Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 13, 2008

Bill Kristol The Über-Hypocrite

Bill Kristol gave lots of bad advice to the McCain campaign. Now, he says, McCain should fire his campaign. This of course without one ounce of acknowledgment that it was Kristol himself who had pushed for all the points that went wrong. Consider two of his recent columns:

As one McCain adviser told The Washington Post, “you’ve got to get it [the financial crisis] over with and start having a normal campaign.”

Wrong.
..
McCain should break the mold and acknowledge, even emphasize the crisis.
How McCain Wins, September 28, 2008

---

McCain should stop unveiling gimmicky proposals every couple of days that pretend to deal with the financial crisis.
Fire the Campaign, October 12, 2008

---

Can he turn it around, and surge to victory?

He has a chance. But only if he overrules those of his aides who are trapped by conventional wisdom, huddled in a defensive crouch and overcome by ideological timidity.
...
With respect to his campaign, McCain needs to liberate his running mate from the former Bush aides brought in to handle her — aides who seem to have succeeded in importing to the Palin campaign the trademark defensive crouch of the Bush White House.
How McCain Wins, September 28, 2008

---

At Wednesday night’s debate at Hofstra, McCain might want to volunteer a mild mea culpa about the extent to which the presidential race has degenerated into a shouting match. And then he can pledge to the voters that the last three weeks will feature a contest worthy of this moment in our history.
Fire the Campaign, October 12, 2008

---

[Palin] should spend her time making the case for McCain and, more important, the case against Obama. As one shrewd McCain supporter told me, “Every minute she spends not telling the American people something that makes them less well disposed to Obama is a minute wasted.”
How McCain Wins, September 28, 2008

---

Obama’s [approval/disapproval rating] is a bit higher than it was a month ago. That suggests the failure of the McCain campaign’s attacks on Obama.

So drop them.
Fire the Campaign, October 12, 2008

Why such turncoat behavior? Best guess: Kristol is running for cover. In a few weeks he will point to his October 12 column and tell anyone who listens that if only McCain had followed his advice and fired his campaign all would have been well.

The scary thing is that some folks will believe him.

Posted by b on October 13, 2008 at 13:53 UTC | Permalink

Comments

McCain campaign fires back at Kristol:

Well, you know Bill is entitled to his perspective. And I used to work for Bill. And I can tell you personally sometimes he’s brilliant and sometimes he’s not. And this is one where it’s the latter category. You know, I think unfortunately he has bought into the Obama campaign’s party line.
Falling apart ...

Posted by: b | Oct 13 2008 17:28 utc | 1

Kristol's advice to fire the whole staff, would only reinforce the Obama campaign meme that McCain is "erratic". And while erratic may be the key function of being a maverick, its also the part people mistrust most.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 13 2008 18:09 utc | 2

From McCains latest speech today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSSQHAeWiiA&feature=related>McCain: "Let me give you the state of the race today. We have 22 days to go. We're 6 points down. The national media has written us off. Senator Obama is measuring the drapes, and planning with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to vote by secret ballot in labor elections, and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide. My friends, we've got them just where we want them."

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 13 2008 18:45 utc | 3

The US pres. campaign has derailed completely.

Rabble rousing, racist slurs, etc. from the Repubs, Palin over the top or beyond the pale (a good nick name for her, what?), McC backtracking etc (see some previous posts.)

McCain seems to be occupying the position of place holder, the loser candidate who plays his valiant citizen role, à la Kerry, saving democracy on a not-so-white horse.

The indignity of it all is mortifying, even experienced third-hand. Tangential to the financial crash, no European pol will ever again point to the US as a ‘vibrant democracy’ .. even that midget-brain Sarkozy has become more Gaullist recently. (De Gaulle wanted to keep the Brits out of the future “EU”... Ignore, rambles.)

From a secular, progressive, modernist, yada yada pov, it is easy to sneer and scoff at the trailer-park Bible-thumpers.

Nevertheless, they represent the only revolutionary force in the US - so weak as to not deserve that name...

They have been co-opted through a clever scam which began long ago, became blatant under Bush the Second’s First Reign (aka Rove). They were brought into the fold (!) through an orchestrated association between touted conventional moral values of the individual kind, appeals to tradition of a folksy-cultural type, roots, American exceptionalism and isolationism, not to mention *white supremacy* married with , or melded with, the elite’s economic paradigm - free market BS dressed up in terms of personal responsibility, perpetual economic growth, etc.

God practically ordained you could reap impressive profits from screwing over your foolish neighbor. In this way, the potential revolutionaries fell into the trap of old-time peons under religious sway in a hierarchical scheme that justifies itself with halos etc. and rewards its adherents. Protestant reformist zeal, successful (so to speak from *one* pov) in the past, turned into acceptance of dominance and was channeled into trivia, went past its sell date.

At present, the mainstream (and the media never mistook that), the main forces, political and economic, even the military-industrial complex, whatever, are behind the stability, quasi-Republican candidate, who has the advantage of a fresh face and profile and a discourse of hope, renewal, repair, a brightly lit future, Beacons on the Hill, etc. And the uber-conservative forces are left with de-fanging, legitimizing, semi-supporting, hand holding, the rag-tag band of potential protestors.

Perhaps not precisely planned, Palin’s function was to take one more step forward to.. National socialism, often called energising the base.

The campaign, according to one commentator on some board, is ‘ass backwards.’ The fraud of the two-party system is exposed, in plain sight.

Ppl like to call it a ‘culture war’ - metro incl. gay Blues against heartland Red necks...oppositions that are partly economic and masquerade as ideological and are upped by coloring states red or blue according to a slim percentage.

What will the grass-roots repubs. and religionist do when they, the true heart of Amerika (their TV candidates) lose? Nothing.

They have been de-fanged, were always complicit in the system, bit of both, there will be no uprising, no reaction beyond cursing, praying, cooking BBQ... Their living is dependent on the present arrangements, the Gvmt. subsidies, water, communal halls, infrastructure, huge subsidies (agri), ethanol cash, etc.etc. The redistribution of wealth in the US, very considerable but always denied, will not be questioned. Palin as a failed icon will do fine in ‘hearts’...

Palin is a dangerous break in US politics. (And the reason why Mc C will lose, but that is just imho.) She is one of ‘them’ - in contrast to Reagan, a Hollywood actor, Ross Perot, a billionaire, George W, an oil man from the elites who has a holiday ranch in Texas, guided by Rove, etc. She is the real thing - of the people - Volk through and through.

Kristol and others on various bandwagons - are just there for nuisance noise andto keepmhteir visibility up.

Posted by: Tangerine | Oct 14 2008 15:37 utc | 4

hoo a bit long sorry and not edited... :)

Posted by: Tangerine | Oct 14 2008 15:39 utc | 5

I can't remember where I found this, if it was here on the moon...sorry. But the more I know about Palin, the less funny she is.

Meet Sarah Palin's radical right-wing pals

But whether the Palins participated directly in shaping the AIP's program is less relevant than the extent to which they will implement that program. Chryson and his allies have demonstrated just as much interest in grooming major party candidates as they have in putting forward their own people. At a national convention of secessionist groups in 2007, AIP vice chairman Dexter Clark announced that his party would seek to "infiltrate" the Democratic and Republican parties with candidates sympathetic to its hard-right, secessionist agenda. "You should use that tactic. You should infiltrate," Clark told his audience of neo-Confederates, theocrats and libertarians. "Whichever party you think in that area you can get something done, get into that party. Even though that party has its problems, right now that is the only avenue."

Tell me again that there's no difference in the tickets.

Posted by: beq | Oct 14 2008 17:00 utc | 6

The comments to this entry are closed.