Nothing More To Say

via Andrew

Quote For The Day

"The denizens of the left blogosphere consider themselves the Democratic Party's base. But they are not. For Democrats, as opposed to Republicans, the wing is not the base; the legions of loyal African Americans, union members, Jews, women and Latinos are. In the end, the sillier left-village practitioners are stoking the same populist exaggeration—the idea that Washington is controlled by crooks and sellouts—that conservative strategists like Bill Kristol believe will bring the Republicans back to power. The perversity of this is beyond comprehension," - Joe Klein.

Anals Of Discourse

That's not a typo.

A couple of things came together to help us remember how far we still have to go to wipe away the stain of the Bush years.

Andrew posts this today

The Barbarian Inside The Gate
"I was very struck also by Janet Napolitano’s comment, I hadn’t read it before to see her say that, that the number one priority is to bring [Hasan] to justice is such a knee-jerk comment and such a stupid comment. He’s going to be brought to justice. He is not going to be innocent of murder. There are a lot of eyewitnesses to that. They should just go ahead and convict him and put him to death," - William Kristol, appearing on Fox News.

Let us be clear: this is a fascist statement.

You begin to understand now why these goons instituted torture. They have total contempt for the Western system of justice, utter contempt for the rule of law. Kristol here is all but calling for a lynching. This is what "conservatism" has come to: the worship of violence and revenge. It makes the Cheney years more comprehensible, doesn't it?

Yesterday I chatted with a particularly pungent example of the authoritarian follower on the Twitter:

HULAgate @GoToTwlv I'd make the argument that the ACLU and the rest of the Diversity First crowd should be tried right next to the 9-11 thugs.

HULAgate @GoToTwlv "The Nuremberg Trials dealt w/ officials of an actual state." Bin Laden says he's king of the camels. Who would argue with that?

HULAgate @GoToTwlv It is about lib Political Correctness run amok, just as Fort Hood was the victim of leftist stupidity playing enabler to terror.

HULAgate @GoToTwlv "Being terrorized can do that" Enough about the brave Dutch, how much did you give to Obama in 2008 to appease the PLO in 2009?

HULAgate @GoToTwlv And still, even after your jive, NO MERIT to AG Holder's stupid decision to re-terrorize the 9-11 victims. Some change, that one.

HULAgate @GoToTwlv So you're saying these were just more late term abortions, on 9-11? I can see how the loon left might take comfort in that, sure.

HULAgate @GoToTwlv Your lost liberal logic is rounder than Oprah's head. Holder has given Al Queda EXACTLY what they wanted, on a Tiffany TV platter.

Because liberals believe in an open and free society with transparency I will post the last 4 messages I sent Mr @HULAgate (the name is some sort of jab at Obama's heritage or something ... I don't know. The man's got a bunch of Beck/Limbaugh/Hannity buzz phrases bouncing around in his skull and they pop up throughout his feverish postings - in lieu of reasoned conversation) You can decide if I wound up as crazy as him. (The posts are printed here in reverse chronological order)

@HULAgate hey, F-the victims right? NY & DC R overwhelmingly liberal/socialist/muslim lovers right? Prob lots of ACLU mbrs too! U think bad about 16 hours ago

@HULAgate I'm sorry that after 233 years this country's resilience and strength has not yet become apparent to you. I gotta go. about 16 hours ago

@HULAgate Friend, for anarchy/death/fear to occur a terrorist needs *us* to be scared, die or abandon our society's rules.They care abt us about 16 hours ago

@HULAgate How come you guys flit from one topic to another? A lack of commitment 2 serious discussion. Being terrorized can do that to a guy about 17 hours ago

@HULAgate You are classy. And you're responding just the way a terrorist would want you too.

And they're not too bright. I found a tongue-in-cheek GT12 post being cited on an pro-Obama Impeachment Website.

(Side note: I remember starting a new job in September of '93. My new boss, an idiot of the first order, had a homemade 'Impeach Clinton' bumbersticker on his ratty Honda. 1993!)

27% of the country still likes Palin.

27% of Illinois voted for Alan Keyes over Obama in 2006.

27% of humans are just genetically wired to think like that.

AMY GOODMAN: [John Dean,] talk about your research, going back in time, what social science you drew from.

JOHN DEAN: Right. What happened in looking for answers, I first went down a lot of bad alleys, where nothing was there. Then I ran into this body of research that really commenced after World War II, where social scientists were trying to figure out if we could ever have in the United States what had happened in Italy and Germany under Hitler and Mussolini. And the short answer was, they found, yes, we could have that. There is clearly an authoritarian personality.

The initial research was very Freudian-based. Other researchers quickly, who debated that and didn’t think that was the most solid, began asking empirical questions, asking surveys of people, and developing scales to determine, you know, which personalities were more likely to become followers and those that are leaders.
So they did develop—now we have 40 years of this material, and it has been replicated time and time again, and we know an awful lot about this type of personality. There are people who submit very easily to an authority figure. They do it because they’re frightened. 9/11 drove an awful lot of people into submitting to authoritarianism, and they’re very aggressive once they submit. This explains a lot of the incivility, the nastiness, the mean-spiritedness. They’re not self-critical, and they become true advocates, not unlike the clips you saw earlier in the show, of whatever position they’re advocating and pushing.

AMY GOODMAN: One of the quotes you begin with is Jonathan Schell. “The administration of George W. Bush is not a dictatorship, but it does manifest the characteristics of one in embryonic form,” he writes.

JOHN DEAN: Yes, well taken. I must say that as somebody who was in a White House where it was dubbed an imperial presidency, which had its own authoritarian nature, we now have a presidency that is the imperial presidency on steroids. They have really bulked it up. It is unchecked by the Congress.

I found when I started looking and applying this research, Amy, that it really starts in the Congress, and it blossoms there in the congressional leadership, setting up a very almost dictatorial system within the House. And then, when Bush and Cheney come in in 2000, they give all this a new legitimacy. 9/11, they exploit that further and give it more legitimacy. And it’s a very troublesome thing, because it is proto-fascist behavior.

Now, are we on the road to fascism? No. The problem is we’re not very far from it. And I’m told by the experts in that area that if it comes here, it will come with a smile on its face, and we’ll give up things that we’ll wish we’d never given up.

Our goal is to to worry about the other 73%

And Bill Kristol's Still Employed Too

Talk about your lack of accountability

I forgot to note a very special anniversary [Wednesday]. April 22nd is the date on which Charles Krauthammer opined:

Hans Blix had five months to find weapons. He found nothing. We’ve had five weeks. Come back to me in five months. If we haven’t found any, we will have a credibility problem.

You’ve now had six years. How’s that credibility looking?

FAIL 2.0, Pt. 2

This worries me too

You're all familiar with the phrase "canary in the coal mine." The idea was that miners would bring canaries down into the mines as warning signals. When the air became toxic, the canaries would be affected first -- thus warning the miners of imminent danger.

With respect to the Afghanistan policy, the problem isn't that the "signaling" canaries are dropping dead. The problem is that they're too happy -- they're chirping with excessive mirth. Specifically, when Max Boot, Robert Kagan, Bill Kristol, and the Post editorial board are all excited about the policy.... well, it might be time to get out of the mine.

FAIL 2.0

Fresh New Recycling from the brainpower behind Iraq, the Aborted Afghan Mission and the Patriot Act

Think Progress

A newly-formed and still obscure neo-conservative foreign policy organisation is giving some observers flashbacks to the 1990s, when its predecessor staked out the aggressively unilateralist foreign policy that came to fruition under the George W. Bush administration.

The blandly-named Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) - the brainchild of Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, neo-conservative foreign policy guru Robert Kagan, and former Bush administration official Dan Senor - has thus far kept a low profile; its only activity to this point has been to sponsor a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan.

Though it’s not mentioned on their Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) bio page, Kristol and Kagan were co-founders of PNAC in 1997. Matt Duss writes at the Wonk Room that Kristol and Kagan seem to be re-naming their old organization because it became “inextricably bound in the public’s imagination to one of the worst foreign policy blunders in American history,” the invasion of Iraq.

Scum

I know that Barry O doesn't want me to think this way anymore but ... well isn't this just the nineties all over again?

Andrew:

Byron York confirmed that it was Republican partisan pressure that forced Gregg to pull out. The idea that a Republican could help give Obama cover on entitlement reform and that he would preside over a big increase in Hispanic representation in the Census was too much for the Rovian partisans. Shill Kristol lets the cat out of the bag:

they were worried that clever “post-partisan” or bipartisan tactics by Obama could split and weaken an already uncertain and demoralized GOP.

Party first. Country always always last. Welcome to today's Republicans.

Dispatching Bilbo

Scott Horton gives us the real whys and wherefores

The Sacking of Bill Kristol

Kristol’s writing wasn’t compelling or even very careful. He either lacked a talent for solid opinion journalism or wasn’t putting his heart into it. A give-away came in the form of four corrections the newspaper was forced to run over factual mistakes in the columns, creating an impression that they were rushed out without due diligence or attention to factual claims. A senior writer at Time magazine recounted to me a similar experience with Kristol following his stint in 2006-07. “His conservative ideas were cutting edge and influential,” I was told. “But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.”

Kristol also regularly commented on political developments in which he was personally engaged—without disclosing the depth of his engagement. The Daily Beast previously highlighted his deep involvement in selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be John McCain’s running mate. In the campaign season that followed, boosterism about Sarah Palin became a staple of his writing, even at the expense of his relationship with McCain and leading figures in the McCain campaign. This conduct blurred the distinctions between being an actor on and observer of the political stage, raising some concern among the guardians of The Times’ credibility.

The Change We've Been Waiting For

At the end of Bill (The Buffoon) Kristol's NYT column today this Notice:

This is William Kristol’s last column.

To Review Why Bilbo today brings us such joy, review GT12's coverage here.

An Exchange Waiting To Be Spoken

"... Yet I have always acted with the best interests of our country in mind. I have followed my conscience and done what I thought was right. You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made. But I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions."

- G.W. Bush, Thursday Night

"No U.S. president can justify a policy that fails to achieve its intended results by pointing to the purity and rectitude of his intentions,"

- Paul Wolfowitz, "Statesmanship in the New Century," in Kagan, R. and Kristol, W, eds. Present Dangers: Crisis and Opportunity in American Foreign and Defense Policy, San Francisco, 2000, p. 335.

Anti-Kristol

Read this prediction from one year ago ...

Succubus

Of Course, as Steve Benen notes, just listening to Bill Kristol demonstrates a near criminal inability to recognize idiocy.....

Toldja:

McCain aides privately call Palin a ‘total disaster.’»

On Salon Radio this morning, Glenn Greenwald asked Harper’s Scott Horton about his recent reporting on how Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol lobbied the McCain campaign to select Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) as the Republican vice presidential nominee. Horton explained that the McCain campaign is now regretting following Kristol’s advice, calling the Palin pick a “total disaster“:

HORTON: We’ve got a lot of finger-pointing going on within the camp, and I’d say there’s a pretty broad agreement amongst a number of the senior-most advisors to McCain that the Palin pick is worse than disappointing. It’s a total disaster, as one describes to me. And there is a sort of blame game going on there. […]

I would say the anger and irritation between a number of the senior people in the McCain camp and Bill Kristol is become really acute. … They view this man as the guy who gave them this albatross, Sarah Palin. I think there’s a lot of real anger about it. There’s also recognition that it’s too late to do anything.

Horton said neoconservatives are “now just proceeding to develop Palin as their candidate, as somebody they want to bring up in 2012, as the neo-con favored Republican.”

Last month, a former Republican White House official, who now works at the American Enterprise Institute, said, “She’s bright and she’s a blank page. She’s going places and it’s worth going there with her.”

Sarah: No Surprise

From Tina Brown's new onliner 'The Daily Beast'

A writer for London’s Daily Telegraph interviewed one of the participants in the Juneau junket about the meeting with Palin:

“She’s bright and she’s a blank page. She’s going places and it’s worth going there with her.” Asked if he sees her as a “project,” the former official said: “Your word, not mine, but I wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment.”

A key organizer and participant in the Palin meeting was Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, who can fairly lay claim to having “discovered” Palin for Washington political circles. Palin’s name appeared in fifty-seven Weekly Standard articles since the Juneau meeting—starting with a paean entitled “The Most Popular Governor” that ran right after the reception.

Indeed, Kristol, who was a loyal McCain supporter in 2000 and is often thought to have suffered exclusion from Bush’s inner circle as a result, may have played a key role in McCain’s decision to tap Palin as his running mate. A McCain campaign insider described to me a tight three-way competition between Palin, Joe Lieberman, and Mitt Romney in the final days. McCain himself, it was no secret, wanted Lieberman to be his running mate, but his senior advisors were adamant that Lieberman could not be sold to the Republican base. A Lieberman nomination might risk exposing serious fissures in the party at the convention in Saint Paul.

Sarah: Not So 'Out Of The Blue'

via London Telegraph:

Neoconservatives plan Project Sarah Palin to shape future American foreign policy

Sources in the McCain camp, the Republican Party and Washington think tanks say Mrs Palin was identified as a potential future leader of the neoconservative cause in June 2007. That was when the annual summer cruise organised by the right-of-centre Weekly Standard magazine docked in Juneau, the Alaskan state capital, and the pundits on board took tea with Governor Palin.

Her case as John McCain's running mate was later advanced vociferously by William Kristol, the magazine's editor, who is widely seen as one of the founding fathers of American neoconservative thought - including the robust approach to foreign policy which spurred American intervention in Iraq.

[To Review GT12's coverage of the Biblically Stupid Bill Kristol click here]

In 1988, Mr Kristol became a leading adviser of another inexperienced Republican vice presidential pick, Dan Quayle, tutoring him in foreign affairs. Last week he praised Mrs Palin as "a spectre of a young, attractive, unapologetic conservatism" that "is haunting the liberal elites".

Now many believe that the "neocons", whose standard bearer in government, Vice President Dick Cheney, lost out in Washington power struggles to the more moderate defence secretary Robert Gates and secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, last year are seeking to mould Mrs Palin to renew their influence.

Wrap-Up

Political Wire:

The Morning After Palin

The Detroit Free Press put together a panel of voters to listen to last night's Republican convention speeches and, much as I predicted last night, the independents were universally negative on Palin. In fact, they were more negative than the Democratic voters. The speech was clearly designed to help close the "enthusiasm gap" that has dogged the McCain campaign all summer.

Other interesting commentary:

Howard Wolfson: "What I was particularly impressed with was her ability to stick the knife into Barack Obama with a smile and do it effectively. She was very, very good... That shot at the end with she and her family on stage cradling the baby is priceless. You can't buy that kind of imagery. She did a very, very good job. I agree Democrats have reason to be concerned. Nobody should underestimate this woman's political ability, to go on stage in a hall like this, give a speech like this for the first time ever, quite impressive."

Ezra Klein: "As delivered, the speech was effective as theater but curiously hollow as an enduring campaign argument: It contained the seeds of a medal ceremony for McCain, and marked Palin as a politician to watch, but it said nothing about the presidency she hopes to be part of."

James Fallows: "Sarah Palin, at least tonight, did not seem interested in bringing anyone new into the fold. A speech that was great in the convention hall. We'll see how it affects the electoral lineup."

Jonathan Martin: "She wasn't quite the surprise that Barack Obama was in 2004, when his star was born at the Democratic convention in Boston. But, like Obama then, delegates left the building and Republicans at home headed to bed with unforgettable images of a fresh face and new force to be reckoned on the national political scene etched in their minds."

Bill Kristol: "Now we see why the liberal establishment has been trying for the last few days to destroy Sarah Palin. She is a threat to their hopes to take the White House this year, a threat to their broader claims to speak for youth, for women, and for the future, and a threat to their attempt to control the high ground in the culture war. After her stunning success last night, some in the liberal media may retire from the ring for a while. Others, with the threat now even more evident, may redouble their assaults and become even more desperate and vicious. Surely they'll fail."

Support Barry O And Make A Bad Man Morose!

In a New York Times op-ed, Neocon William Kristol appears depressed by the current assumption that Obama has the election in the bag -- but what seems to annoy him most are the "got hope?" bumper stickers adorning even expensive cars in his Washington suburban neighborhood.

"I relapsed into moroseness," Kristol complains, wondering "Are my own neighbors’ lives so bleak that they place their hopes in Barack Obama?" ... "Do they really believe their fellow citizens who happen to prefer McCain are hopeless?"

Get Your Own Bumper Sticker Here And Piss On Bill Kristol

Even Bill Kristol Can Find Some New Outrage To Create

John McCain? Not so creative (via Wonkette):

Stylish wordsmith Barack Obama had an op-ed in the New York Times last week, which is kind of a big deal. He could be the next David Brooks or Bill Kristol or even Maureen Dowd! So then Grampa Walnuts McCain was all, “Argghhh, I should get a column in the New York Times, I was tortured,” so the Times is all, “Okay, submit one, we guess?”

According to Drudge:

or where-ever he got this from, Op-Ed editor David Shipley cold rejected McCain’s submission because, instead of being an op-ed for the NYT, was just some rehashed campaign talking points against Obama.

Drudge reports: '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.'

Shipley continues: '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.'

Kristol-Nut

Just to keep GT12 records up to date:

Major Neo-con idiot, fascist tool and NY Times Columnist is always, and always stunningly, wrong (click here to review our data) said this yesterday in the (fading) Grey Lady:

It was widely assumed, though, that if either McCain or Romney won the nomination, the winner would bring [former mastermind of 2000's Straight Talk Express campaign Mike] Murphy on board for the general election. So far it hasn’t happened. I believe it soon will.

...the full plan, as I understand it, was — and is — to have [Karl Rove disciple Steve] Schmidt, a good operative and tactician, take over day-to-day operations at headquarters, while bringing Murphy on both to travel with McCain and as chief strategist.

... With Murphy in charge, McCain will have the campaign team he wants. Then all they’ll have to do is come from behind to win against a superior organization, more money, a gifted candidate and a Democratic-tilting electorate. Oh well: no challenge, no glory.

Politico reports this today:

Mike Murphy, a political consultant who helped Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) mastermind his 2000 campaign, will not be reboarding the Straight Talk Express. “I do not expect to join the campaign,” Murphy said. “They’re my friends, and I wish them well.”

And confirmed here in the very same NY Times that hosted Bill's fairy tale yesterday:

Count Murphy Out for McCain Campaign
By Adam Nagourney
Mike Murphy, the long-time associate and friend of John McCain who had been rumored to be joining the McCain campaign, said this morning he was not going to do it.

In an interview, Mr. Murphy said the raft of speculation was threatening Mr. McCain’s campaign and he wanted to put an end to it.
“I’m not expecting to join the campaign"

I live for the day that Bill predicts McCain's victory. Then I will be able to sleep at night.

Luckily, He's Always Wrong

This from the never accurrate Billy-The-K

On Fox News Sunday .., Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.

However, “if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out,” Kristol said, reinforcing the fact that McCain is offering a third Bush term on Iran.

“I do wonder with Senator Obama, if President Bush thinks Senator Obama’s going to win, does he somehow think — does he worry that Obama won’t follow through on that policy,” Kristol added. Host Chris Wallace then asked if Kristol was suggesting that Bush might “launch a military strike” before or after the election:

WALLACE: So, you’re suggesting that he might in fact, if Obama’s going to win the election, either before or after the election, launch a military strike?

KRISTOL: I don’t know. I mean, I think he would worry about it. On the other hand, you can’t — it’s hard to make foreign policy based on guesses of election results. I think Israel is worried though. I mean, what is, what signal goes to Ahmadinejad if Obama wins on a platform of unconditional negotiations and with an obvious reluctance to even talk about using military force.

Not An Honest Man, Not An Honorable Man, Just Gollum (or HRC) With A Bad Haircut

Mr Straight Talk-Anti-Torture (except when I have to vote against it) hires a true blue enthusiast for waterboarding your enemy.

This is A Third Bush Term On Steroids

Glen Greenwald reports:

Newest McCain official: President has "near dictatorial powers"

Bill Kristol today proudly announces that one of his Weekly Standard staff members, Michael Goldfarb, was just named the Deputy Communications Director of the McCain campaign. Last April, this newest McCain official participated in a conference call with former Senator George Mitchell, during which Mitchell advocated a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Afterwards, this is what Goldfarb wrote about what he thinks are the powers the President possesses in our country:

Mitchell's less than persuasive answer [to whether withdrawal timetables "somehow infringe on the president's powers as commander in chief?"]: "Congress is a coequal branch of government...the framers did not want to have one branch in charge of the government."
True enough, but they sought an energetic executive with near dictatorial power in pursuing foreign policy and war. So no, the Constitution does not put Congress on an equal footing with the executive in matters of national security.

And:

The Times indicts the Bush administration for exposing terrorists captured abroad to "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures." Boo hoo.

And

[I]f federal agents show up at a corporate headquarters for a major American company and urgently seek that company's officers for assistance in the war on terror, the companies damn well ought to give it as a matter of simple patriotism, whether the CIA wants a plane for some extraordinary rendition or help in tracking terrorists via email. . . . [T]o expect a company to resist a plea from the government for help in a time of war is ridiculous.

Because Somebody (Pat Buchanan, HRC) Might Bring This Up

William Kristol, who does no research and is always (no, really, he's always) wrong is discussed by Think Progress:

In his New York Times column [yesterday], Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol tried to find reasons for conservatives to be optimistic about 2008 elections, despite the claims of some Republicans that “the Republican brand is in the trash can.” To support his argument, Kristol pointed to Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-IL) 41-point loss in the West Virginia primary:

On Tuesday night, while the G.O.P. Congressional candidate was losing in a Mississippi district George Bush carried in 2004 by 25 points, Barack Obama was being trounced in the West Virginia Democratic primary — by 41 points. I can’t find a single recent instance of a candidate who ultimately became his party’s nominee losing a primary by this kind of margin.

Apparently Kristol didn’t look hard enough. Writing at Room Eight, New York political consultant Jerry Skurnik says it took him “all of 2 minutes to find what Kristol couldn’t find.”

On Feb. 5, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney beat presumptive GOP nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) by 85 points in the Utah primary.

In fact, on the same day, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee beat McCain by the same margin Kristol touted as unprecedented — 41 points — in the Arkansas primary.

As did Mitt Romney in the Colorado caucus.