Via Nicole Belle at C&L:
Harper’s:
The Washington Post‘s David Broder is called the “dean” of the Washington punditry. More recently, he seems to sum up everything that’s wrong with the class who brought you weapons of mass destruction, the Iraq war and the ever “resurgent” President Bush. He is the vessel of a received wisdom which keeps the war-president in place, cautioning against criticism and validating war- and fear-mongering at every turn. Rather than provide pearls of wisdom based on a lifetime in Washington politics, Broder dishes out naïve, uncritical appraisals of Bush which often have a sycophantic twist-by contrast, he strings administration critics with malicious attacks which reflect faulty reasoning and imaginary facts. True, every columnist makes a mistake or two under the pressure of an imminent deadline. But Broder’s recent streak is a growing embarrassment for the Washington Post.
We already knew this… But I thought BooMan might get a kick out of this.
heh
🙂
I think I summed it up pretty well.
Of course you did… It is easy to define when you invent the term. lol (You do know I was only asking for the benefit of those that may not have read one of your Broder slams, right?)
I get credit for inventing the term, but I didn’t. Not sure who did. Maybe Duncan. Maybe Yglesias. But they tend to truncate it as High Broderism, which is not really correct, IMO. ‘Higher Broderism’ signifies its position at the top of the food chain.
I didn’t know that…