Worst David Broder column ever?

I don't know. There is a pretty "high" bar, but I'm submitting this as a likely candidate.

Money quote:

Can Obama harness the forces that might spur new growth? This is the key question for the next two years.

What are those forces? Essentially, there are two. One is the power of the business cycle, the tidal force that throughout history has dictated when the economy expands and when it contracts...

What else might affect the economy? The answer is obvious, but its implications are frightening. War and peace influence the economy.

Look back at FDR and the Great Depression. What finally resolved that economic crisis? World War II.

Here is where Obama is likely to prevail. With strong Republican support in Congress for challenging Iran's ambition to become a nuclear power, he can spend much of 2011 and 2012 orchestrating a showdown with the mullahs. This will help him politically because the opposition party will be urging him on. And as tensions rise and we accelerate preparations for war, the economy will improve.

Via Washington Monthly's Steve Benen, whose comments on this are HERE.  

PS:  Atrios calls Broder a "sociopathic monster."  "Shrill" but definitely arguable.  This loonytoons suggestion that WWII-style spending - just so long as it's actually on a war - is just what the doctor ordered for a deeply depressed economy comes from the same Beltway Denizen who wrote last year that the big challenge to Congress and Obama is, quote, "don't pass along unfunded programs to our children and grandchildren."  I'm not sure I'd go as far as "sociopathic monster", but "incoherent, irresponsible, blathering idiot" seems about right.

Comments

[Jamie]

The "stupid vs. evil" meme is a touchstone in political analysis, but Broder seems to have crossed the divide. His "Obama will save the economy by pretending to go to war with Iran" idea is so amoral and yet also so devoid of common sense.