Drat?

DRAT?….I confess that I’m perplexed by the reaction of the Democratic candidates to the capture of Saddam Hussein. Amy Sullivan says it “could best be described as a collective ‘Drat,'” and that seems like a pretty reasonable assessment based on this New York Times roundup of candidate reaction.

But why? Even aside from the fact that it really was unalloyed good news, aren’t these folks bright enough to realize that they damn well ought to at least pretend that it was unalloyed good news? Only Dean and Clark struck the right tone ? which might explain why they’re frontrunners and the others aren’t ? and I gather that even Dean sounded a bit grudging in person. (I didn’t hear him, I only read the transcript.)

A tin ear for what people want to hear is not a good sign in someone who wants to be president. These guys could have done a lot better, and should have.

Washington Monthly - Donate today and your gift will be doubled!

Support Nonprofit Journalism

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really works—and how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, I’ll make a donation