Bring Back Joan Quigley

As many around the blogosphere have noted, yesterday was the one year anniversary of Dick Cheney's appearance on Larry King Live when he declared of the insurgency in Iraq:

"The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

Oops. Of course, this is the same administration that more than 2 years earlier declared "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq. And the same administration that 3 1/2 years earlier declared that Gen. Shinseki's estimates of 250,000 troops and a hundred billion dollars to execute the war were "wildly off the mark" and promptly mothballed him for flagrantly and wantonly telling the truth while under oath (as if this president is going to tolerate that!). And the same administration that predicted that the Iraqis would throw roses at our feet and that there would be no problem with any insurgency. And the same administration that said we knew right where those WMDs were.

At this point, the Vegas casinos really should consider getting into the futures business and giving odds against whatever the White House predicts. Remember back in the mid-80s when that whole brouhaha started over Reagan consulting with astrologer Joan Quigley? I say it's time to bring her back, maybe even with a cabinet position. At least that way, there's a slim chance something the White House predicts might come true; and slim is better than none.

Tags

More like this

Much has been written about the incompetence with which the Bush administration has pursued the war and post-war occupation in Iraq. I'd like to add to our understanding of that situation by looking, in hindsight, at what was predicted with foresight before the war. Many of the people who were…
A columnist for the St. Petersburg Times has a column on the mounting cost of the Iraq war. It's stunning to me that the "liberal media" hasn't made a bigger deal out of the fact that the White House was either completely clueless about what the war would require, in terms of both troop strength…
Brig. General Mark Scheid has laid out what many others have been saying since before the Iraq war started in 2003, that Rumsfeld's plan for the war was based on absurdly rosy scenarios that bore little relation to reality. He adds one new element to the story: Rumsfeld actually threatened to fire…
This is really weird timing. I'd love to know what really prompted this. Bush has been adamant that Rumsfeld would not be going anywhere, and you know that "resigned" means "forced out." He's certainly not leaving on intelligent grounds, like on the basis of his utter failure; if that was the case…

At this point, the Vegas casinos really should consider getting into the futures business and giving odds against whatever the White House predicts.

I would genuinely be surprised if they weren't already. Bookmakers aren't stupid and the Bush administration's tendency to lie about the tiniest thing even when they don't have to is hardly difficult to discern.

By Ginger Yellow (not verified) on 31 May 2006 #permalink

Remember back in the mid-80s when that whole brouhaha started over Reagan consulting with astrologer Joan Quigley?

Reagan, or Reagan's wife?

By Roman Werpachowski (not verified) on 01 Jun 2006 #permalink

I doubt the casinos would want to offer odds on White House predictions. They would need so positive likelihood of either outcome happening to have playable odds. If they posted odds now, everybody would pile their money on "White House prediction turns out to be false", and the casinos would be taken to the cleaners.

It's kinda like betting on whether the Smails kid eats his booger, during your fifteenth viewing of Caddyshack.

===>Reagan, or Reagan's wife?

Is not Nancy Reagan a Reagan herself?
I'm just saying.

I agree with you. What the white (or not so white ?) house needs is an astrologer, and a very good one !