Barron’s is for people that own… Well, own a lot of stuff. And if they’re heaving Bush over the side, that means they think the economy—by which they mean their streams of revenue—is seriously fucked. Not right now, but in the forseeable future.

Was it James Carville who said, “When I die, I want to come back as the bond market?” Who knew that the inverted yield curve, a recession signal, would seal Bush’s fate among the coupon clippers. It’s a funny old world….

Let’s watch Barron’s slip W the Big Weenie, via Big Picture via MyDD

“AS THE YEAR WAS DRAWING TO A CLOSE, we picked up our New York Times and learned that the Bush administration has been fighting terrorism by intercepting communications in America without warrants. It was worrisome on its face, but in justifying their actions, officials have made a bad situation much worse: Administration lawyers and the president himself have tortured the Constitution and extracted a suspension of the separation of powers….

Certainly, there was an emergency need after the Sept. 11 attacks to sweep up as much information as possible about the chances of another terrorist attack. But a 72-hour emergency or a 15-day emergency doesn’t last four years….

Willful disregard of a law is potentially an impeachable offense. It is at least as impeachable as having a sexual escapade under the Oval Office desk and lying about it later. The members of the House Judiciary Committee who staged the impeachment of President Clinton ought to be as outraged at this situation. They ought to investigate it, consider it carefully and report either a bill that would change the wiretap laws to suit the president or a bill of impeachment.

I didn’t mean to open my presents early! Honest!

UPDATE And there’s another present under the tree! One of the sweet things about the Barron’s editorial is that it makes WaPo’s Krauthammer look like the tool that he is:

The braying herds have already concluded, Tenet-like, that the president’s actions were slam-dunk illegal. It takes a superior mix of partisanship, animus and ignorance to say that.

Contrary to the administration, I also believe that as a matter of political prudence and comity with Congress, Bush should have tried to get the law changed rather than circumvent it. This was an error of political judgment. But that does not make it a crime. And only the most brazen and reckless partisan could pretend it is anything approaching a high crime and misdemeanor.

Barron’s as part of the “braying herd”? Barron’s as a “brazen and reckless partisan”?

Oh my. I think I filed this under the wrong department, Charles, if I may so call you. This should be under the Department of Stop It! You’re Killing Me!