Being Kristol Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry

zeke12 · Dec 29, 2007

This paper reeks of opinions. You know what every columnist at this paper needs to do?

Shut. The fuck. Up.

hondo · Dec 29, 2007

king cranium maximus IV said:

By "wrong" you actually mean "doesn't agree with me."
Click to expand...

no, by wrong we mean:

He?s [Saddam Hussein] got weapons of mass destruction. At some point he will use them or give them to a terrorist group to use?Look, if we free the people of Iraq we will be respected in the Arab world?.France and Germany don?t have the courage to face up to the situation. That?s too bad. Most of Europe is with us. And I think we will be respected around the world for helping the people of Iraq to be liberated.
Click to expand...

and

We are tempted to comment, in these last days before the war, on the U.N., and the French, and the Democrats. But the war itself will clarify who was right and who was wrong about weapons of mass destruction. It will reveal the aspirations of the people of Iraq, and expose the truth about Saddam's regime. It will produce whatever effects it will produce on neighboring countries and on the broader war on terror. We would note now that even the threat of war against Saddam seems to be encouraging stirrings toward political reform in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and a measure of cooperation in the war against al Qaeda from other governments in the region. It turns out it really is better to be respected and feared than to be thought to share, with exquisite sensitivity, other people's pain. History and reality are about to weigh in, and we are inclined simply to let them render their verdicts.
Click to expand...

and

There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular.
Click to expand...

and

The United States committed itself to defeating terror around the world. We committed ourselves to reshaping the Middle East, so the region would no longer be a hotbed of terrorism, extremism, anti-Americanism, and weapons of mass destruction. The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably. But these are only two battles. We are only at the end of the beginning in the war on terror and terrorist states.
Click to expand...

and

[T]here are hopeful signs that Iraqis of differing religious, ethnic, and political persuasions can work together. This is a far cry from the predictions made before the war by many, both here and in Europe, that a liberated Iraq would fracture into feuding clans and unleash a bloodbath. The perpetually sour American media focus on the tensions between Shiites and Kurds that delayed the signing by three whole days. But the difficult negotiations leading up to the signing, and the continuing debates over the terms of a final constitution, have in fact demonstrated something remarkable in Iraq: a willingness on the part of the diverse ethnic and religious groups to disagree--peacefully--and then to compromise. This willingness is the product of what appears to be a broad Iraqi consensus favoring the idea of pluralism.
Click to expand...

(quote taken from 2004)

and

What the Bush administration did say--and what so many reporters seem to have trouble understanding--is that Iraq and al Qaeda had a relationship that, by its very existence, posed a potential threat to the United States.
Click to expand...

and

Just four weeks after the Iraqi election of January 30, 2005, it seems increasingly likely that that date will turn out to have been a genuine turning point. The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, ended an era. September 11, 2001, ended an interregnum. In the new era in which we now live, 1/30/05 could be a key moment--perhaps the key moment so far--in vindicating the Bush Doctrine as the right response to 9/11. And now there is the prospect of further and accelerating progress.
Click to expand...

and

All this made me think the 2006 elections could result in a Speaker Pelosi. I now think that unlikely. Pelosi's endorsement today of the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq makes the House Democrats the party of defeat, the party of surrender.
Click to expand...

and on. and on. and bloody, american-killing, reputation-ruining on.
Click to expand...

Are those Kristol quotes, or taken from Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry speeches on the floor of the Senate pre-2003?

hondo · Dec 29, 2007

Zeke12 said:

Lyman_Bostock said:

Wrong = don't agree with me. Confirmed.
Click to expand...

Lyman, I've told you this before, and I'll tell you this again, I'm sure: You're smarter than that argument.

Bill Kristol has been shown over the past five years to be completely divorced from reality. That isn't partisan. That's just true.
Click to expand...

In reality, he's divorced from your reality. Which is the same thing as not agreeing with the Gospel according to Fen.

zeke12 · Dec 29, 2007

And your inability to acknowledge an objective reality is noted.

Fenian_Bastard · Dec 29, 2007

"He's [Saddam Hussein] got weapons of mass destruction. At some point he will use them or give them to a terrorist group to use?Look, if we free the people of Iraq we will be respected in the Arab world?.France and Germany don't have the courage to face up to the situation. That's too bad. Most of Europe is with us. And I think we will be respected around the world for helping the people of Iraq to be liberated."

Please, hondo, point out any contention in that quote that's true.
Everything is opinion.
Nothing is fact.
I thought the liberals were the postmodernists.
Wow.
And, forgive me for asking, but aren't there a couple dozen young conservative writers toiling away on wingnut welfare who write better than Bloody Bill (Wrong!) Kristol?

king cranium maximus IV · Dec 29, 2007

Are those Kristol quotes, or taken from Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry speeches on the floor of the Senate pre-2003?
Click to expand...

ahh, this argument again.

so, basically, you're saying that you believe that clinton, gore, and kerry were correct? (because if you're asking me to put up or shut up, then yeah, they were all wrong. only kristol had the president's ear, however.)

Bill Brasky · Dec 29, 2007

A perfect description of Kristol from a liberal blogger "The Isiah Thomas of War"

king cranium maximus IV · Dec 29, 2007

dead troops make me smirk! tee hee!

Ben_Hecht · Dec 29, 2007

hondo said:

king cranium maximus IV said:

By "wrong" you actually mean "doesn't agree with me."
Click to expand...

no, by wrong we mean:

He?s [Saddam Hussein] got weapons of mass destruction. At some point he will use them or give them to a terrorist group to use?Look, if we free the people of Iraq we will be respected in the Arab world?.France and Germany don?t have the courage to face up to the situation. That?s too bad. Most of Europe is with us. And I think we will be respected around the world for helping the people of Iraq to be liberated.
Click to expand...

and

We are tempted to comment, in these last days before the war, on the U.N., and the French, and the Democrats. But the war itself will clarify who was right and who was wrong about weapons of mass destruction. It will reveal the aspirations of the people of Iraq, and expose the truth about Saddam's regime. It will produce whatever effects it will produce on neighboring countries and on the broader war on terror. We would note now that even the threat of war against Saddam seems to be encouraging stirrings toward political reform in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and a measure of cooperation in the war against al Qaeda from other governments in the region. It turns out it really is better to be respected and feared than to be thought to share, with exquisite sensitivity, other people's pain. History and reality are about to weigh in, and we are inclined simply to let them render their verdicts.
Click to expand...

and

There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America ... that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq just want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular.
Click to expand...

and

The United States committed itself to defeating terror around the world. We committed ourselves to reshaping the Middle East, so the region would no longer be a hotbed of terrorism, extremism, anti-Americanism, and weapons of mass destruction. The first two battles of this new era are now over. The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably. But these are only two battles. We are only at the end of the beginning in the war on terror and terrorist states.
Click to expand...

and

[T]here are hopeful signs that Iraqis of differing religious, ethnic, and political persuasions can work together. This is a far cry from the predictions made before the war by many, both here and in Europe, that a liberated Iraq would fracture into feuding clans and unleash a bloodbath. The perpetually sour American media focus on the tensions between Shiites and Kurds that delayed the signing by three whole days. But the difficult negotiations leading up to the signing, and the continuing debates over the terms of a final constitution, have in fact demonstrated something remarkable in Iraq: a willingness on the part of the diverse ethnic and religious groups to disagree--peacefully--and then to compromise. This willingness is the product of what appears to be a broad Iraqi consensus favoring the idea of pluralism.
Click to expand...

(quote taken from 2004)

and

What the Bush administration did say--and what so many reporters seem to have trouble understanding--is that Iraq and al Qaeda had a relationship that, by its very existence, posed a potential threat to the United States.
Click to expand...

and

Just four weeks after the Iraqi election of January 30, 2005, it seems increasingly likely that that date will turn out to have been a genuine turning point. The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, ended an era. September 11, 2001, ended an interregnum. In the new era in which we now live, 1/30/05 could be a key moment--perhaps the key moment so far--in vindicating the Bush Doctrine as the right response to 9/11. And now there is the prospect of further and accelerating progress.
Click to expand...

and

All this made me think the 2006 elections could result in a Speaker Pelosi. I now think that unlikely. Pelosi's endorsement today of the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq makes the House Democrats the party of defeat, the party of surrender.
Click to expand...

and on. and on. and bloody, american-killing, reputation-ruining on.
Click to expand...

Are those Kristol quotes, or taken from Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry speeches on the floor of the Senate pre-2003?
Click to expand...

You know better.

Lyman_Bostock · Dec 29, 2007

shotglass said:

Lyman_Bostock said:

If we're going to start suggesting columnists who are "wrong" be banished from the medium, we're going to have a lot fewer columnists.
Click to expand...

And that is ... a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Yes -- because, as can be seen in this thread, one person's wrong is another person's right ... er, "correct."

I think Jay Mariotti is a tool and is wrong about most things, but I don't want to see him unemployed. I just don't read him.

If you think Kristol's wrong, don't read him. Just like I don't read Paul Krugman.

king cranium maximus IV · Dec 29, 2007

no president went to war based off advice from paul krugman.

i can deal with most wingnut welfare writers. bill kristol, however, is as dangerous as the kings of yellow journalism a century ago, if not moreso.

the ridiculous misinformation kristol will spread about iran can only harm this country. i consider bill as treasonous as ward churchill.

sirvaliantbrown · Dec 29, 2007

Fenian, I never agree with you on anything political, but you're very right on this one. Kristol...man. He hasn't just been wrong...he has been spectacular in his wrongness.

I enjoyed Reason Magazine's Radley Balko's take:

Failing Upward
Posted on December 28, 2007, 9:48pm | Radley Balko

It's a D.C. tradition.

Huffington Post is reporting that your next regular columnist for the New York Times will beâ€¦William Kristol.

A pretty uninspiring choice. It means the Times op-ed page will be well-represented by big government liberals (Krugman, Herbert), big government moderates (Friedman, Kristof), and big government conservatives (Brooks, Kristol). I do believe that just about covers the full range of acceptable political opinion, doesn't it?

Also makes you wonder just how many times one man can be wrong before people will not merely stop taking him seriously, but stop giving him bigger and broader platforms from which to trumpet his perpetual wrongness.

Log in or Sign up

Being Kristol Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry

zeke12 Guest

hondo Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

zeke12 Guest

Fenian_Bastard Guest

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

Bill Brasky Active Member

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

Ben_Hecht Active Member

Lyman_Bostock Guest

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

sirvaliantbrown Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Being Kristol Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry

zeke12 Guest

hondo Well-Known Member

hondo Well-Known Member

zeke12 Guest

Fenian_Bastard Guest

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

Bill Brasky Active Member

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

Ben_Hecht Active Member

Lyman_Bostock Guest

king cranium maximus IV Active Member

sirvaliantbrown Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches