I had the following exchange with Politico reporter Ryan Grim (here's the transcript) over his claim that the "Beltway consensus" was that the MoveOn "Betray-Us" ad was a "disaster" for Democrats:
03:19 PM Rochester, NY: Has Beltway consensus ever been right about anything, ever? Could you give me one example? Beltway consensus told us Bush would be a uniter not a divider, that the Democrats would have trouble in the 2006 election, that the war would be a big political winner. It tells us that Bill Clinton is a handicap to Hillary and that Bill Clinton was unpopular president (it's even wrong in hindsight). Why would ANYONE care what Beltway consensus was except to deduce that the opposite must be true? Sorry if this sounds flip or shrill -- I'd like an honest answer. Give me one example of something Beltway consensus has been right about in the past 20 years. Just one.
Ryan Grim: Um, the consensus was right that Fred Thompson would join the presidential race. Can we get points for that? I don't mean to be flip, either, but I'm also struggling for an answer. If anyone can think of one, send it in and I'll post it.
Lemme get back to you on this one.
He never got back to me so I asked again:
03:49 PM Rochester, NY: I'm still waiting for more examples of where the Beltway consensus was right While I was waiting I thought of another good example of where it was wrong: that Bush would listen to Iraq Study Group.
Ryan Grim: You're right, it's tough. But partly, that's because the press doesn't get credit when it's right. It's easier to remember when the MSM was wrong. I guess that the MSM was right in saying that Harriet Myers was a disastrous Supreme Court pick and wouldn't be confirmed. The media was right that Hurrican Katrina would damage, if not mortally wound, the Bush presidency.
Neither of those examples was right. Everyone said that about Miers and the people saying that about Katrina were mostly outside-the-Beltway types.
What a bunch of losers.