Those too mesmerized by baseball playoffs to watch Letterman, Conan et al last night did not miss much. All day long politicians had been doing stand-ups about Obama's Nobel Prize.
The President himself led off his Rose Garden turn with "Well, this is not how I expected to wake up this morning. After I received the news, Malia walked in and said, 'Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo's birthday!' And then Sasha added, 'Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up.' So it's good to have kids to keep things in perspective."
Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele came back to crack, "President Obama won’t be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action” as Rush Limbaugh chimed in, "“Can you imagine, folks, how big Obama’s head is today? I think it’s getting so big that his ears actually fit.”
Poor taste was bipartisan as a State Department spokesman got off a one-liner about George W. Bush, "From our standpoint, you know, we think that this gives us a sense of momentum when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes."
Last year's short-term Republican star Mike Huckabee tried for dry humor:
"There will be an outcry from those on the right who will say that Obama's nomination, made two weeks into his Presidency, is impossible to justify but I think such an outcry will sound like right-wing whining. The better response is simply to allow those on the left to explain what he did in his first two weeks as President that merited such recognition."
William Kristol announced that the Weekly Standard would skip its usual "Parody Page" to publish news of Obama's prize, which was more ridiculous than anything his editors could make up.
In his cogent parsing of Obama's response, James Fallows alludes to a fellow former Jimmy Carter speechwriter's attempt at a Letterman Top Ten of Fox News' responses to the award, including "Besides, who cares what a bunch of geeks in Oslo think? The International Olympic Committee speaks for the whole world."
Old-time comic Jimmy Durante used to complain, "Everybody wants to get into da act!" Even former President of Poland Lech Waleska, who won the Nobel in 1983, came out of the wings to say, "“Who, Obama? So fast? Too fast--he hasn’t had the time to do anything yet.”
That wasn't as witty as some, but then again we all know about Polish jokes. Maybe something was lost in the translation.
Showing posts with label William Kristol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label William Kristol. Show all posts
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Vacuous Valedictory
"All good things must come to an end" is the start of his New York Times essay today, which concludes with an editor's note: This is William Kristol’s last column.
The subject of the piece is not the writer's tenure:
"Since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, conservatives of various sorts, and conservatisms of various stripes, have generally been in the ascendancy. And a good thing, too! Conservatives have been right more often than not--and more often than liberals--about most of the important issues of the day: about Communism and jihadism, crime and welfare, education and the family. Conservative policies have on the whole worked--insofar as any set of policies can be said to 'work' in the real world. Conservatives of the Reagan-Bush-Gingrich-Bush years have a fair amount to be proud of."
It's fitting for Kristol to go out on a high note of error. klutzy writing and self-delusion, but apparently the market for his kind of babbling is not entirely dead. He came to the Times after a stint with Time, and now there are reports that the Washington Post, apparently suffering from a lack of wrong-headedness not completely satisfied by Charles Krauthammer and Michael Gerson, will avail themselves of Kristol's wisdom occasionally.
Whatever. The Times' next move should be to go after an elegant conservative like Peggy Noonan to go with their other literate columnists.
The subject of the piece is not the writer's tenure:
"Since Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, conservatives of various sorts, and conservatisms of various stripes, have generally been in the ascendancy. And a good thing, too! Conservatives have been right more often than not--and more often than liberals--about most of the important issues of the day: about Communism and jihadism, crime and welfare, education and the family. Conservative policies have on the whole worked--insofar as any set of policies can be said to 'work' in the real world. Conservatives of the Reagan-Bush-Gingrich-Bush years have a fair amount to be proud of."
It's fitting for Kristol to go out on a high note of error. klutzy writing and self-delusion, but apparently the market for his kind of babbling is not entirely dead. He came to the Times after a stint with Time, and now there are reports that the Washington Post, apparently suffering from a lack of wrong-headedness not completely satisfied by Charles Krauthammer and Michael Gerson, will avail themselves of Kristol's wisdom occasionally.
Whatever. The Times' next move should be to go after an elegant conservative like Peggy Noonan to go with their other literate columnists.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Dick Cheney's Farewell Snarls
Bush's Scrooge is making some final appearances and, true to his nature, giving us "Bah, humbug" to the very end.
Almost six years, 4210 American lives and trillions of dollars after the Iraq invasion, the Vice President tells us "the world is better off with Saddam gone...This was a bad actor."
Torture? "Did it produce the desired results? I think it did...it's been a remarkably successful effort. I think the results speak for themselves."
William Kristol, in his fond farewell, assures Cheney "Popularity Isn't Everything" as a new poll shows 23 percent of Americans ranking him as the worst vice president ever. But the VP, who picked himself for the job, doesn't require solace. "I'm very comfortable," he says. "with where we are and what we achieved substantively. And frankly, I would not want to be one of those guys who spends all his time reading the polls."
Kristol's compatriots on the New York Times editorial page have a slightly different view, pointing out that "it must be exhausting to rewrite history as much as Mr. Cheney has done in a series of exit interviews."
Not for someone who personifies the old saying, "often wrong but never in doubt." Asked about "second thoughts" over publicly telling Sen. Pat Leahy to copulate with himself, Cheney says, "No, I thought he merited it at the time."
Judging from his curtain calls this week, Dick Cheney has felt that way about the rest of us for eight years.
Almost six years, 4210 American lives and trillions of dollars after the Iraq invasion, the Vice President tells us "the world is better off with Saddam gone...This was a bad actor."
Torture? "Did it produce the desired results? I think it did...it's been a remarkably successful effort. I think the results speak for themselves."
William Kristol, in his fond farewell, assures Cheney "Popularity Isn't Everything" as a new poll shows 23 percent of Americans ranking him as the worst vice president ever. But the VP, who picked himself for the job, doesn't require solace. "I'm very comfortable," he says. "with where we are and what we achieved substantively. And frankly, I would not want to be one of those guys who spends all his time reading the polls."
Kristol's compatriots on the New York Times editorial page have a slightly different view, pointing out that "it must be exhausting to rewrite history as much as Mr. Cheney has done in a series of exit interviews."
Not for someone who personifies the old saying, "often wrong but never in doubt." Asked about "second thoughts" over publicly telling Sen. Pat Leahy to copulate with himself, Cheney says, "No, I thought he merited it at the time."
Judging from his curtain calls this week, Dick Cheney has felt that way about the rest of us for eight years.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Pursuing Palin, Shunning Ron Paul
It would be restful if, along with Joe the Plumber, John McCain's running mate just went off into a disposable-celebrity waste basket along with the other used Kleenex of the campaign, but Sarah Palin and the idea of her are still with us, as Andrew Sullivan so cogently points out today:
"That the Palin absurdity should follow the two-term presidency of another individual utterly out of his depth in national government is particularly troubling; 46 percent of Americans voted for the possibility of this blank slate as president because she somehow echoed their own sense of religious or cultural 'identity'. Until we figure out how this happened, we will not be able to prevent it from happening again."
Promoting an over-aged cheerleader with no political substance whatsoever for 2012, as William Kristol and others are doing, is a sign that the diaper division of the Republican Party has no interest in going back to its Goldwater-William F. Buckley roots and offering principled opposition to the new Democratic majority.
Palin's ascension is highlighted by the decline and fall of Ron Paul who, in his own idiosyncratic way, identified some of the issues that his party should be considering and debating. As Paul now writes:
"In the rise and fall of the recent Republican reign of power these past decades, the goal of the party had grown to be only that of gaining and maintaining power--with total sacrifice of the original Republican belief in shrinking the size of government."
Instead, the GOP focus is on Palin's "star quality" and her media blitz this week to make GOP true believers forget how her vast emptiness and arrogance helped bring down John McCain's campaign.
"That the Palin absurdity should follow the two-term presidency of another individual utterly out of his depth in national government is particularly troubling; 46 percent of Americans voted for the possibility of this blank slate as president because she somehow echoed their own sense of religious or cultural 'identity'. Until we figure out how this happened, we will not be able to prevent it from happening again."
Promoting an over-aged cheerleader with no political substance whatsoever for 2012, as William Kristol and others are doing, is a sign that the diaper division of the Republican Party has no interest in going back to its Goldwater-William F. Buckley roots and offering principled opposition to the new Democratic majority.
Palin's ascension is highlighted by the decline and fall of Ron Paul who, in his own idiosyncratic way, identified some of the issues that his party should be considering and debating. As Paul now writes:
"In the rise and fall of the recent Republican reign of power these past decades, the goal of the party had grown to be only that of gaining and maintaining power--with total sacrifice of the original Republican belief in shrinking the size of government."
Instead, the GOP focus is on Palin's "star quality" and her media blitz this week to make GOP true believers forget how her vast emptiness and arrogance helped bring down John McCain's campaign.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Out of the Mouths of Boobs
Two leaders of the get-paid-to-be-stupid-in-public punditry give us gems today, Pat Buchanan with his pronouncement that Colin Powell is backing Barack Obama because he's black and William Kristol scolding Peggy Noonan for saying that Sarah Palin is symptomatic of "a new vulgarization in American politics.”
Buchanan can't help belaboring the obnoxious obvious, but Kristol reaches new heights of sappiness in attacking Noonan:
"Why do elites like to proclaim premature closure--not just in elections, but also in wars and in social struggles? Because it makes them the imperial arbiters, or at least the perspicacious announcers, of what history is going to bring. This puts the elite prognosticators ahead of the curve, ahead of the simple-minded people who might entertain the delusion that they still have a choice."
Aside from attacking what he does for a living in prose that shows an urgent need for instruction in remedial invective, Kristol is making the case that Joe the Plumber is "the latest ordinary American to do a star turn in our vulgar democratic circus. He seems like a sensible man to me...
"McCain and Palin have had the good sense to embrace him. I join them in taking my stand with Joe the Plumber--in defiance of Horace the Poet."
When Kristol's New York Times gig expires, the editors should seriously consider Joe as his replacement.
Buchanan can't help belaboring the obnoxious obvious, but Kristol reaches new heights of sappiness in attacking Noonan:
"Why do elites like to proclaim premature closure--not just in elections, but also in wars and in social struggles? Because it makes them the imperial arbiters, or at least the perspicacious announcers, of what history is going to bring. This puts the elite prognosticators ahead of the curve, ahead of the simple-minded people who might entertain the delusion that they still have a choice."
Aside from attacking what he does for a living in prose that shows an urgent need for instruction in remedial invective, Kristol is making the case that Joe the Plumber is "the latest ordinary American to do a star turn in our vulgar democratic circus. He seems like a sensible man to me...
"McCain and Palin have had the good sense to embrace him. I join them in taking my stand with Joe the Plumber--in defiance of Horace the Poet."
When Kristol's New York Times gig expires, the editors should seriously consider Joe as his replacement.
Monday, October 13, 2008
McCain's Last Move
"It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign," William Kristol decrees in today's New York Times. "He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s."
Whatever the Times is paying Kristol, it's too much. Pundits are supposed to see what's ahead, not in the rear-view mirror.
McCain is scheduled to make a "turnaround" speech today, an oratorical "Hail Mary" pass to turned-off voters.
But, in the spirit of bipartisanship so desperately needed these days, herewith a rerun of the acceptance speech McCain should have made at the Republican convention and can still adapt before the final debate this week:
Minneapolis, Sept 4, 2008--In a Capraesque moment for the 21st century, John Sidney McCain III told a stunned Republican Convention tonight:
"I accept your nomination for president of the United States but, in all good conscience, must reject the tactics that are being used to win that office for myself and my party."
To the bewildered, buzzing audience, McCain declared, "I take my text tonight from a source familiar to us all but too easily forgotten in the heat of political battle: 'For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?'
"My friends, I have tried to serve my country all my life with honor, and I will not trade that accomplishment for any office, no matter how exalted.
"In the past months, I have given in to the temptation to allow people who speak for me to paint my opponent as dishonest, deceitful and untrustworthy. From my own experience as his Senate colleague, I know that is simply not true.
"From this moment, all that will stop. In my heart, I believe I am better qualified to lead this country, and I will make my case to anyone who will listen. But I will not be part of a process that demeans others for my own advantage and damages the civilized American dialogue that has been the glory of our democracy for more than two centuries."
Sources close to McCain reveal that, prior to delivering his acceptance speech, the text of which was not made available in advance, the Republican candidate had dismissed all members of his staff associated with Karl Rove and the Bush campaigns of 2000 and 2004.
In what is being called "Operation Straight Talk Redux," the Senator has taped talking-head commercials outlining his positions on the economy, energy, health care and other issues, ending with the statement, "I'm John McCain, and you can bet your bottom dollar I approve this message."
Reaction from Republican convention goers has been mixed. "Even it works for him," said one Congressional candidate who declined to be identified, "there goes eight years of everything the rest of us got from following the Rove playbook."
Seasoned political observers are divided over whether the new McCain can win over enough Independents and disaffected Democrats to make up for expected losses among Conservative Republicans.
"In the long run," says one pollster, "honesty is the best policy. Except when it isn't."
Whatever the Times is paying Kristol, it's too much. Pundits are supposed to see what's ahead, not in the rear-view mirror.
McCain is scheduled to make a "turnaround" speech today, an oratorical "Hail Mary" pass to turned-off voters.
But, in the spirit of bipartisanship so desperately needed these days, herewith a rerun of the acceptance speech McCain should have made at the Republican convention and can still adapt before the final debate this week:
Minneapolis, Sept 4, 2008--In a Capraesque moment for the 21st century, John Sidney McCain III told a stunned Republican Convention tonight:
"I accept your nomination for president of the United States but, in all good conscience, must reject the tactics that are being used to win that office for myself and my party."
To the bewildered, buzzing audience, McCain declared, "I take my text tonight from a source familiar to us all but too easily forgotten in the heat of political battle: 'For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?'
"My friends, I have tried to serve my country all my life with honor, and I will not trade that accomplishment for any office, no matter how exalted.
"In the past months, I have given in to the temptation to allow people who speak for me to paint my opponent as dishonest, deceitful and untrustworthy. From my own experience as his Senate colleague, I know that is simply not true.
"From this moment, all that will stop. In my heart, I believe I am better qualified to lead this country, and I will make my case to anyone who will listen. But I will not be part of a process that demeans others for my own advantage and damages the civilized American dialogue that has been the glory of our democracy for more than two centuries."
Sources close to McCain reveal that, prior to delivering his acceptance speech, the text of which was not made available in advance, the Republican candidate had dismissed all members of his staff associated with Karl Rove and the Bush campaigns of 2000 and 2004.
In what is being called "Operation Straight Talk Redux," the Senator has taped talking-head commercials outlining his positions on the economy, energy, health care and other issues, ending with the statement, "I'm John McCain, and you can bet your bottom dollar I approve this message."
Reaction from Republican convention goers has been mixed. "Even it works for him," said one Congressional candidate who declined to be identified, "there goes eight years of everything the rest of us got from following the Rove playbook."
Seasoned political observers are divided over whether the new McCain can win over enough Independents and disaffected Democrats to make up for expected losses among Conservative Republicans.
"In the long run," says one pollster, "honesty is the best policy. Except when it isn't."
Monday, September 29, 2008
Repositioning Palin
Most provocative quotes of the day:
"It's time to let Palin be Palin--and let it all hang out." --Scott Reed, a Republican strategist, in the Wall Street Journal.
"McCain needs to liberate his running mate from the former Bush aides brought in to handle her--aides who seem to have succeeded in importing to the Palin campaign the trademark defensive crouch of the Bush White House." --William Kristol, New York Times.
In what conjures up visions of Dr. Frankenstein retooling his creation in the lab, Gov. Palin is being whisked off for pre-debate work, the Journal reports:
"McCain campaign manager Rick Davis and senior adviser Steve Schmidt...plan to fly with her on Monday to Sen. McCain's ranch in Sedona, Ariz., which they hope she will find a comforting place to prep...
"More broadly, the McCain campaign aims to halt what it sees as a perceived decline in the crispness and precision of Gov. Palin's latest remarks as well as a fall in recent polls, according to several advisers and party officials."
Such emergency cosmetic surgery on the Vice-Presidential candidate is a disheartening reminder that McCain's shoot-from-the-hip style of decision-making does not always work out well, and it evokes sympathy for Ms. Palin, who has never pretended to the kind of expertise they are now trying to fabricate for her. (Fareed Zakaria points out that "if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly--nonsense.")
If they are going to use old movies as a guide, they may want to try "Singin' in the Rain," with someone behind the curtain while Gov. Palin mouths the words.
"It's time to let Palin be Palin--and let it all hang out." --Scott Reed, a Republican strategist, in the Wall Street Journal.
"McCain needs to liberate his running mate from the former Bush aides brought in to handle her--aides who seem to have succeeded in importing to the Palin campaign the trademark defensive crouch of the Bush White House." --William Kristol, New York Times.
In what conjures up visions of Dr. Frankenstein retooling his creation in the lab, Gov. Palin is being whisked off for pre-debate work, the Journal reports:
"McCain campaign manager Rick Davis and senior adviser Steve Schmidt...plan to fly with her on Monday to Sen. McCain's ranch in Sedona, Ariz., which they hope she will find a comforting place to prep...
"More broadly, the McCain campaign aims to halt what it sees as a perceived decline in the crispness and precision of Gov. Palin's latest remarks as well as a fall in recent polls, according to several advisers and party officials."
Such emergency cosmetic surgery on the Vice-Presidential candidate is a disheartening reminder that McCain's shoot-from-the-hip style of decision-making does not always work out well, and it evokes sympathy for Ms. Palin, who has never pretended to the kind of expertise they are now trying to fabricate for her. (Fareed Zakaria points out that "if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly--nonsense.")
If they are going to use old movies as a guide, they may want to try "Singin' in the Rain," with someone behind the curtain while Gov. Palin mouths the words.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Clouded Kristol Ball
How wrong can he be in one column? Let me count the ways.
In today's New York Times, William Kristol discloses that "McCain operatives" consider Joe Biden "a pick from weakness," even as McCain himself tells Katie Couric that Biden is "a very wise selection. I know that Joe will campaign well for Sen. Obama, and so I think he's going to be very formidable."
This is followed by a feat of pretzel logic to prove that pro-choice, former liberal Democrat Joe Lieberman would be McCain's best bet for VP on a "quasi-national-unity ticket, with Lieberman renouncing any further ambition to run for the presidency."
Lieberman? Unity? The same Lieberman who lost the Connecticut Democratic primary for reelection in 2006 and retained his seat only because Republicans ran a non-entity in November? The pillar-of-rectitude Lieberman inspired by JFK and liberal enough to run with Al Gore in 2000 until he became a cheerleader for a misbegotten war and was kissed by George W. Bush?
"A Lieberman pick," Kristol concludes, "should help with ticket splitters. But can such a ticket hold the support of pro-lifers, conservatives and Republicans? If you’re conscientiously pro-life, you will have reservations about a pro-abortion-rights VP. If you’re a proud conservative, Lieberman hasn’t been one. If you’re a loyal Republican, you’d much prefer someone from within the ranks."
Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the show? They must be paying Kristol by the word.
In today's New York Times, William Kristol discloses that "McCain operatives" consider Joe Biden "a pick from weakness," even as McCain himself tells Katie Couric that Biden is "a very wise selection. I know that Joe will campaign well for Sen. Obama, and so I think he's going to be very formidable."
This is followed by a feat of pretzel logic to prove that pro-choice, former liberal Democrat Joe Lieberman would be McCain's best bet for VP on a "quasi-national-unity ticket, with Lieberman renouncing any further ambition to run for the presidency."
Lieberman? Unity? The same Lieberman who lost the Connecticut Democratic primary for reelection in 2006 and retained his seat only because Republicans ran a non-entity in November? The pillar-of-rectitude Lieberman inspired by JFK and liberal enough to run with Al Gore in 2000 until he became a cheerleader for a misbegotten war and was kissed by George W. Bush?
"A Lieberman pick," Kristol concludes, "should help with ticket splitters. But can such a ticket hold the support of pro-lifers, conservatives and Republicans? If you’re conscientiously pro-life, you will have reservations about a pro-abortion-rights VP. If you’re a proud conservative, Lieberman hasn’t been one. If you’re a loyal Republican, you’d much prefer someone from within the ranks."
Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the show? They must be paying Kristol by the word.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Shedding Tears for Hillary
Memo to disaffected Clinton Democrats arriving in Denver: Forty years ago at the convention in Chicago, as a delegate supporting anti-war candidate Eugene McCarthy, I was tear-gassed by the police of Mayor Richard Daley, a supporter of Hubert Humphrey. The Democrats lost that election and Richard Nixon moved into the White House.
The internal strife will be less riotous this week, but the danger of self-inflicted damage is just as great. The passions in 1968 were political, about ending a war, but the powerful feelings of 2008 are personal, about perceived sexism and disrespect for the first woman within reach of a presidential nomination.
From the sidelines, hopeful Republicans are shedding crocodile tears for Hillary Clinton with TV commercials about being "passed over," and ardent feminists like William Kristol are bemoaning "The Democrats' Glass Ceiling."
Such sympathy is touching, coming from those whose political sensitivities have brought on a devastating war and economic chaos, but Democrats of all persuasions are faced with the challenge of not letting their own passion for fairness and justice lead to another victory for politicians whose priorities are power and privilege.
That would be cause for sadness beyond tears.
The internal strife will be less riotous this week, but the danger of self-inflicted damage is just as great. The passions in 1968 were political, about ending a war, but the powerful feelings of 2008 are personal, about perceived sexism and disrespect for the first woman within reach of a presidential nomination.
From the sidelines, hopeful Republicans are shedding crocodile tears for Hillary Clinton with TV commercials about being "passed over," and ardent feminists like William Kristol are bemoaning "The Democrats' Glass Ceiling."
Such sympathy is touching, coming from those whose political sensitivities have brought on a devastating war and economic chaos, but Democrats of all persuasions are faced with the challenge of not letting their own passion for fairness and justice lead to another victory for politicians whose priorities are power and privilege.
That would be cause for sadness beyond tears.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Dear John: NY Times Rejects McCain
For someone who spent a working lifetime turning down manuscripts and being turned down in turn, the Times' rejection of John McCain's answer to Barack Obama's OpEd piece on Iraq is puzzling.
Reading it on the Drudge Report, the McCain riposte is no prose masterpiece, but it mirrors, albeit with partisan fervor, Obama's "My Plan for Iraq," published last week and certainly meets the literary standards of OpEd columnist William Kristol.
OpEd editor David Shipley explains: "The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.
"It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq."
In his rejected manuscript, McCain claims Iraq has met "all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress. Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks.
"More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City—actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism."
No matter how simplistic, the piece reflects how McCain "defines victory in Iraq." Why didn't the Times let him have his say and let its columnists and readers as well as bloggers everywhere expose the holes in his logic and question whether such a "victory" justifies the American blood and treasure it has cost?
In turning the manuscript down, the newspaper has shot itself in the foot once again, fueling the arguments set forth in a current Vanity Fair piece, "Why Do People Love to Hate The New York Times?"
Reading it on the Drudge Report, the McCain riposte is no prose masterpiece, but it mirrors, albeit with partisan fervor, Obama's "My Plan for Iraq," published last week and certainly meets the literary standards of OpEd columnist William Kristol.
OpEd editor David Shipley explains: "The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.
"It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq."
In his rejected manuscript, McCain claims Iraq has met "all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress. Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks.
"More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City—actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism."
No matter how simplistic, the piece reflects how McCain "defines victory in Iraq." Why didn't the Times let him have his say and let its columnists and readers as well as bloggers everywhere expose the holes in his logic and question whether such a "victory" justifies the American blood and treasure it has cost?
In turning the manuscript down, the newspaper has shot itself in the foot once again, fueling the arguments set forth in a current Vanity Fair piece, "Why Do People Love to Hate The New York Times?"
Monday, June 23, 2008
Neo-Con Sacrifices for Their Country
This is about as ad hominem as it gets, but in today's New York Times, William Kristol is huffing about a MoveOn ad that "boldly embraces a vision of a selfish and infantilized America, suggesting that military service and sacrifice are unnecessary and deplorable relics of the past. And the sole responsibility of others."
He finds the commercial featuring a mother refusing to make her baby available for John McCain's hundred-year Iraq war "unapologetic in its selfishness, and barely disguised in its disdain for those who have chosen to serve."
Such posturing is particularly galling from a charter member of the Neo-Cons who, when other people's sons were dying in Vietnam, were too busy getting into post-Harvard politics, as Kristol was, or hiding out by pulling family National Guard strings a la George W Bush or getting multiple deferments, as Dick Cheney did, or otherwise choosing not to serve, as only the most fire-breathing of them all, John Bolton, has had the honesty to admit.
"I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy," Bolton wrote in the 25th reunion book of his graduation from Yale about his decision to join the National Guard and go to law school.
Talking about service, Kristol's one-year stint with the Times expires in January just before the Bush Administration does. Haven't they all sacrificed for their country long enough?
He finds the commercial featuring a mother refusing to make her baby available for John McCain's hundred-year Iraq war "unapologetic in its selfishness, and barely disguised in its disdain for those who have chosen to serve."
Such posturing is particularly galling from a charter member of the Neo-Cons who, when other people's sons were dying in Vietnam, were too busy getting into post-Harvard politics, as Kristol was, or hiding out by pulling family National Guard strings a la George W Bush or getting multiple deferments, as Dick Cheney did, or otherwise choosing not to serve, as only the most fire-breathing of them all, John Bolton, has had the honesty to admit.
"I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy," Bolton wrote in the 25th reunion book of his graduation from Yale about his decision to join the National Guard and go to law school.
Talking about service, Kristol's one-year stint with the Times expires in January just before the Bush Administration does. Haven't they all sacrificed for their country long enough?
Monday, June 02, 2008
Fighting Words
What would Monday mornings be these days without some fresh William Kristol absurdity on the New York Times OpEd page?
Today the accident-prone pundit chides Barack Obama for a "sin of omission" in a commencement speech urging graduates to enter public service without mentioning the military as an option:
"(A)t an elite Northeastern college campus, Obama obviously felt no need to disturb the placid atmosphere of easy self-congratulation. He felt no need to remind students of a different kind of public service--one that entails more risks than community organizing. He felt no need to tell the graduating seniors in the lovely groves of Middletown that they should be grateful to their peers who were far away facing dangers on behalf of their country."
Should they also be grateful for the armchair strategists who sent them there to prove a Neo-Con theory that turned out to be devastatingly wrong? Kristol and his cohorts have never been any closer to the fighting than a think tank, from which their guru, Dick Cheney, after multiple Vietnam deferments, led his toy soldiers into helping George Bush lie our way into Iraq.
Somebody at the Times should take away Kristol's wooden sword.
Today the accident-prone pundit chides Barack Obama for a "sin of omission" in a commencement speech urging graduates to enter public service without mentioning the military as an option:
"(A)t an elite Northeastern college campus, Obama obviously felt no need to disturb the placid atmosphere of easy self-congratulation. He felt no need to remind students of a different kind of public service--one that entails more risks than community organizing. He felt no need to tell the graduating seniors in the lovely groves of Middletown that they should be grateful to their peers who were far away facing dangers on behalf of their country."
Should they also be grateful for the armchair strategists who sent them there to prove a Neo-Con theory that turned out to be devastatingly wrong? Kristol and his cohorts have never been any closer to the fighting than a think tank, from which their guru, Dick Cheney, after multiple Vietnam deferments, led his toy soldiers into helping George Bush lie our way into Iraq.
Somebody at the Times should take away Kristol's wooden sword.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
McCain, the Goldilocks Candidate
Unnerving as the image may be, there is a contorted Three-Bearish quality to the tale of the Republican standard bearer this year.
After the party found Rudy Giuliani too hot and Mitt Romney too cold, Ron Paul too hard and Fred Thompson too soft, they reluctantly decided that John McCain was just right, albeit not far right enough to suit some of the more vocal party animals.
Pappa Bear Rush Limbaugh has been ignoring McCain and diverting himself by getting Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries.
Momma Bear Ann Coulter is still sulking about McCain sitting in her chair with threats to vote for Hillary in November because "she's more conservative than he is" and "would be stronger on the war on terrorism."
Only Baby Bear Bill Kristol, with the optimism of youth, has warmed up to the GOP Goldilocks, babbling that "Republican hopes of denying Democrats complete control of the federal government for the next couple of years may rest on the promise of 'McCain exceptionalism,'” which could result in "a return to this cold-war model--a strong-on-national-security and supporter-of-middle-American-values Republican presidential candidate prevailing, while at the same time voters choose a Democratic Congress."
As fairy tales go, that may be the most outlandish of all.
After the party found Rudy Giuliani too hot and Mitt Romney too cold, Ron Paul too hard and Fred Thompson too soft, they reluctantly decided that John McCain was just right, albeit not far right enough to suit some of the more vocal party animals.
Pappa Bear Rush Limbaugh has been ignoring McCain and diverting himself by getting Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries.
Momma Bear Ann Coulter is still sulking about McCain sitting in her chair with threats to vote for Hillary in November because "she's more conservative than he is" and "would be stronger on the war on terrorism."
Only Baby Bear Bill Kristol, with the optimism of youth, has warmed up to the GOP Goldilocks, babbling that "Republican hopes of denying Democrats complete control of the federal government for the next couple of years may rest on the promise of 'McCain exceptionalism,'” which could result in "a return to this cold-war model--a strong-on-national-security and supporter-of-middle-American-values Republican presidential candidate prevailing, while at the same time voters choose a Democratic Congress."
As fairy tales go, that may be the most outlandish of all.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Kristol Ball on Obama and McCain
Today's MSM campaign news:
William Kristol: "In a New York Times/CBS News poll in late February, Obama was defeating John McCain 50 to 38. Two months later, the Times/CBS poll had McCain and Obama tied. The poll that came out yesterday showed Obama reopening a lead over McCain--but clearly over this period a vulnerability for Obama was exposed."
CBS: "Obama has seen a big reversal since his denunciation of Wright’s remarks on Tuesday. He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent."
The alarming news is that Obama's lead over McCain has shrunk from 12 to 11 percent.
After this disquisition on Obama's vulnerability, Kristol has a brilliant suggestion for the Republicans: Nominate 36-year-old Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as McCain's running mate.
Why didn't anyone think of that before? A potential successor half as old with six months of experience in a state house would surely comfort voters worried about McCain's age.
Kristol may be a little shaky on facts, but he's much funnier than Maureen Dowd or Gail Collins.
William Kristol: "In a New York Times/CBS News poll in late February, Obama was defeating John McCain 50 to 38. Two months later, the Times/CBS poll had McCain and Obama tied. The poll that came out yesterday showed Obama reopening a lead over McCain--but clearly over this period a vulnerability for Obama was exposed."
CBS: "Obama has seen a big reversal since his denunciation of Wright’s remarks on Tuesday. He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent."
The alarming news is that Obama's lead over McCain has shrunk from 12 to 11 percent.
After this disquisition on Obama's vulnerability, Kristol has a brilliant suggestion for the Republicans: Nominate 36-year-old Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal as McCain's running mate.
Why didn't anyone think of that before? A potential successor half as old with six months of experience in a state house would surely comfort voters worried about McCain's age.
Kristol may be a little shaky on facts, but he's much funnier than Maureen Dowd or Gail Collins.
Monday, April 07, 2008
The Least of Obama's Problems
William Kristol, who writes as if he were being paid by the word, today gives us a diary of his recent expense-account travels and reports "that lots of conservatives and Republicans expect Barack Obama to be our next president."
But undaunted, Kristol dredges up "an experienced Democratic operative" who thinks McCain is going to win with this brilliant analysis:
"Obama isn’t growing in stature. Once I thought he could be Jimmy Carter, but now he reminds me more of Michael Dukakis with the flag lapel thing and defending Wright. Plus he doesn’t have a clue how to talk to the middle class. He’s in the Stevenson reform mold out of Illinois, with a dash of Harvard disease thrown in.”
In a close race, Kristol comforts his fellow conservatives, that “dash of Harvard disease” could be the difference.
Comparing Obama, a once-in-a-lifetime political talent, to the clueless Carter and lead-footed Dukakis, is grasping at straws and expecting an electorate, panicky about the economy and worn out by the war, to find McCain's version of Bush Lite irresistible borders on the delusional.
Between now and November, Democrats have hard work to do to assure retaking the White House, but overcoming Obama's Harvardness is not high on the list. After all, the voters didn't hold George W. Bush's Yale background against him, and he proved that a President's college education ia no measure of how he will do in office.
But undaunted, Kristol dredges up "an experienced Democratic operative" who thinks McCain is going to win with this brilliant analysis:
"Obama isn’t growing in stature. Once I thought he could be Jimmy Carter, but now he reminds me more of Michael Dukakis with the flag lapel thing and defending Wright. Plus he doesn’t have a clue how to talk to the middle class. He’s in the Stevenson reform mold out of Illinois, with a dash of Harvard disease thrown in.”
In a close race, Kristol comforts his fellow conservatives, that “dash of Harvard disease” could be the difference.
Comparing Obama, a once-in-a-lifetime political talent, to the clueless Carter and lead-footed Dukakis, is grasping at straws and expecting an electorate, panicky about the economy and worn out by the war, to find McCain's version of Bush Lite irresistible borders on the delusional.
Between now and November, Democrats have hard work to do to assure retaking the White House, but overcoming Obama's Harvardness is not high on the list. After all, the voters didn't hold George W. Bush's Yale background against him, and he proved that a President's college education ia no measure of how he will do in office.
Monday, March 31, 2008
The McCain Makeover
The Righteous Republican cosmeticians have started to work their magic and, as in the women's magazines I used to edit, a natural-looking person may end up resembling an aging tart. To borrow from Gloria Steinem, McCain would do better to brush them off and say, "This is what seventy and self-possessed looks like, get used to it."
The first ad is a tipoff, harking back to those days at the Hanoi Hilton over a quarter of a century ago, echoing his advice to fellow prisoners: "Keep that faith. Keep your courage. Stick together. Stay strong. Do not yield. Stand up. We're Americans. And we'll never surrender."
We're all prisoners of George W. Bush in Iraq now, and it may not be in McCain's best interests to remind us that he wants to keep us there, if not for a hundred years, until some of the troops there are his age now.
Today William Kristol is advising the candidate who admits he doesn't know much about the economy to offer "a broad reform agenda--education reform, health insurance reform, tax reform, government reform, Wall Street reform. He could start by outlining an up-to-date, capitalism-friendly and transparency-requiring approach to regulating the credit markets."
Biography isn't enough, Kristol reminds McCain. You have to start doing a George Bush impersonation, throwing out all kinds of voter bait that you can sweep aside when you get into the White House.
By the time Conservatives finish remaking McCain, his nonagenarian mother won't recognize him and, if he looks in the mirror, neither will he.
The first ad is a tipoff, harking back to those days at the Hanoi Hilton over a quarter of a century ago, echoing his advice to fellow prisoners: "Keep that faith. Keep your courage. Stick together. Stay strong. Do not yield. Stand up. We're Americans. And we'll never surrender."
We're all prisoners of George W. Bush in Iraq now, and it may not be in McCain's best interests to remind us that he wants to keep us there, if not for a hundred years, until some of the troops there are his age now.
Today William Kristol is advising the candidate who admits he doesn't know much about the economy to offer "a broad reform agenda--education reform, health insurance reform, tax reform, government reform, Wall Street reform. He could start by outlining an up-to-date, capitalism-friendly and transparency-requiring approach to regulating the credit markets."
Biography isn't enough, Kristol reminds McCain. You have to start doing a George Bush impersonation, throwing out all kinds of voter bait that you can sweep aside when you get into the White House.
By the time Conservatives finish remaking McCain, his nonagenarian mother won't recognize him and, if he looks in the mirror, neither will he.
Monday, March 10, 2008
The Audacity of Dope
In today's New York Times, William Kristol invokes the Reign of Terror in advising John McCain to follow Danton's lead in picking his running mate.
Coopting Obama's keyword, Kristol urges the Republican nominee to show audacity and "upend the normal dynamics of this year’s election" with a bold vice presidential choice like Gen. David Petraeus, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas or--wait for it--"a hawkish and principled Democrat like Joe Lieberman."
As one of the Connecticut Independent's constituents, I am reduced to paraphrasing Henny Youngman, "Take my Senator--please."
Kristol's reasoning: "If any Republican can defend conservative principles and policies, at once acknowledging Bush’s failures while pivoting to present his own biography and agenda to the voters, McCain can.
"Still, he’ll have to take risks."
One of them would be listening to loony advice from the likes of Kristol, who has only recently become McCain's new best friend and is now urging on him the wisdom of the French Revolution: “Il faut de l’audace, encore de l’audace, toujours de l’audace.”
McCain may want to keep in mind that Danton ended up under the guillotine.
Coopting Obama's keyword, Kristol urges the Republican nominee to show audacity and "upend the normal dynamics of this year’s election" with a bold vice presidential choice like Gen. David Petraeus, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas or--wait for it--"a hawkish and principled Democrat like Joe Lieberman."
As one of the Connecticut Independent's constituents, I am reduced to paraphrasing Henny Youngman, "Take my Senator--please."
Kristol's reasoning: "If any Republican can defend conservative principles and policies, at once acknowledging Bush’s failures while pivoting to present his own biography and agenda to the voters, McCain can.
"Still, he’ll have to take risks."
One of them would be listening to loony advice from the likes of Kristol, who has only recently become McCain's new best friend and is now urging on him the wisdom of the French Revolution: “Il faut de l’audace, encore de l’audace, toujours de l’audace.”
McCain may want to keep in mind that Danton ended up under the guillotine.
Monday, February 25, 2008
What's Wrong With Obama
Now we know the worst. Behind all the electoral enthusiasm for the Democratic front runner is a treasonous self-regard.
In today's New York Times, William Kristol explains it in his inimitable style. In declining to wear an American flag lapel pin as "a substitute...for true patriotism," which he defines as "speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security," Barack Obama is guilty of...moral vanity!
"What’s striking," Kristol instructs us, "is that Obama couldn’t resist a grandiose explanation. Obama’s unnecessary and imprudent statement impugns the sincerity or intelligence of those vulgar sorts who still choose to wear a flag pin. But moral vanity prevailed. He wanted to explain that he was too good--too patriotic!--to wear a flag pin on his chest."
A surge of unity after 9/11 inspired Americans to display the flag--on their lapels and their lawns--after the trauma of an unthinkable attack. But Kristol's heroes--Bush, Cheney and Rove--converted that heartfelt feeling into a Neo-Con tool for waging preemptive war, trampling on civil liberties and winning elections by attacking their opponents' love of country.
In rejecting that definition of patriotism, Obama is embracing "the preening self-regard of Bill Clinton, the patronizing elitism of Al Gore and the haughty liberalism of John Kerry."
As a member of that fraternity, Obama can't expect to be pinned by William Kristol, who has belatedly pledged John McCain into the circle of true believers who wear their American hearts on their sleeves and their chests.
In today's New York Times, William Kristol explains it in his inimitable style. In declining to wear an American flag lapel pin as "a substitute...for true patriotism," which he defines as "speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security," Barack Obama is guilty of...moral vanity!
"What’s striking," Kristol instructs us, "is that Obama couldn’t resist a grandiose explanation. Obama’s unnecessary and imprudent statement impugns the sincerity or intelligence of those vulgar sorts who still choose to wear a flag pin. But moral vanity prevailed. He wanted to explain that he was too good--too patriotic!--to wear a flag pin on his chest."
A surge of unity after 9/11 inspired Americans to display the flag--on their lapels and their lawns--after the trauma of an unthinkable attack. But Kristol's heroes--Bush, Cheney and Rove--converted that heartfelt feeling into a Neo-Con tool for waging preemptive war, trampling on civil liberties and winning elections by attacking their opponents' love of country.
In rejecting that definition of patriotism, Obama is embracing "the preening self-regard of Bill Clinton, the patronizing elitism of Al Gore and the haughty liberalism of John Kerry."
As a member of that fraternity, Obama can't expect to be pinned by William Kristol, who has belatedly pledged John McCain into the circle of true believers who wear their American hearts on their sleeves and their chests.
Monday, February 18, 2008
A Few Words From Bush's Gunga Dim
William Kristol, the Neo-Con water carrier, finds inspiration today in the poet of empire, Rudyard Kipling, via George Orwell, a literary confluence that boggles the 21st century mind.
From an Orwell essay on Kipling discovered in a used-book store, Kristol finds a parallel for today's Democrats with the British "permanent and pensioned opposition," whose quality of thought deteriorated because it was "not obliged to take responsibility or make any real decisions.”
Modestly asking our leave to "vulgarize the implications of Orwell’s argument a bit," the New York Times' newest sage adapts the wisdom of the author of "White Man's Burden" to belabor opposition to the war in Iraq and illegal eavesdropping as the acts of decadent Democrats who have forgotten how to take responsibility for the use of power.
Cheerfully ignoring the fate of the British Empire that Kipling celebrated, Kristol advises Bush detractors to step up and emulate those men of action who muddled up the Middle East a century ago.
He ends with a more recent historical reference: "To govern is to choose, a Democrat of an earlier generation, John F. Kennedy, famously remarked. Is this generation of Democrats capable of governing?"
Kristol may want to take note of something JFK also said, "You can't beat brains."
From an Orwell essay on Kipling discovered in a used-book store, Kristol finds a parallel for today's Democrats with the British "permanent and pensioned opposition," whose quality of thought deteriorated because it was "not obliged to take responsibility or make any real decisions.”
Modestly asking our leave to "vulgarize the implications of Orwell’s argument a bit," the New York Times' newest sage adapts the wisdom of the author of "White Man's Burden" to belabor opposition to the war in Iraq and illegal eavesdropping as the acts of decadent Democrats who have forgotten how to take responsibility for the use of power.
Cheerfully ignoring the fate of the British Empire that Kipling celebrated, Kristol advises Bush detractors to step up and emulate those men of action who muddled up the Middle East a century ago.
He ends with a more recent historical reference: "To govern is to choose, a Democrat of an earlier generation, John F. Kennedy, famously remarked. Is this generation of Democrats capable of governing?"
Kristol may want to take note of something JFK also said, "You can't beat brains."
Monday, February 04, 2008
John McCain, Traitor
In the eyes of its diehards, the Republican Party will go a long way tomorrow toward nominating a candidate who has betrayed its principles.
On the far right's list of infamy, McCain is reviled for damaging free speech and the First Amendment for trying to curb the power of money in elections, harming free enterprise by advocating a patient's bill of rights and the importation of lower-priced socialized medications from Canada and, worst of all, refusing to crack down on illegal immigrants who might sneak across our unfenced borders for another 9/11 attack.
The tide of bile against John McCain is so high that right-wing realists are piling last-minute sandbags on the ideological dikes to avert a GOP Katrina.
In the Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby argues that "the immaculate conservative leader for whom so many on the right yearn to vote is a fantasy. Conservatives who say that McCain is no Ronald Reagan are right, but Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan either. Neither is Mike Huckabee. And neither was the real--as opposed to the mythic--Ronald Reagan.
"The conservative case against McCain is clear enough...But this year, the conservative case for McCain is vastly more compelling."
The New York Times' new sage William Kristol urges far-right colleagues to overcome their "disgruntlement and dyspepsia" and not to "treat 2008 as a throwaway election."
Fellow senators, too, are having a hard time swallowing the idea of McCain as their standard bearer, the Washington Post reports, warning that "his tirades suggest a temperament unfit for the Oval Office."
McCain's offenses against collegiality, to an outside observer, seem motivated by outrage at blatant corruption, but we may not be attuned to the nuances of legislative free enterprise.
Tomorrow will be a test for all his detractors. Will they choose a chance to win in November with the treacherous McCain or go down in honor with malleable Mitt Romney?
On the far right's list of infamy, McCain is reviled for damaging free speech and the First Amendment for trying to curb the power of money in elections, harming free enterprise by advocating a patient's bill of rights and the importation of lower-priced socialized medications from Canada and, worst of all, refusing to crack down on illegal immigrants who might sneak across our unfenced borders for another 9/11 attack.
The tide of bile against John McCain is so high that right-wing realists are piling last-minute sandbags on the ideological dikes to avert a GOP Katrina.
In the Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby argues that "the immaculate conservative leader for whom so many on the right yearn to vote is a fantasy. Conservatives who say that McCain is no Ronald Reagan are right, but Mitt Romney is no Ronald Reagan either. Neither is Mike Huckabee. And neither was the real--as opposed to the mythic--Ronald Reagan.
"The conservative case against McCain is clear enough...But this year, the conservative case for McCain is vastly more compelling."
The New York Times' new sage William Kristol urges far-right colleagues to overcome their "disgruntlement and dyspepsia" and not to "treat 2008 as a throwaway election."
Fellow senators, too, are having a hard time swallowing the idea of McCain as their standard bearer, the Washington Post reports, warning that "his tirades suggest a temperament unfit for the Oval Office."
McCain's offenses against collegiality, to an outside observer, seem motivated by outrage at blatant corruption, but we may not be attuned to the nuances of legislative free enterprise.
Tomorrow will be a test for all his detractors. Will they choose a chance to win in November with the treacherous McCain or go down in honor with malleable Mitt Romney?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)