the Democrats are less popular.
Andrew
George W Bush?
The Other Andrew
I’m not in love with the new congress, myself, EEEL. I think they’re being much too timid. Of course, they’re nowhere near as bad as our previous Terri Schiavo Red Alert congress.
Speaking of polls, Congress isn’t yet doing two things the American public wants: establishing a timetable for withdrawal and capping the number of troops. I have a feeling that, as the surge fails and Bush’s presidency continues to age badly, we’ll see the Congressional numbers go up.
Zifnab
Republican-Americans are so full of angry rhetoric and so lacking in productive ideas. Also, they don’t believe in gravity. It’s true.
If you haven’t seen the four-sided harmonous Timecube, the absolute hilarity of fixedearth.com may be lost on you. Regardless, it would be funnier if it wasn’t one of the guys running my State Congress.
RSA
Check out the trends across multiple polls. There is not a single case in which a recent approval rating for Congress is less than a pre-election approval rating, and usually it’s by a good margin. People are basically happier with Congress than they were before; who expects everything to turn around at once?
Zombie Santa Claus
This was a funny question for the Broderman:
The reply is classic:
What does being “out reporting” entail? Is that like “killing zombies”? Do you head out with a machete and a rifle when you go out reporting? Do you get to loot, destroy, burn buildings down, and saw through the heads of undead legions? If so, I’m off to journalism school faster than you can infect the population of Pittsburgh.
How long is journalism school, anyway? 4 Friedmans?
Zombie Santa Claus
I just finished reading that Broder chitchat. DougJ, you’re the guy from Baltimore, right? ‘Fess up.
RSA
I also wouldn’t want to be around anyone who consumes blogs. There isn’t enough Gas-X in the world to prevent the resulting intestinal distress.
Teak111
Well, I’ve heard it said that Bush wasn’t such a schmuck as Gov of tex, that although right-wing, he did manage to work with the then, Dem tex legislature. Maybe he is returning to that approach in his waning years here. He will have to work mighty hard to turn around that idea that his presidency is toast. Even hard right-wingers I know have dismissed him.
Zombie Santa Claus
No, only eat your monitor occasionally. Normally, you should be out with a shotgun, blasting zombies when they pounce at you.
I think we should use Tucker Carlson’s bowtie as a unit of measurement. For example: A shotgun shell is roughly one Carlson long, yet can easily take down a three-Coulter zombie if fired directly into the brainpan.
Krista
So, should a Coulter equal 3 Limbaughs, or are they so close that we could almost divvy it up into a metric/Imperial comparison. So that way, you could say that one Coulter is equal to 1.32 Limbaughs.
I can see it now, “Man, I saw that new horror movie, and is the guy in it ever evil!” “Oh yeah, how evil?” “Oh, he had to be at LEAST 7 Coulters!”
Krista
That one works whether you consider a Coulter a unit of weight or a unit of evil. Of course, as the latter was my idea, I’m a bit biased towards it.
Zombie Santa Claus
Who do we use for weight measurement, then? Oliver Willis?
tBone
No sale.
Congressional Approval Ratings:
ABC/Washington Post
Oct. 19-22 2006: 31%
Jan. 16-19 2007: 43%
Gallup
Oct. 9-12 2006: 23%
Feb. 1-4: 37%
AP-Ipsos
Oct. 2-4 2006: 27%
Feb. 5-7: 34%
Diageo/Hotline
Oct. 19-23 2006: 27%
Jan. 11-14, 31%
Fox/Opinon Dynamics
Oct. 10-11 2006: 31%
Jan. 30-31 2007: 33%
The trend seems pretty clear. Of course, if I was an asshole, I would have just listed the one that increased by 14 percentage points (well outside the margin of error).
Krista
Sure, although you’d have to have a sub-unit, as a number of things would weigh less than one Oliver.
tBone
Denny Hastert. 1 hastert = 16 coulters.
Zombie Santa Claus
I say we use Coulter for weight, and Michelle Malkin for evil.
My $.02 cents.
Tony J
“Is it an… evil… unit of weight? Mmmm?”
(Raise pinkie to corner of mouth and pout hopefully)
Joathan
Umm.. Something seems to be missing.
I posted on a thread here yesterday about a lack of Pentagon planning for the occupation phase of the Iraq invasion. Something about Powerpoint slides, IIRC.
That thread seems to have completely disappeared.
Here is a link to the story in question:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6364507.stm
Krista
If I agree with you, will you finally put that trinket I’ve been wanting in my Christmas stocking?
dreggas
All of them combined = 1 blivit
Perry Como
Now assume a frictionless Coulter.
Zifnab
Doug Feith in a vacuum?
Jake
Does 1 Texas Dem. = 1 Nancy Pelosi San Francisco Naughty Hellfire Club Dem.?
Just asking.
And frictionless Anne Coulter sounds vaguely squirmtastic.
Perry Como
Why would the White House be pressuring Republican congress critters over the non-binding resolution if it doesn’t matter?
Odd.
Dave
The real question is if you add all those wingnut pundits, politicians, EEEL, Darrel, Paul L. and Jimmy Mack together, how much of a brain do you get? Bonus question: How much do they hate America compared to Pelosi?
ThymeZone
Broder is finished as a pundit. Which was true a long time ago, but this just makes it official.
“Split in the country?”
The fucking country is overwhelmingly anti-Bush and wants his presidency to be over. That’s not a fucking split, that’s a complete collapse of public confidence. It’s in the realm of 70-30 at the present time and headed for 80-20 as we speak.
Why are we even TALKING about fucking Broder? Is the blahsphere so self indulgent that it can’t find anything else to cackle about today?
Fucking Anna Nicole Smith is more relevant to our lives right now than fucking Broder, why don’t we have some more posts about her?
At least she had big tits.
Fe E
ThymZone said:
And Broder is just a total boob.
Sorry pp; I just couldn’t resist. And, on some level I do find some glee in seeing a pompous ass get deflated like this.
Make your own jokes people.
dreggas
Oh this is rich:
Lieberman: Constitutional Crisis
dreggas
Oh this is rich:
Lieberman: Constitutional Crisis
Andrew
Come on people! Zombies aren’t evil. We’re just projecting the feelings of our own inadequate good upon these poor brainless creatures. Is it their fault they want to eat our brains? Or is it our fault for having such tasty brains (excl. the usual suspects) to begin with?
Fe E
Ooops, I meant ThymEZone
ThymeZone
Okay, Constutional Crisis? Fine, let’s have it.
Bring it.
dreggas
Agreed.
dreggas
How about them “EFP’s”
Not made in Iran so much
Perry Como
Lieberman : “Right now, as the battle for Baghdad begins”…
Really? We just started fighting to take over Baghdad? What an assclown.
dreggas
I prefer insemineferious tubloidial buttnoid
jg
I thought we wouldn’t be fighting an urban battle in the streets of Baghdad?
So Leiberman considers it a constitutional crisis if the legislature gets togetther and debates whether or not its in teh countries best interests to escalate the war? We should just let Bush make it bigger or smaller as he determines?
grumpy realist
Geez, I wish Lieberman would just go ahead and emigrate elsewhere and get out of our hair. And take all the rest of the “hawk Democrats” of his ilk with him.
dreggas
I don’t care if he stays I just wish he’d STFU. Between him and the current republican leadership I want to vomit when I hear them speak, just from the sound not because they are who they are.
Zifnab
What in the holy flying fuck does Joe Lieberman know about bipartisanship? And how, pray tell, does a Congress co-operate with a President who never ever cedes an inch? Finally, why should we not believe the damage has already been done? This is like “civil war” all over again, except replace “civil war” with “constitutional crisis”. We’re not heading for a CC, we’re in one!
Open your eyes Joe. The President of the United States no long gives a flying flip about what America wants. In the face of the Congress, the Judiciary, and his own Executive Military, open dissent broils, and he refuses to take his head out of the sand.
God damnit, the people of Conneticut suck. Enjoy the next 6 years of this crap, you dumb bastards.
The Other Steve
But… but… you promised that Bush would give me a Pony!
And he’d be a uniter not a divider.
And he’d bring respect to the White House.
and he’d be this like super awesome intelligent statesman.
Why are you wrong all the time?
dreggas
these are all successes that haven’t happened yet.
mrmobi
I feel you pain, Zif.
The good news is, Holy Joe will probably become a Republican in fact in the next couple of years. I’d like to see Holy Joe reap what he has sown, but sometimes what goes around just keeps going around.
Holy crap, though, you are right about Connecticut. What are they thinking out there?
dreggas
Regarding Connecticutt.
I think more people should have been out voting but the bottom line, and there’s no conspiracy here, the repubs abandoned the person running under the R label and supported Holy Joe in his “Fine you may win the primary but I’m still going to run” bullshit race which was nothing more than Lieberman living up to his name poor loserman.
Given no viable challenge from the republicans and republicans being encouraged to vote for his sorry, whiny ass Lieberman won with the votes of the republicans cementing the fact he is a republican in all but name.
dreggas
Oh and speaking of the Holy and pious senators, Looks like McCain is not going to vote on the resolution tomorrow…hmmmm.
Punchy
Thanks for the mouth-vomit, asshole.
dreggas
That is exactly the reason why I didn’t dwell on it much.
dreggas
Jeff Sessions – new poster child for Attention Deficit Disorder.
This guy is babbling on and on and on about this that and the other thing on the floor of the senate continuing to polute the atmosphere with wasted Co2
DougJ
Broder’s been brain dead for years. I’ve seen that footage of his eyes seeming to track a balloon but I think it was random involuntary head movement. I guess I’d have more confidence in him if he could speak or eat without a feeding tube.
Perry Como
You know those Iranian “IEDs”? Yeah, not so much.
Zifnab
If McCain makes it out of the primaries, I hope they have that fact plastered on every Democratic talking point they print.
“McCain too busy/elitist/chickenshit to vote on the troops! McCain doesn’t care about the war!”
That would leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling.
dreggas
And my point on Sessions is proven:
I’ll Take “We invaded Iraq Because” for 10000 Alex
tBone
Jesus fucking Christ on a pogo stick. Four years into the war and drooling asshats like Lieberman are still trying to conflate Iraq with 9/11? Does the Bush administration have naked pictures of Holy Joe in the page’s lounge or something?
dreggas
That’s an image I don’t want in my head
Paddy O'Shea
The new Bush Apologist Defense:
“Look! They hate Congress, too!”
No wonder the EEELs are bursting with pride.
Andrew
on the Sabbath!
And holy fucking shit, Virgil Goode is absolutely fucking insane. He was like a headliner at a retarded Nuremberg rally.
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Going by the polls you chose, the Honeymoon Democrat Congress gets about an aggregate 36% approval rating, while “Everybody Hates Bush” gets a miserable 34% approval.
Woo-hoo. Looks like a groundswell to…nobody.
tBone
Huh. That’s odd, considering that none of the polls I cited for the Republican Congress were above 31%. I’m sure you meant to type 28% instead of 34% there, because you’re not a dishonest hack. Right?
Perry Como
You dishonest whackjobs have had an entire month to change the policies established by six years of Republican rule. The fact that polls don’t show a major boost in confidence just shows how extreme you are.
DougJ
EEEL — give it up. We all know you’re Mac.
tBone
WAADJ.
Richard 23
Now I understand the EEEL handle. Nobody would want to admit to being Mac Buckets, not even Mac Buckets. What an embarrassment.
chopper
yeah, i noticed that too. even using all the polls (it would really be wiser to drop the ones with the highest and lowest difference and whoda thought the latter would be FOX), its an 8% increase in approval for the new congress. and that’s in about a month.
it must be that new republican math, where 1% is a certainty.
tBone
It’s real simple, Leftards – 51%/49% where the Republican is ahead is a sweeping victory that confers a mandate. 51%/49% where a Democrat comes out on top is a razor-thin ‘victory’ that can probably best be described as a statistical blip, if not outright fraud.
Richard 23
Well that was obvious, tBone.
And now that the anti-surge resolution has passed the House, anything bad that happens in Iraq is obviously the Democrat party’s fault. Because they’ve simultaneously emboldened the enemy and depressed troop morale.
And you know what Lincoln said about Congressmen who undermine the military: “[they] should be arrested, exiled or hanged.” Got that right!
Darrell
I believe it was Bill Clinton and/or his lackies in the media who told us over and over how with 43% of the vote in a divided 3-way race, that Clinton had been given a “mandate” by voters. Any equivalent examples to this coming from The Party of Hate (TM)(Republicans)?
Punchy
Darrell has reached Step 1 of the program. Somebody…quick…check for the Apocolypse.
Jimmy Mack
Clinton never would have won without Perot. He was truly our only unelected president.
And it’s funny that when his approval ratings were in the 30s no one was writing obits for his presidency…
chopper
yeah
tBone
Clinton had an 5.8 million vote advantage over Bush I in 1992; Bush II had a 3.6 million vote advantage over Kerry.
Otto Man
They told us this over and over again? Really? I’m sure you could offer some proof then.
tBone
Wow. I think Jimmy needs a diagnosis. Quick, where’s Bill Frist?
Andrew
Cut a hole in the box?
Jimmy Mack
I didn’t say he didn’t. I just said he wouldn’t have won without Perot. Try reading my comments before you attack me next time.
tBone
Err, yeah. I was responding to Darrell with that, not you. If I had been responding to you I would have used smaller words, and possibly some brightly-colored visual aids.
Zombie Santa Claus
Jimmy Mack is worse than Darrell. At least Darrell is up-front and honest about being a conservative. He doesn’t hide behind this facade of centrism that Jimmy Mack seems to want to cling to.
Been Brodering much lately, Jimmy?
grandpa john
So Jimmy I guess these articles don’t know what they wer talking about huh?
from Wikipedia
Perot’s almost 19% of the popular vote made him the most successful third-party presidential candidate in terms of popular vote since Theodore Roosevelt in the 1912 election. Some conservative analysts believe that Perot acted as a spoiler in the election, primarily drawing votes away from Bush and allowing Clinton to win many states with less than a majority of votes. However, exit polling indicated that Perot voters would have split their votes fairly evenly among Clinton and Bush had Perot not been in the race, and an analysis by FairVote – Center for Voting and Democracy suggested that, while Bush would have won more electoral votes with Perot out of the race, he would not have gained enough to reverse Clinton’s victory.[1]
or this one from open debates site
http://www.opendebates.org/theissue/1992.html
On October 1, Ross Perot announced that he was reentering the race, and he immediately polled 7 percent nationally.
The Bush campaign was delighted with Perot’s return. They no longer believed that Bush could win a plurality of votes, and they wanted Perot in the presidential debates to tip the election in their favor. When Perot had quit the race, Clinton had shot up 14 points whereas Bush had only climbed three points. If Perot was allowed to debate, the Bush campaign reasoned, he could steal more of Clinton’s votes again.
Zifnab
Why not? If Perot decided not to run, what garantees that the 1.8 million Perot voters would have gone to Bush? Do you think any would have gone to Clinton? Perhaps a few tens of thousands would have just stayed home?
Your assumption is so inherently flawed it defies reasonable thinking. At least when liberals bitched over Nader, it was concerning a few thousand votes in Florida. And even then, the million-odd votes that went to Pat Buchanan because of those mangled ballots, swung the election in Floria far more than the handful that went to Nader.
I suppose you’re going to blame the ’96 Clinton/Dole race on Perot too? :-p
RSA
Perhaps you could refer us to a poll in which Clinton’s approval rating for the job he was doing as President dropped below 40%? Why do rightwingers try to insinuate that Clinton wasn’t given consistently high job approval ratings from the public, pretty much for his entire tenure?
Fledermaus
Bullshit, Broder – gawd how can you be so stupid?
Think on this, there have been absolutely no oversight at all on this president for the last 6 years (no hearings, no investigations – save for Plame) and even with that free ride he’s been mired in the sub-40s approval for over a year.
Just wait till we find out what the gov’t been doing for the last 6 years. Analogies to other presidents will all fall by the wayside and we’ll be left with comparisons to Nero, Henry VI and Crazy King Ludwig.
ThymeZone
All centrism is fake. Even if it’s sincere, it’s based on magical thinking and delusion.
In age when you have a strong two-party system, and one of those parties has hooked up with people who have openly declared war on half of their own country, centrism is dishonest and evil.
There was nothing centrist about the results of the last election. If anything, it was a repudiation of centrism, and a demand for new direction. Anybody who can’t get on board with that new direction should get the fuck out of the way.
As for Broder? He’s not an actual centrist, he’s basically an erudite version of Rodney King.
Can’t we all just get along? Actually, no, we can’t. I can’t get along with people who think that the salvation of the world will come out of bombs and guns, and that the earth is 6000 years old. I have no desire to get along with them, and I have no intention of getting along with them.
bpower
I pray for the coming of averagely competent American government.
The Sanity Inspector
The Bush years will be remembered as the time when America finally started fighting back against The Jihad, and ditched for good the Not Sufficiently Provocative cowardice that marked the Clinton administration. Not even Hillary will be able to get away with triangulating our troubles away, anymore. Ten years from now, Bush will be remembered as one whose efforts helped get us safely from now until then.
ThymeZone
Good Christ.
Rome Aulgain
Wow, a voice from the wilderness! Finally, someone has said what we’ve all needed to understand for so long.
No, we all can’t get along. Great TZ, absolutely awesome statement. Now, how do we go about fixing this centristic mess? I’m a little sick of the “united we stand…” bullshit myself.
Rome Again
Hmmmm, mouse changed my name ROFL, oops! My comment is now “awaiting moderation”.
Sorry John/Tim., different computer, the mouse skips at times. Apologies.
Rome Again
Wow, a voice from the wilderness! I’m proud to know you. Finally, someone has said what we’ve all needed to understand for so long.
No, we all can’t get along. Great TZ, absolutely awesome statement. Now, how do we go about fixing this centristic mess? I’m a little sick of the “united we stand…” bullshit myself.
Zombie Santa Claus
That’s why 10 years from now, Bush will be recalled in triumph to begin his term as President-for-Life, while the corpses of his critics will fill the bellies of the stray dogs of Guantanamo Bay.
God bless America.
RSA
Ten years from now, it’s more likely that there will be an equivalent of Godwin’s Law on the internets, such that if someone brings up Bush’s name in a thread for any reason, it will mean the effective end of rational discussion.
Zombie Santa Claus
Nah, the prisoner camps for moonbats will be up and running well before the 10-year mark. After about 6 months of a Democrat President, America will develop a powerful hankering for this kind of integrity and leadership, and will happily back a coup to restore Bush to power.
That’s my read on it, anyway. Then again, it’s not like I have a crystal ball or anything.
chopper
he’s got a point, clinton never started a muslim civil war in the mideast that could have seriously destabilized the entire area. his lack of provacatism shows him to be a true coward.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
He didn’t have the guts to stir up the hornet’s nest and take on the hornets individually. Hell, I know 9-year-olds with more guts than Clinton.