Is this nuts? Well, yes, obviously:
This morning on MSNBC, outgoing Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) unveiled his plan to "confront" Iran. Santorum said that the United States should have supported a bus driver strike that occurred a few weeks ago. According to Santorum, "We should have quietly gone in there and given them a whole boat-load of money so they could sustain the strike and continue to cause unrest within Iran to try to topple the government."
But here's my question: Why is Santorum on MSNBC at all?
I've lived long enough to see a couple of watershed congressional elections, and I don't recall the press immediately rushing to seek out the wisdom of the Democratic senators who lost in 1980 or the Democratic members of both houses who went down to defeat in 1994. I especially don't remember anyone looking fore foreign policy advice from incumbents in those years who lost by 18 points.
I know that Santorum is having some sort of weird midlife crisis that's led him to fantasize that he's Winston Churchill. He's given a couple of blood-and-guts speeches lately that won applause on the red-meat right. So what? He's a loser. When Democrats lose, the Establishment banishes them to a sort of Siberia. Why doesn't Santorum get the same treatment?
(Via the Carpetbagger Report.)