Niall Ferguson

Niall Ferguson preemptively adds fuel to the "if Obama wins the election it's only because he stole it" fire by writing an article with a title in the third person claiming that Obama has some tricky "Middle East surprise" up his sleeve, all while thoughtfully being condescending:

For slower readers, the paper spelled out how an announcement would affect the race for the White House: “The prospect of one-on-one negotiations could put Mr. Romney in an awkward spot ... The danger of opposing such a diplomatic initiative is that it could make him look as if he is willing to risk another American war in the Middle East without exhausting alternatives.”

Everyone's all in a tizzy about the "wag the dog" scenario, but a throwaway paragraph caught my eye:

Right now, Barack Obama certainly needs one [a surprise.]

Well, it is not going to come from the economy (unless you want to factor in the risk of a 1987-style stock-market plunge, which would hardly help the president). And it is not going to come from Donald Trump. And even if the Democrats dig up two more barking-mad Republican candidates for the Senate, both of whom believe that rapes are part of God’s plan to make babies, no one is going to be very surprised.

Ferguson is right. That would be no surprise at all, since for all of the heat Akin and Murdoch have gotten for their rape comments, as I wrote months ago these comments are perfectly in line with their own party, and Paul Ryan in particular. Ferguson probably didn't even notice the line as he wrote it, but he's correct re: we should no longer be surprised by the GOP's comments on rape, as they're simply toeing the party line.