Kristol Says He Helped Congressional GOP Formulate ‘The Best Arguments Against’ Health Care Reform
Kristol Says He Helped Congressional GOP Formulate ‘The Best Arguments Against’ Health Care Reform
In Dec. 1993, Bill Kristol, a current Fox News contributor and the editor of the Weekly Standard, issued a now-infamous memo to Republican leaders, arguing that they should “defeat” President Clinton’s health care reform plan “outright” instead of negotiating a compromise. In later memos, Kristol counseled that Republicans should oppose reform “sight unseen” because “there is no health care crisis.” Kristol’s advice “animated” Republicans, who concluded “that all-out opposition to the Clinton plan” was “in their best political interest.”
Throughout this year’s debate over health care reform, Kristol has played a similar role, arguing in the media that Republicans should “kill” reform instead of trying to be “constructive.” In an interview on the Washington Times’ America’s Morning News radio show yesterday, Kristol revealed that he had met with some congressional Republicans on Wednesday night to devise strategy for defeating reform:
KRISTOL: Next week will really be a first crescendo in the big health care debate. And this dinner I was at last night was some Republican members, Senate and House, some staffers, some outside people, trying to think about how to, the best arguments against it and where the politics of this lies. She is really going for it. And I think the issue is Medicare. I mean this will be the largest package of Medicare cuts I think the Congress will ever have passed.
Later in the interview, Kristol distilled the conclusions from the strategy session with congressional Republicans, saying that citizens “need to go see their congressman and say ‘do not vote for this until either we have a chance to read it more carefully, but really more importantly just don’t vote for it because it’s going to cut my Medicare and raise my taxes.’” He echoes the same attack line in his Weekly Standard column today: “There will be no Republican votes for the Pelosi Plan of tax hikes and Medicare cuts. Will there be enough Democratic resistors so the bill is either withdrawn or defeated?.” Listen here:
For the past month, Fox has been claiming that it is not actually a “communications arm” for the Republicans. What do they think about one of their regular contributors advising Republicans on strategy behind closed doors? Will they disclose Kristol’s advisory role when he appears on the air?
- Comments
- 118
Malkin: The content of Obama’s off-the-record meeting with liberal journalists ‘ought to be disclosed.’
Malkin: The content of Obama’s off-the-record meeting with liberal journalists ‘ought to be disclosed.’
On Monday, President Obama met with liberal-leaning journalists and commentators in an off-the-record session that included MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. Reporting on the meeting that night, Fox News’ Bret Baier suggested the White House had a “double standard” and was “playing favorites” after the White House had challenged Fox’s credibility as a news organization. On Fox and Friends this morning, host Brian Kilmeade and Fox contributor Michelle Malkin demanded that the off-the-record session be put on the record for the American people:
KILMEADE: Let’s go to your second question. What did you talk about in your off-the-record meeting with opinion journalists at the White House-friendly media outlet for over two hours and why should it be kept secret? Who was there? What do you need to know Michelle?
MALKIN: Well, we know that a lot of left-wing opinion journalists were invited to this off-the-record meeting that lasted two-and-a-half-hours. That’s a lot longer than General McChrystal got and I think that the news-consuming audience ought to know what was discussed. We ought to know and it ought to be disclosed what was discussed by those attendees when they talk about this White House and its policy. Why shouldn’t this be completely transparent?
Watch it:
As Crooks and Liars’ Susie Madrak notes, the complainers at Fox appear to be “suffering from memory loss” about President Bush’s many off-the-record chats with conservative columnists and radio hosts, including Fox News personalities Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Glenn Beck. Additionally, they seem to forget that Obama shared an off-the-record dinner with conservative columnists, including Fox contributors Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol and Paul Gigot, before his Inauguration. Malkin should note that the dinner lasted two-and-half hours.
Kristol: ‘Thank God Most Of The Workforce Isn’t Unionized’
Kristol: ‘Thank God Most Of The Workforce Isn’t Unionized’
Earlier this week, hate radio host Rush Limbaugh was dropped from an investor group that was trying to purchase NFL’s St. Louis Rams franchise. Limbaugh’s involvement with the group sparked a week of controversy due to his history of racially divisive commentary. African-American NFL players said they “wouldn’t play” for Limbaugh’s team while the head of the NFL’s players union said he opposed Limbaugh’s bid because sports are meant to reject “discrimination and hatred.”
On Fox News Sunday today, the “All-Stars” jumped to Limbaugh’s defense. NPR’s Juan Williams set up a false comparison, claiming that people don’t complain about MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann announcing football games even though he makes “divisive” statements about conservatives. The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol used the NFL player’s union’s opposition to Limbaugh to attack unions in general, saying “thank God most of the workforce isn’t unionized”:
KRISTOL: Thank God most of business isn’t a monopoly. Thank God most of the workforce isn’t unionized. Why could this happen? This could happen because all the NFL players are in one union. Because all the NFL owners are in one club and pressure can be put on them. Thank God there’s more diversity in this country in terms of different industries and different businesses. And people can be controversial and can still find places that are willing to have them.
Watch it:
Kristol’s attack on unionization ignores the fact that unions are good for the American economy since unions help workers secure higher wages and greater benefits. Additionally, the collective bargaining of unions give workers the ability to shape the conditions of their employment, as the NFL players union successfully demonstrated.
According to Dan Lebowitz, executive director of the Center for Sports and Society at Northeastern University, the NFL has 78 percent African-American players. Because the player’s union has leverage, that means the players won’t have to work for someone who said just two years ago, “the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.”
Liz Cheney undercuts her own excuse for not joining sister Mary’s new political consultancy shop.
Liz Cheney undercuts her own excuse for not joining sister Mary’s new political consultancy shop.
Last week, the Washington Post reported that one of former Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughters, Mary, was “leaving the political consulting firm Navigators Global to start her own consulting company.” Though one of Mary’s friends told the Post that Mary’s dad and her sister, Liz, would be joining her, a spokeswoman for the family said “Liz is not involved” because “she is spending all of her time helping Vice President Cheney write his book.” But the claim that Liz Cheney is too busy with the book to take on other projects was undermined today with the launch of her new non-profit group, Keep America Safe. Politico reports:
Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s eldest daughter Liz will launch a new group aimed at rallying opposition to the “radical” foreign policy of the Obama administration which it says has succeeded only in undermining the nation’s security.
The new group, Keep America Safe, will make the case against President Barack Obama’s moves to wrench America away from Bush era foreign policy on issues from detaining alleged terrorists at Guantanamo Bay to building a missile shield in Eastern Europe.
“The policies being proposed by the Obama administration are so radical across the board,” Cheney said. “Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, you want the nation to be strong and so many steps this president is taking are making the nation weaker.”
Along with Cheney, Keep America Safe’s board features Weekly Standard editor William Kristol and Debra Burlingame, whose husband was killed in 9/11. The project is being helped by a number of former McCain campaign aides, including blogger Michael Goldfarb, war room chief Aaron Harison and video producer Justin Germany.
Kristol Compares Obama’s Olympics Pitch To ‘George W. Bush-Like’ Bullying
Kristol Compares Obama’s Olympics Pitch To ‘George W. Bush-Like’ Bullying
Conservatives have been bashing President Obama for the past week over his decision to personally go to Copenhagen to boost America’s pitch for the 2016 Olympics. When the International Olympics Committee eliminated Chicago in the first round, those same conservatives were euphoric. Today on Fox News Sunday, Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard — whose headquarters erupted in “cheers” when America lost — said that Obama’s decision to go to Copenhagen was an example of George W. Bush-like bullying:
KRISTOL: Our economy doesn’t need the boost of the Olympics. And then an American president in sort of a George W. Bush-like way goes and tries to bully the International Olympic Committee. [...]
Come walk with us. I’m here for America. Can you imagine if some Republican — if Bush had done this and we hadn’t gotten it? Typical Bush heavy-handedness, cowboy unilateralist, hegemonic imperialist action. Obama falls into that trap and they went for it. I must say you couldn’t help be amused by it.
Watch it:
First of all, Kristol was a big fan of the Bush administration’s policies, so it’s not clear why he wouldn’t like Obama going to Copenhagen. But more importantly, Obama’s trip was not a “hegemonic imperialist action.” Brazil, Spain, and Japan — the other three 2016 finalists — all sent their country’s leaders to Copenhagen, as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow pointed out on NBC’s Meet the Press today. Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks said that he was proud Obama had “put his country ahead of his own personal prestige”:
MADDOW: In 2012, London got the Olympics after Blair tried for them. In 2014, Russia got them after Putin tried for them, and in 2016, all four finalists sent their head of government or head of state to make the argument. Obama did nothing unreasonable, and it would have been a shock if Chicago won. For them to be cheering America’s loss here on the right, I think is sort of disgusting. [...]
BROOKS: Nonetheless, I have to say, I’m with Obama on this. He took a risk, he comes away somewhat humiliated, but he took a risk for his town, he took a risk for his country, he put his country ahead of his own personal prestige, and he lost one. I actually don’t mind it. I think he was all right on this.
E.J. Dionne added that Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) presidential slogan was “Country First,” but “in this case, it was Obama-hatred first on the right, not the country.” Watch it:
Kristol Floats ‘Plausible Rumor’ That Hagel Will Replace Gates, Calls Him ‘An Advocate Of Retreat Everywhere’
Kristol Floats ‘Plausible Rumor’ That Hagel Will Replace Gates, Calls Him ‘An Advocate Of Retreat Everywhere’
Yesterday, Foreign Policy Initiative co-founder Bill Kristol appeared on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show, where he said that he now believes “for the first time that he will not accept General McChrystal’s recommendation in Afghanistan.” “I really worry now about the next few years to a degree and in a way that I really hadn’t before,” said Kristol.
When Hewitt asked him if a resignation by one of Obama’s top foreign policy advisers “would mobilize public opinion” against Obama’s decisions, Kristol said “it would help.” He added that he had “just heard this morning from someone who’s been in touch with people in the administration, a foreign gentleman who deals with this government, that people are talking about Secretary Gates leaving at the end of the year, and being replaced by Chuck Hagel.” Hewitt and Kristol then took the opportunity to attack Hagel:
KRISTOL: People are talking about Secretary Gates leaving at the end of the year, and being replaced by Chuck Hagel…
HEWITT: Ugh.
KRISTOL: Yeah, exactly, as Secretary of Defense. I think that’s quite a plausible rumor, and a very worrisome one, because he is an advocate of retreat everywhere, I think.
HEWITT: Yeah, it’s sort of neoisolationism replacing neoconservatism as the driving intellectual force behind the intellectuals on either side.
Kristol is typically off-base when he describes Hagel as “an advocate of retreat everywhere.” Instead, Hagel is simply in favor of smarter engagement with the world. As he wrote in the Washington Post earlier this month, “global collaboration does not mean retreating from our standards, values or sovereignty”:
Development of seamless networks of intelligence gathering and sharing, and strengthening alliances, diplomatic cooperation, trade and development can make the biggest long-term difference and have the most lasting impact on building a more stable and secure world. There really are people and organizations committed to destroying America, and we need an agile, flexible and strong military to face these threats. How, when and where we use force are as important as the decision to use it. Relying on the use of force as a centerpiece of our global strategy, as we have in recent years, is economically, strategically and politically unsustainable and will result in unnecessary tragedy — especially for the men and women, and their families, who serve our country.
Indeed, Kristol has long been antithetical towards Hagel’s concern with thinking through the potential negative consequences of military engagement. Before the Iraq war — which Hagel supported before becoming an aggressive critic — Hagel wanted to know, “What comes after a military invasion? Who rules Iraq? Does the United States really want to be in Baghdad, trying to police Baghdad for twenty or thirty years?” Kristol dismissed Hagel with the assertion that “predictions of ethnic turmoil in Iraq are even more questionable than they were in the case of Afghanistan.” Kristol was wrong.
Perhaps, Kristol is lashing out because Hagel has so publicly chastised the foreign policy vision that Kristol supports. In his book, America: Our Next Chapter, Hagel wrote: “So why did we invade Iraq? I believe it was the triumph of the so-called neo-conservative ideology, as well as Bush administration arrogance and incompetence that took America into this war of choice … They obviously made a convincing case to a president with very limited national security and foreign policy experience, who keenly felt the burden of leading the nation in the wake of the deadliest terrorist attack ever on American soil.”
The Reemergence Of Discredited Neocons: Right-Wing Conference To Advocate A Surge In Afghanistan
The Reemergence Of Discredited Neocons: Right-Wing Conference To Advocate A Surge In Afghanistan
The Foreign Policy Initiative (aka “PNAC 2.0”), an organization which is headed by neoconservatives Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan, and Dan Senor, is holding a conference today and tomorrow on “Advancing & Defending Democracy.” FPI arose after its previous incarnation — the Project for a New American Century — suffered a massive blow to its credibility by staking its reputation on advocating for the “one of the worst foreign policy blunders in American history” — the Iraq war.
Kristol, Kagan, and Senor are now enthusiastically dedicating their efforts to building support for a U.S. troop surge in Afghanistan, calling such a strategy “politically smart for Republicans.” Kagan said recently that withdrawing from Afghanistan would be to “commit preemptive suicide.”
President Obama is thus far resisting the calls to rush more troops into Afghanistan. “I don’t want to put the resource question before the strategy question,” he said on CNN yesterday. “Because there is a natural inclination to say, if I get more, then I can do more. But right now, the question is, the first question is, are we doing the right thing? Are we pursuing the right strategy?” In a letter to Obama earlier this month, FPI made clear that the only “strategy” it’s interested in is escalation:
Since the announcement of your administration’s new strategy, we have been troubled by calls for a drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan and a growing sense of defeatism about the war. … There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat. We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past.
Of course, no one knows more about repeating “errors of the past” than Bill Kristol. At its conference this week, FPI has two separate panels on Afghanistan. The right-wing organization is not hosting a single Democratic elected official (though Rep. Jane Harman did participate in its last event on Afghanistan in March). Instead, the conference is marked by the presence of right-wing luminaries, such as Sen. Jon Kyl, former Gov. Mitt Romney, Elliott Abrams, and Newt Gingrich. Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt is moderating a panel, while Michael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack from the Brookings Institution are also participating. Finally, the conference will fittingly wrap up tomorrow with “A Conversation with John McCain.”
Matt Yglesias writes that the Obama administration needs to “reject the kind of discredited neocon logic that says the only way to deal with the problem of the moment is with maximum force.” He adds, “the situation in Afghanistan has gotten as bad as it has in large part precisely as a result of the last administration listening to the counsel of people like McCain.”
Kristol: Leave Joe Wilson alone!
Kristol: Leave Joe Wilson alone!
Today on Fox News Sunday, Rep. Joe “You Lie!” Wilson (R-SC) said that he will not offer an apology to the House for his conduct during President Obama’s joint address to Congress. The House leadership has said that unless Wilson apologizes, they will introduce a resolution of disapproval. Later in the show today, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol issued a desperate plea for Democrats to leave Wilson — who has a “reputation for bipartisanship” — alone. He said that Pelosi will be leading the party “off the cliff” if they rebuke Wilson:
KRISTOL: Can I just say one thing? He [Obama] is leading his party off a cliff, and Speaker Pelosi is going to lead his party — her party off the cliff if they try to rebuke Joe Wilson.
He has apologized. It will be a disgrace if they do some stunt in the House to try to humiliate this man, who is, in fact — has a reputation for bipartisanship on the Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee he’s on.
Obama and Pelosi are leading the party off a cliff, I think, and I hope a lot of Democrats say, Slow down. Let’s take a look at this bill.
Watch it:
Republican leaders, including Minority Leader John Boehner (OH), have also been pressuring Wilson to apologize to the House.
Palin signs onto Kristol letter attacking ‘defeatism’ about the war in Afghanistan.
Palin signs onto Kristol letter attacking ‘defeatism’ about the war in Afghanistan.
As the Obama administration debates whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, recent polling has shown that support for the war by the American people is at an all-time low. In an effort to push the White House to “fully resource” the war in Afghanistan, the new incarnation of the Project For A New American Century — Bill Kristol’s Foreign Policy Initiative — has written a letter to Obama that features the signatures of conservative luminaries such as Karl Rove, McCain adviser Randy Scheunemann, and Sarah Palin:
Since the announcement of your administration’s new strategy, we have been troubled by calls for a drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan and a growing sense of defeatism about the war. With General McChrystal expected to request additional troops later this month, we urge you to continue on the path you have taken thus far and give our commanders on the ground the forces they need to implement a successful counterinsurgency strategy. There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat. We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past.
Palin’s inclusion on the list shouldn’t be surprising, considering that during her time as Sen. John McCain’s running mate, neocons considered her a “blank page” and a “project” for them to mold into a messenger for their cause.
Jon Stewart Gets Kristol To Concede Government Can Provide ‘First-Class Health Care’
Jon Stewart Gets Kristol To Concede Government Can Provide ‘First-Class Health Care’
Last night on The Daily Show, host Jon Stewart peppered right-wing pundit Bill Kristol with questions about why he is opposed to health care reform that includes a public health insurance option. Why is government-run health care “good enough for the military,” but “not good enough for the people of America?” Stewart asked.
Kristol — who has urged conservative activists and Republicans to “resist the temptation” to work with Democrats in crafting health reform and instead “go for the kill” — responded that the military “deserves it,” but the American people do not:
STEWART: Are you saying the American public shouldn’t have access to the same quality health care that we give to our better citizens?
KRISTOL: To our soldiers? Absolutely. [Crowd boos]
Kristol explained that soldiers get paid less, but “one way we make it up to” them is by giving them “first-class health care.” “I feel like you’ve trapped me somehow,” Kristol observed. Indeed, Stewart explained the flaw in Kristol’s logic:
STEWART: I just want to get this on record — Bill Kristol just said that the government can run a first-class health care system.
KRISTOL: Sure it can. [Crowd applauds]
STEWART: And a government-run system is better than a private health care system.
Kristol tried to backtrack, saying he wasn’t sure the military system is “better,” and later argued that other government-run systems aren’t providing the best health care.
Stewart wrapped up Kristol’s argument by stating, “So what you are suggesting is that the government could run the best health care system for Americans, but it’s a little too costly, so we should have the shitty insurance company health care.” Watch it:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Bill Kristol Extended Interview | ||||
|
||||
Kristol on Obama: ‘He is an arrogant man.’
Kristol on Obama: ‘He is an arrogant man.’
On Fox News Sunday, the pundit roundtable continued to harp on President Obama’s initial reaction — and subsequent clarifications — to the arrest of Harvard African-American studies professor Henry Louis Gates. On Friday, Obama conceded he could have “calibrated [his] words differently” after originally stating the Cambridge police acted “stupidly.” “Everybody needs to climb down, as the president said in his briefing room comments,” NPR’s Mara Liasson said. But right-wing pundit Bill Kristol refused to let the controversy die, complaining that Obama’s apology was the sign of an “arrogant” man:
The President could have said, you know that was a stupid thing for me to say. But he didn’t say that for some reason. You know, that would be too self-deprecating. And I think he is an arrogant man. And he feels entitled to pass judgment on Cambridge cops or on pediatricians…
Watch it:
Putting aside that Kristol has made a career of sitting in judgment of others, the Cambridge cops have said they are “profoundly grateful that the president took time out of his busy schedule to attempt to resolve this situation.” In a statement, Cambridge police officers said, “It is clear to us from this conversation that the president respects police officers and the often difficult and dangerous situations we face on a daily basis.” As former McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt said of Kristol, “He’s in the business of ad hominem insults and criticism.” Schmidt observed, “That’s a reflection of [Kristol’s] values. He’s the Washington, D.C., talking head and glitterati.”
Bill Kristol And Dennis Miller Think That Conservatives Should ‘Plant A Flag On The Phrase Progressive’
Bill Kristol And Dennis Miller Think That Conservatives Should ‘Plant A Flag On The Phrase Progressive’
While interviewing Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol on his radio show yesterday, Dennis Miller suggested that conservatives ought to consider commandeering the term “progressive” for their cause. “If I was Republicans right now or conservatives, whatever way you want to look at it — I would plant a flag on the phrase progressive,” said Miller.
Miller claimed that “liberals are trying to co-opt” the term, but they haven’t “completely commandeered it” yet, so conservatives should “start claiming progressivism on the right too.” Kristol agreed, citing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s frequent use of the phrase, “progressing Alaska forward”:
KRISTOL: And I agree with you. What’s progressive about heaping tax burdens and energy costs burdens on working class and middle class people in a tough economic time? I mean, who’s really for progress? People make fun of Sarah Palin, her grammar’s not so good some times and she’s always talking about “progressing Alaska forward.” It’s not a verb I usually use, but maybe she’s on to something in the notion that conservatives should not give up the notion that they’re the progressive force now in American politics.
Listen here:
Kristol and Miller’s musing about co-opting progressivism for the conservative movement will likely shock right wingers like Glenn Beck, who have sought to demonize the term. “I’ve been saying now for awhile, and it really has clicked in my mind, um, that it is the progressive movement, it is the cancer that is inside both parties,” said Beck last month. Citing the lessons he learned from Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, Beck is convinced that “progressivism” is the true insidious force threatening America:
BECK: We’ll come back with Jonah Goldberg. I want to make something real clear, though. It wasn’t just — don’t think that this is a Barack Obama or a Democrat-bashing thing. Because it’s not. Compassionate conservativism is the same thing. Progressivism is in both parties, and that is the cancer that you need to educate yourself on and know what it is so you can fight it and irradiate it. It is — and you can find the beginnings of it. A great place to start is a book, it’s just come out in paperback I think tomorrow, or maybe it was out last week. Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism.
But Miller, who raised the idea of re-branding conservatives as progressives, might not mind that his idea tramples on Beck’s paranoid shtick. Miller has mocked Beck as “a shaky cat” who “makes Howard Beale look like John Wayne.”
Transcript: More »
The ‘Kristol Ball’ plots Palin’s long-shot path to the White House.
The ‘Kristol Ball’ plots Palin’s long-shot path to the White House.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol reaffirmed his “contrarian” take on Gov. Sarah Palin’s (R-AK) recent decision to quit. The “Kristol Ball” argued that Palin is now “all in” for a “high risk” presidential run. Depending on her “talents and abilities” Kristol used a strained comparison to President Obama to lay out Palin’s winding road to the White House:
KRISTOL: Everyone said [Obama couldn't] compete with people with these long records. … He seems to have gotten President. I don’t think it is foolish for Palin to think, “You know what, if that’s the world we live in now where people don’t value — maybe correctly — experience in years of experience in Washington, or two terms counts more than two and half years as Governor of Alaska. Maybe she thinks she gets out there and becomes a leader of the conservative movement, and then a leader of the Republican Party, and then conceivably a nominee of the Republican Party, and then conceivably a president just as Obama did.
Watch it:
Kristol has been particularly unreliable as of late, and has been extremely poor in predicting the likely success of would-be presidential candidates. In 2006, he declared that “Barack Obama is not going to beat Hillary Clinton in a single democratic primary.” Earlier in the program, Karl Rove expressed a less charitable view than that of Kristol, saying, “[E]ffective strategies in politics are ones that are so clear and obvious that people can grasp it. It is not clear what her strategy is.”
GOP Operative Schmidt Blasts Bill Kristol: ‘He’s In The Business Of Ad Hominem Insults And Criticism’
GOP Operative Schmidt Blasts Bill Kristol: ‘He’s In The Business Of Ad Hominem Insults And Criticism’
Yesterday, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol — a long-time aggressive public advocate of Sarah Palin — took great exception to a new article in Vanity Fair by Todd Purdum which quoted McCain campaign officials disparaging Palin’s performance as a vice presidential candidate.
Kristol fingered one particular McCain official for blame: chief strategist Steve Schmidt. Kristol claimed that Schmidt trashed “Palin’s mental state to others in the McCain-Palin campaign.” And now Schmidt is firing back by unloading some very candid rhetorical bombs against Kristol. Politico’s Jonathan Martin reports:
Asked about the accusation, Schmidt fired back in an e-mail: “I’m sure John McCain would be president today if only Bill Kristol had been in charge of the campaign.”
“After all, his management of [former Vice President] Dan Quayle’s public image as his chief of staff is still something that takes your breath away,” Schmidt continued. “His attack on me is categorically false.”
Schmidt then offered more colorful perspective of Kristol’s character:
“Bill Kristol, going back to the time of the campaign, has taken a lot of cheap shots at the campaign without ever offering a plausible path to victory,” Schmidt said. “He’s in the business of ad hominem insults and criticism.” […]
As for the charges of being a sunshine soldier with regard to Palin, Schmidt said: “Nonsense. I’m a team player. That’s a reflection of [Kristol’s] values. He’s the Washington, D.C., talking head and glitterati. I live in Northern California and I really don’t give a s— about that stuff.”
Kristol responded by claiming that “John McCain deserved better” than Schmidt. And Kristol’s chief McCain campaign ally — Randy Scheunemann — likened Schmidt to the “Iranian secret police.”
During the presidential campaign, neoconservatives Kristol and Scheunemann had made Palin their “project,” seizing upon her cluelessness to shape her foreign policy views. As Matt Duss observed at the time, Palin’s “simplistic presentation of the Russia-Georgia conflict, her mindless threat of war with Russia, asserting that America shouldn’t ‘second guess’ Israeli policy, and her tiresome and dishonest conflation of 9/11 and Iraq,” all confirmed that she was getting the neocon talking points. And now the neoconservative camp is returning the favor by rushing to defend her.
Kristol and Hume call for ‘targeted air strikes’ against North Korea.
Kristol and Hume call for ‘targeted air strikes’ against North Korea.
On Fox News Sunday yesterday, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that it would be “wise” for the Obama administration to “knock out a few” of North Korea’s missile sites. “You know, it might be worth doing some targeted air strikes to show the North Koreans — instead of always talking about, Gee, there could be consequences, to show that they can’t simply keep down the — keep going down this path,” said Kristol. Asked if he would “consider” “brother Kristol’s” idea, Fox’s Brit Hume, replied, “I would.” Watch it:
Yglesias notes that “Kristol doesn’t even attempt to say what he thinks this will accomplish.” “He just kind of tosses it out there for no reason because arguing that the United States should start wars is what he does.” Nonproliferation expert Joe Cirincione, the president of the Ploughshares Fund, tells ThinkProgress that “Kristol may sound authoritative on the Fox News set, but following his advice would be a disaster on the battlefield.” “A strike on North Korea would be the beginning of a war, not the end of a crisis,” said Cirincione.
Read Cirincione’s full statement: More »
Kristol Ball fails: Predicted on Sunday that Granholm would be Supreme Court nominee.
Kristol Ball fails: Predicted on Sunday that Granholm would be Supreme Court nominee.
Today, President Obama picked Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his Supreme Court nominee. On Fox News Sunday this past week, right-wing pundit Bill Kristol (ie “Kristol Ball”) confidently predicted that Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) would be the next Supreme Court nominee:
KRISTOL: I think he has made up his mind, and I think it’s going to be Jennifer Granholm, the governor of Michigan, for this reason. Obama gave that interview Friday which we saw the snippet from. In that interview, he uses the term practical seven times — I want someone with a practical sense of how the world works, I want someone with practical experience. Obama knows what he’s doing, and I think he wants to say, I’m putting on someone who went to Harvard Law School, clerked at an appellate level, was attorney general of Michigan, has good quotes from Republicans and Democrats about their conduct of that legal office, but who really understands the effect on real-world decisions.
Watch it:
Bill Kristol has also wrongly predicted that Ted Stevens would “hang on” in Alaska, that McCain would conquer “the path to the presidency,” and that Colin Powell would endorse President Obama at the 2008 DNC.
Kristol: ‘Dick Cheney, Most Valuable Republican.’
Kristol: ‘Dick Cheney, Most Valuable Republican.’
While many Republicans are trying to ditch the legacy of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, one pundit is still clinging to the previous administration. In a column today titled “Don’t Wince. Fight!,” Bill Kristol offers a full-throated defense of Cheney, writing that Republicans cringing at the re-emergence of the former vice president have a “juvenile understanding of political dynamics.” Kristol then prescribes that to regain power, the GOP needs to embrace Bush’s policies and listen to Cheney:
The real question any Republican strategist should ask himself is this: What will Republican chances be in 2012 if voters don’t remember the Bush administration–however problematic in other areas–as successful in defending the country after 9/11? To give this issue away would be to accept a post-Herbert-Hoover-like-fate for today’s GOP. That’s why Republicans should listen carefully when Cheney gives a speech this week in which he’ll lay out the case for the surveillance, detention, and interrogation policies of the Bush administration in the war against terror.
Kristol concludes, “Dick Cheney probably won’t be the glamour quarterback of the Republican comeback. But he’s proving to be a heck of a middle linebacker.” Those considering taking the advice of the Kristol Ball should check out his July 2007 op-ed on “Why Bush Will Be A Winner.”
Kristol Issues Another Correction: I Was Wrong To Blame Obama For Stock Market Declines
Kristol Issues Another Correction: I Was Wrong To Blame Obama For Stock Market Declines
In discussing the state of the economy this morning on Fox News Sunday, conservative commentator Bill Kristol noted that the stock market has performed reasonably well over the last several months. “The market’s up 35 percent in the last two months, which is pretty amazing,” Kristol said. He then noted that those Republicans — including himself — who were “chortling” about the stock market’s significant decline just after President Obama’s inauguration would now be forced to admit that they were wrong:
Republicans who were chortling over that 20 percent drop in the stock market the first month or two of [Obama's] administration are going to be, fairly enough, hoist on our own petard by the fact that now Obama’s getting this big stock market rally. … I — no one should base anything on this forecast — but in my view the short term is surprisingly bullish, but medium-long term very worrisome.
Watch it:
Indeed, a key talking point of the right-wing in late 2008 and the early part of 2009 was that the significant decline in the stock market was evidence that Obama’s approach to economic recovery was already failing. Kristol himself penned a column in the Weekly Standard entitled “Don’t Worry, Be Happy: Obama gives the markets the back of his hand.” In it, Kristol argued that Obama’s failure to base his entire economic agenda on ensuring day-to-day gains in the markets on Wall Street demonstrated he had already failed at governing:
So the stock market drops over 25 percent since Election Day, almost 20 percent since Inauguration — and Barack Obama tells the American people at his press conference Tuesday not to “spend all your time worrying about that.” [...]
The stock market is about real money, about the real livelihoods of real. … I’m told almost every theme in Obama’s speech last Tuesday night was focus-group tested–and the speech played pretty well politically. But the markets weren’t impressed. Isn’t it time for Obama and his team to get up the nerve to stop playing politics and to govern?
Kristol, of course, was not alone in making this argument. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Republicans in Congress all got on board. The question now is whether or not Kristol’s conservative brethren will follow his lead and issue a correction.
Kristol: ‘Literally, On Substance, There Is Now No Argument For Closing Guantanamo’
Kristol: ‘Literally, On Substance, There Is Now No Argument For Closing Guantanamo’
In recent days, Republicans in Congress, desperate for some political traction, have for some unknown reason latched onto the idea that criticizing the Obama administration for wanting to close Guantanamo Bay is a good one. Last night on Fox News, right-wing super-hawk Bill Kristol came on board.
Kristol criticized Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) argument that detainees should be given “the same due process we give our own troops,” saying it is a political “gift” to Republicans (nevermind the fact that GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham made a similar argument the previous day). “Why not keep Guantanamo open?” Kristol asked, claiming that there is no longer any reason to close it:
KRISTOL: Literally, on substance, there is now no argument for closing Guantanamo. It is entirely symbolic. Obama has shown he symbolically would like to. The Europeans love him. They can’t love him anymore, you know. He should reverse himself.
And the Republican position should now be not just to embarrass the Democrats. Republicans should say it is a ridiculous waste of money, and a little dangerous, incidentally, to now close what has turned out to be an extremely effective, well-run facility.
Watch it:
What Kristol doesn’t understand is that symbolism actually creates substance and the Guantanamo Bay prison serves as a symbol that harms U.S. national security. Indeed, “16 highly-respected intelligence and counterterror officials” told the U.S. Supreme Court last January that holding detainees without due process provides “a powerful recruitment tool for violent extremists…and greater risk to the security of the Nation.” Other experts agree:
– Center for Strategic and International Studies: “In the view of many around the world, Guantanamo represents indefinite detention, torture, and abuse…Guantanamo does serve as a recruitment tool for al Qaeda.”
– Council on Foreign Relations expert Daniel Prieto: Gitmo has “direct effects on our counterterrorism policies, making them brittle and making the United States less safe in the world, in terms of serving as propaganda and an active recruitment tool for terrorists and really inflaming public opinion around the world.”
Even Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), whom Kristol fervently supported to become the nation’s next president, has said “Guantanamo has become a symbol around the world that is not good.”
Indeed, as the Wonk Room’s Matt Duss noted, Gitmo “remains a potent symbol of American lawlessness, and a driver of anti-American sentiment” and “raises the political costs for potential American allies and partners.” Addressing Kristol’s claim that Gitmo has been “effective,” Duss notes that it “has been a significant radicalizing force for Islamic militants” and adds, “So yes, it’s been effective — at getting American soldiers killed.”
Kristol Now Thinks Torture Debate Is ‘Healthy’ If Democrats Are Also The Focus
Kristol Now Thinks Torture Debate Is ‘Healthy’ If Democrats Are Also The Focus
Many conservatives have expressed outrage that President Obama earlier this month released four-Bush era Office of Legal Counsel memos that detail the Bush administration’s legal justification for torture. Not only has the right criticized Obama for releasing the memos, but it has succumbed to defending the use of torture and argued vigorously that no official investigations should ensue.
The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol has been leading the charge lately on Fox News:
– “[Releasing the memos] is a pander to the left. I think it’s really pathetic for an American president to do that, and to disavow, in effect, the good faith efforts of a previous administration to protect us in ways that I think were entirely appropriate.” [4/16/09, Special Report]
– “To release these memos and to create what’s now going to be weeks, months, years of lawsuits and investigations — I mean, it’s really a disgrace.” [4/19/09, Fox News Sunday]
– “The idea that we’re going back and even raising the possibility of criminal prosecution is so appalling that it renders me almost speechless.” [4/21/09, Special Report]
However, last night on Fox, Kristol pulled an about face, saying that any debate into the matter would be “healthy.” Why? Because he wants to include the Clinton administration:
KRISTOL: I hope that debate goes to the whole, not just the last eight year, but the last 16 years. Let’s discuss the Clinton administration, which had renditions, sent people they captured to places where they were treated. [...] But let’s have a big debate about whether the Bush administration acted properly or not, and whether the Clinton administration acted properly or not, and how to act going forward in fighting this war on terror. I think it’s a healthy debate.
Watch a video compilation of Kristol’s evolution:
Later in the segment, when Brett Baier appeared to recognize his change of heart, Kristol was forced to revert back to his old self. “You think it’s good for the country to shine the light?” Baier asked. “No. …I would much prefer that we fight this war the way we fight usual wars, with keeping secrets secret,” Kristol replied.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll