Karl Rove attacks James Richard Perry (incidentally, is America ready for a president with three first names?) and Seasoned Political Observers examine the tea leaves as far back as the 1990 race for Texas agriculture commissioner.
Itís simpler than that, people.
Rove is a courtier, at the moment without a king. If I had a shot at becoming president, Rove would be indifferent to the fact I am a socialist, agnostic, semi-anarchist enemy of everything he thinks the Founding Oligarchs stood for. He would be prancing around me 24/7, blowing kisses and moistening his lips suggestively.
That Rove is sticking it to Perry today has nothing to do with old feuds. It means only that he needs a new king and he doesnít think he could make this particular enemy of the people into one.
So heís abandoning Perry early as a signal of friendship and availability to all the other Republican hopefuls.
Speaking of whom, I went to a meet-and-greet Saturday with four Democratic contenders for our districtís seat in the U.S. Congress. One was the speaker of the Connecticut House, another a House representative, and the other two were very young men with no political experience but impressive backgrounds in academia and foreign affairs. Each spoke briefly, then answered questions and worked the crowd for an hour or so.
On the drive home it struck me that any one of the four would in all likelihood make a better president than any of the Republican aspirants. (Iím open to persuasion on Huntsman, but just barely. My general feeling about anyone who would seek the nomination of todayís Republican Party is summed up by the old graffito: A manís ambition must be small, to write his name on a shit-house wall.)