Inside, the Economist's editors advance the Bush/pony plan for Palestine, in which Bush makes bold strides towards resolving one of the the most intractable political conflicts of the modern era. The newspaper seems determined, against all available evidence and common sense, to lash its fortunes to Bush's sinking ship. Like Paul Newman coming back against blow after blow from Paul Kennedy's meaty fists in the jailyard, refusing to stay down, the newspaper refuses to back down from its blind support of U.S. imperial ambitions. This is because its editors are heavily invested in the status quo and lack imagination.
Relatedly, Brad DeLong writes:
One thing worthy of note. Carlyle Group CEO David Rubenstein's reaction to George W. Bush:
David Rubenstein: you know if you said to me, name 25 million people who would maybe be President of the
, he wouldn't have been in that category... United States
That was the reaction of everybody not on Bush's payroll who has met Bush I have talked to--everybody except our elite Beltway press, that is.