Bill Kristol's column in the Monday New York Times is always something to look forward to after a long weekend, as he continues to fill the political humor op-ed slot at the paper once filled so ably by Russell Baker. And, oh, those embarrassing corrections! Today he serves up an unintentionally hysterical classic, using Barack Obama's recent remarks about people clinging to religion in hard times to link the candidate to -- are you ready for this? -- Karl Marx.
After Marx, why not Lennon? The John Lennon who once proclaimed, "I don't believe in religion" and "I don't believe in Jesus." But by the end of the column, I stopped laughing when Kristol, whose writings and advocacy have so damaged "average" Americans, called Obama a fraudulent voice of the people because he is truly "disdainful of small-town America.... He's usually good at disguising this. But in San Francisco the mask slipped. And it's not so easy to get elected by a citizenry you patronize."
He concluded: "And what are the grounds for his supercilious disdain? If he were a war hero, if he had a career of remarkable civic achievement or public service -- then he could perhaps be excused an unattractive but in a sense understandable hauteur. But what has Barack Obama accomplished that entitles him to look down on his fellow Americans?"
Now, let's take that paragraph, re-read it but substitute Bill Kristol for Barack Obama at the end. How does that hold up? Let's review Kristol as man-of-the-people, as "war hero" and his "remarkable" civic achievements.
-- Son of intellectuals, attended exclusive prep school in Manhattan, then Harvard.
-- Served as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle.
-- Led the fight to scuttle health care reform under Clinton. Kristol claimed there was no health care crisis and wrote key memo urging Republicans to "kill," not try to amend, the Clinton plan. If the Clinton proposal passed, he warned, it would "revive ... the Democrats, as the generous protector of middle-class interests."
-- Was one of the most influential agitators for the attack on Iraq in 2003, which has taken the lives of thousands of "small town" soldiers and injured thousands more for life (as I explore in my new book on Iraq and the media). Made famous 2002 statement, "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."
-- Has backed every tax cut for the rich and other economic policies that have kept the middle-class sliding backwards for years.
-- Military service? Come on!
Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It has been hailed by Arianna, Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald and others and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen. He is editor of Editor & Publisher.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This is pure gutter trash, throw the NY Times in the sewer.
Bill Kristol's parents were great admirers of Leo Trotsky, who embraced the Marxist thought. Also Bill Kristol works for Rupert Murdoch who kept a bust of Lenin on his mantelpiece and referred to Lenin in his letters home as "The Great Thinker."
Considering the many esteemed bosses of Bill Kristol -- Dan Quayle, Allen Keys, Bill Bennett, Rupert Murdoch and now the New York Times, is there any doubt that he is a very confused person?
Chagrined,
I thought you post was excellent, I'd only suggest that you provide a bit of supporting
evidence, and keep posting it over and over. I think Kristol is an idiot.
Long ago on a planet far, far away, William F. Buckley, Jr., was the voice of conservatives who believed in limited government and fiscal responsibility. He was a true patriot. On this planet, the voices who speak for conservatives are William Kristol and Bill O'Reilly, who have no clue about anything. Both are nationalists, the former holding to an ideology based on premises Hitler executed. To those of you who dispute my premises and would write I don't support my argument, I say to you, "This is about William Kristol. I don't have to prove a fucking thing."
The hiring of Bill Kristol by the NY Times was the final straw in my giving up on a once great
paper, that I used to read daily. The idea of liberal media bias in the current NY Times is utterly ridiculous. The paper has become such a flack tor the right wing, that I find it no longer worth
reading, as has taken place in most US media with the independents being swallowed up by
fewer and fewer companies, and more responsive to their corporate masters.
Kristol knows what he's doing. Thats why he's beneath contempt. He didn't associate Obama with Marx by accident. I will be watching for the next prominently placed "Obama is a communist" remark. Don't laugh. If they can try to make him a Muslim, why not a communist? A lot American voters (according to me) still hate and fear communists without having any idea at all what a communist actually is. How do they know Obama is NOT a communist?
Bingo. Now its Lieberman.
Elistist yuppies are too smug to realize how many people hate them, and in turn also hate Obama and everything associated with him. And I am a life-long Democrat. The thought of this elistist fringe making national decisions for me is one reason Hillary Clinton is now 20 points ahead of Obama in Pennsylvania.
What reason do we have to be so sure that Hillary Clinton is not part of an elitist fringe? I get that a lot of people believe that Obama is, and that Hillary has been playing up her firearm and religion angles lately, but those aren't exactly traits exclusive to the average American. What gets Clinton the non-elitist fringe rep??
This article is not very helpful potential voters because the author did not address why Kristol's remarks are erroneous and inflammatory, he just made an ad hominem attack on Kristol. Doesn't the reader deserve better?
No, because Kristol deserves no better than having an unsupported ad hominem lodged against him. I loved it. What is more important--having Kristol, whose every statement about Iraq during the windup to the attack against Saddam and the decimation of the Iraqi people and the American military was disputed by even george h. w. bush as well as other respected conservatives as well as military leaders of high-ranking importance, or proving an attack against him, Kristol? In this instance, the reader should not care about being slighted. I'd like to see Kristol in prison along with the other neocons who brought about the travesty of Iraq. Kristol is a coward and a traitor. We used to hang offenders for that.
Kristol is laughingly un-American. He serves only the interests of the rich and the warmongering crowd. He cheerleads policies that get the sons and daughters of Americans he will never meet killed, while he advocates tax cuts that benefit his wealthy friends. His main objective to universal health care was that it would create a better perception of Democrats among the middle class. His idea of small town America is not one of abandoned mills and factories with the accompanying economic plight, but of upper middle class islands of prosperity in Connecticut. Kristol can probably count the numbers of real, average Americans he has ever spoken to in his life on one hand.
Talk about elitist!
...and bill kristol...(sorry, I had to throw up after I wrote his label)...would vote for Stalin. He's one of the worst examples of "journalist" available for public viewing. How many of you would smack him if they had to face that smug smile in person?
So who's running for president again? Kristol? Also, is this a typo or intentional?
"Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It has been hailed by ouw own Arianna, Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald and others and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen. He is editor of Editor & Publisher. "
Well, Hillary, Kristol has just given you your new line of attack.
Why anyone reads Kristol or any article about him is beyond me.
Writing or blogging about him is just cheap publicity. Like what that other outfit is doing with Coulter. As long as people say something (anything) we know they're watching.
If people keep wrting about him the NY Times might be encouraged to think they should keep him.
I'm not going to contribute to that! Please don't you do it either.
BTW - I didn't read this blog article. The title was enough.
Here's what I can't wait for...
Obama is in full melt-down. That's appearant to even his biggest fawning fans on MSNBC.
So all of you HuffPO lefties who have been venting on the HillBilly juggernaut will have to suck it up and begin to move your support to her and him. You'll have to forgive their slander and lies.
At the convention, Obama will complain of racism, and continue to lecture the country through his racial prism on how we ought to act and feel. But the train will leave the station without him in St. Paul.
And she will be the candidate the left has to support.
Typically, you're projecting what you want to happen rather than what is indeed happening; it may still be too soon to tell, but I think Obama will actually be stronger and harder to beat after this, as it is bringing out a stronger, more defiant element of his personality to the forefront.
But hey, believe what you want; it's obvious that you're not interested in reality.
HAS to support? Hardly. If Hillary steals the nomination, plan on 4 more years of Republican mismanagement and war, because those victims of Hillary's crime will sit out the election. President John McBombBombIran will be your fearless leader.
SORRY RICK -- Next hatchetman. You have had your three swings .You imply contrived faith in God on the part of Barack Obama.Then you bob ,weave ,swerve and attack ,anything to avoid your responsibility -- to support your implied charge.
Don't feel bad ,Bill Kristol did not substantiate his conclusions either.By the way -- even he does not consider himself objective . Hence his position -- ON the EDITORIAL PAGE .
remember Boats and Booze don't mix
later
The above was meant as a reply and was posted out of place -- by me , Sorry to all . I will be more careful .
Reaganwater
Actually I think it is even worse than you think Reaganwater. These statements give some evidence that Obama really does think he is better than those "bitter" people out there. It can be implied from his statements that HE came to his faith through some sort of intellectual and spiritual epiphany, but that the bittermen come to theirs through irrational reactions to hard times. Not exactly a great way to "connect" with white working class voters, eh? Again with the booze obsession. Listen I hear AA has a 24 hour hotline. Make use of it now.
Tsk, tsk, tsk, there you go with that wishful thinking....
Out of law school, Obama was working to save the jobs of steel mill workers in South Chicago who have much in common with those in Pennsylvania. Obama may have been speaking honestly with the people in Pennsylvania instead of condescendingly trying to ""connect" with white working class voters."
All politicains have some Karl Marx in them.
Control of the peoples hearts and minds as well as their government is what politics is mostly about.
I agree dadw5boys. That cuts right to the chase.
Oh Bill, are you ever right?
Kristol isn't about being RIGHT, he's all about being on MESSAGE...the NeoCon message, that is.
Bill Krysal is one of the reasons we have BUSH in the Whitehouse.
Krystal and Rove should be the name of snakes because the have poisioned our government!!!!!!!
It's only "hysterical" because you disagree. I like Obama as a person, but there is a similarity in the comments. Does that make him a Marxist? Certainly not. But to say there isn't a similarity is just wishfull thinking.
I suppose Kristol nacht does not like gays and believes that the Marxist and gays need to be in camps. He probably does not like us camping it up either, or was he sodomized in his exclusive school there in the Big Apple? Who knows, but is a hoot is that yellow rag the New York Times employs him to spew forth is opinion and he one of the enablers of the Iraq quagmire.
Loading comments…
Posted April 14, 2008 | 12:01 PM (EST)