I can't tell if the Washington Post op-ed by Ed Rogers, a former Reagan and Bush 41 staffer, is an insidiously subtle joke or just grand incoherence in print.
Writing that "Republicans need to do something radical" to beat an unbeatable Obama, Rogers first ponders Jon Huntsman, who, Rogers correctly observes, is "toast" in the GOP since he's an "articulate, attractive, cerebral, urbane internationalist" as well as "a proven conservative with a reassuring, moderate tone," and who also has accumulated "vast experience in state and federal government, including service as a diplomat," which "clearly makes him qualified to be president."
And then there's Michele Bachmann, who holds "many glib, shallow positions" and possesses a stunning "lack of experience" and any way you cut it isn't "credible as a commander in chief."
So, suggests Rogers: "Huntsman and Bachmann should have a meeting of the minds and offer themselves as a Huntsman-led ticket before the Iowa caucuses next year."
Because this, according to Rogers, seriously (I think?), is "the best team the party can offer" -- a man unelectable in his own party, and a veep candidate who's in no position to take the presidential helm should something grim happen to Huntsman.
Was Rogers drunk? delirious? kidding?