Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen, a couple of DOFOs* writing for the Wall Street Journal, say President Obama should take “the moral high ground” and allow Hillary Clinton to save the Democratic Party by becoming its nominee.

Now, there can only be three reasons why Caddell and Schoen would write such muck:

1) This is a payback to Roger Ailes for his allowing them to slurp his booty sweat through a short straw all these years.

2) They are insanely and irreversibly drunk.

3) Bill O’Reilly murdered Caddell and Schoen and is now writing under their names.

Check this out:

With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.

I know I could find more egregious examples of two political “commentators” running a propaganda fraud, but I would have to dig deep into the bowels of the now-defunct Soviet Propaganda Machine to find them. (By the way, these two self-described “traditional liberal Democrats” tried this shtick last year about this time.)

People are “worse off” than they were when Mr. Obama came into office? That kind of stuff properly belongs on the Wall Street Journal opinion pages, where economic truth goes to die. To resurrect some of that truth, I present it in graph form, courtesy of the Bureau of Economic Analysis:

As you can see, the economy tanked in 2008 (the -8.9 contraction was more than anyone thought as the Obama presidency began; these numbers are the revised ones and explain why the original stimulus package was not as effective as was hoped), and thanks to the efforts of Obama and the Democrats—with absolutely zero Republican help—the economy is not tanking anymore.

By any standard, except the one employed by Hannitized “Democrats” like Caddell and Schoen, people are unquestionably much better off than they were during W. Bush’s last year in office. 

The purulent propaganda continues:

If President Obama were to withdraw, he would put great pressure on the Republicans to come to the table and negotiate—especially if the president singularly focused in the way we have suggested on the economy, job creation, and debt and deficit reduction. By taking himself out of the campaign, he would change the dynamic from who is more to blame—George W. Bush or Barack Obama?—to a more constructive dialogue about our nation’s future.

Who is more to blame? Huh? Are they bleeping kidding? If they would pull their heads out of Roger Ailes’ trousers, perhaps they could take a look at the graph above.

And the idea that were Mr. Obama to suddenly withdraw from the race, Republicans, Machiavellians that they are, would call a truce and do what is right for the country is preposterous.

But Caddell and Schoen aren’t done:

But this is about more than electoral politics. Not only is Mrs. Clinton better positioned to win in 2012 than Mr. Obama, but she is better positioned to govern if she does. Given her strong public support, she has the ability to step above partisan politics, reach out to Republicans, change the dialogue, and break the gridlock in Washington.

Yeah, sure. Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and the Tea Party Republicans in Congress would simply wilt under the influence of Mrs. Clinton, and probably summons Sister Sledge to Washington and burst into “We Are Fam-il-y!” And, no doubt, Grover Norquist would suddenly release his death grip on the GOP and the country, all because Mrs. Clinton has once again taken up residence in the White’s House.

Were Caddell and Schoen (a pollster for Bill Clinton) dropping acid during the Clinton presidency? Hillary Clinton was under constant attack by the same kind of conservatives who dominate Republican Washington today. Have people forgotten Whitewater and cattle futures and Travelgate and Vince Foster and all the murders the Clintons committed?  Does anyone believe that, say, Sean Hannity wouldn’t have his viewers—and Republican guests—whipped up into a Fox frenzy all over again?

Did The Onion reject this article? Were Caddell and Schoen then forced to sell it to the Wall Street Journal because the editors there cannot differentiate between satire and seriousness?

DOFOs, I tells ya.

___________________________________

* Democrats on Fox Only.