corrente

Wish I'd said this. But Brad DeLong did:

We don't have a sample size of one. We have Bush budget policy: a $#@!-up. We have Bush tax policy: $#@!-up. We have Bush employment policy: a $#@!-up. We have John Di Iulio's report on Bush social policy: a $#@!-up. We have Bush stem-cell policy: a $#@!-up. We have Bush global warming policy as reported to us by Paul O'Neill: a $#@!-up. We have Bush energy policy: a $#@!-up. No matter how hard Gregg Easterbrook tries to convince us that the only reason Bush environmental policy is lousy is because of liberal attacks on Bush, his environmental policy is still what it is: a $#@!-up. We have Bush's behavior on September 11, 2001: a $#@!-up. We have Bush's inability for a week afterwards to say "Pervez Musharraf" reliably (rather than "the leader of Pakistan"): a $#@!-up. We have Bush's decisions on how to fight the War in Afghanistan, ending at Tora Bora: a $#@!-up. We have the postwar reconstruction of Afghanistan: a $#@!-up. We have the Medicare drug benefit: a $#@!-up. We have the run-up to the war in Iraq: a $#@!-up. We have the role played by the INC: a $#@!-up. We have the diplomatic skill used to gather a coalition for the war: a $#@!-up. We have the postwar reconstruction effort: a $#@!-up. We have Abu Ghraib: a $#@!-up. We have claims of presidential powers to imprison never even claimed by Henry VII: a $#@!-up. And we have this week's Cuba policy: a $#@!-up.

By my count, the Bush administration is batting zero-for-twenty. If you are batting zero-for-twenty, it is highly likely that you will not hit a triple the next time you're up at bat.
(via Bradford DeLong)

Go on, Brad! Say what you really feel!