Monday, November 17, 2008

Kristol: Two Parts Denial, One Part Lie



OK, this is just getting too easy. Remember yesterday (we were so much younger then!) when I said that it was hilarious seeing Republican spokesmodels groping for ways to rebuild their party which didn't include offending the religious nutjobs and warmonger neocons? Well here comes Billy Kristol (who was SO much funnier when he was on Soap) with his latest op-ed in the New York Times, and he sums up this amusing trend in one single sentence:

A hawkish foreign policy, social conservatism and middle-American populism aren’t the problems.


LOL. Bill, those first two points are huge, enormous, gigantic problems! As for the third point, who ever said anything about middle-American populism being a problem? It's part of what got Obama elected, after all! Oh, wait... OK, maybe that is a problem for the GOP, just not the way Kristol meant. So that's his little white lie, his implication being that the Republican Party still embraces the mainstream American values so hated by elitist Democratic demons. But I think what he's really referring to is the sub-middle-American populism that we saw whipped up by Kristol's love child, Sarah Palin, at her scary rallies. Um, not a problem?

As for real middle-American populism, ha! We stole that from you, just like we stole fiscal responsibility. Suck on that, Bill!

Finally, the King of the Neocons offers his most laughable prevarication yet:

I don’t pretend to know just what has to be done.


Oh but you do, Bill, you do!

UPDATE: In other neocon schadenfreude news, David Frum has left the National Review (David Frum!!) due to his unwillingness to pander exclusively to the old and uneducated.

7 comments:

FranIAm said...

Bill. Bill. Bill.

I just clicked into the link and read the piece.

My favorite line? It was at the very end and not even uttered by Kristol...

Paul Krugman is off today.

Matty Boy said...

Regarding Billy K.: The conservatives thought The Divine Sarah and [First Name the Occupation] were populism. (I'm so sick of the guy, I don't want to type his moniker anymore.)

Regarding David F.: The National Review is becoming as meaningless to conservatives as The New Republic is to liberals. That's gotta hurt.


Ouch.

Karen Zipdrive said...

Kristol and Frum are no longer credible voices from the right.
I think Rachel Maddow wielded the nut cutter on Frum.

puravida said...

Billy, that photo...you look mahvelous.

Princess Sparkle Pony said...

I almost feel guilty that it's so easy to do that black eye trick in Photoshop: just use the "burn" tool on the midtones. It works every time, and always ends up looking real. Better than Ashley Todd's, anyway.

lebecka said...

Too bad about David Frum. I don't agree with him often, but at least he is a thinker, not a demagogue. I hope he sets up shop somewhere on his own-- I like his voice in the argument.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Certainly was damning with faint praise when Jacob Weisberg said that David Frum was "the most interesting writer" that the National Review "has."

That's "had." After Florence King retired, it was all over for me with NR, except for unintended comic relief.