In the Arena

Oh NO! He’s CRASHING!

Bill Kristol has, for the past twenty years, played neoconservative wise man with gradually diminishing effect. His major claim to fame was coming up with the recalcitrant strategy–vote no!–that turned Republicans like Bob Dole away from reforming health care in 1994. This was considered brilliant at the time. Ever since, he has been known for 3 things:

–a continuing reputation for strategic brilliance, resting on the same old, same old strategy…Just vote no. This has riddled and rendered silly the vast bulk of his columns in recent years.

–a non-stop bellicose neoconservatism when it comes to U.S. foreign policy. Indeed, a need to locate mortal enemies anywhere he can. Absurdly, in the 1990s, with regard to China. Lethally, in the 2000s, with regard to Iraq and then (and now) Iran.

–introducing Sarah Palin to a waiting world, touting and defending her (even now).

So it’s no surprise that Kristol has added his name to the hilarious tendency on the right to predict THE UTTER FAILURE AND COMPLETE COLLAPSE OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. And he has now cited me as evidence that such is the case. He quotes me–accurately, (an infrequent event at the Weekly Standard)–as saying that Obama may be blowing a real chance for reform. Well, yes. I wrote that last week. I questioned Obama’s domestic policy tactics. Still do. But I find the President’s economic and social policies a vast relief after the quantum-ignorance of the Bush Administration…and I still think we have a very good chance of passing a significant and much-needed health care reform this year.

Kristol goes on to cite various polls in which Americans declare themselves conservatives. True enough, until you ask them about specific policies–stimulus, health care reform, no war with Iran, etc etc. Then they’re liberals. And he arrives at this absolutely fantastic conclusion about me, Paul Krugman and David Brooks:

Why such long faces? Because they realize that, despite the financial meltdown on the Bush administration’s watch and the errors of omission and commission by the GOP over the last decade, the American public hasn’t fundamentally rethought their turn in 1980 away from big government liberalism.

This is, of course, lazy hackery. And wishful thinking. The fact is, we may be at a hinge of history, a natural correction after the conservatism of the past 30 years. We are certainly in the midst of a  turn toward moderation after the radical right-wing excesses of the Bush Jr. years. But we can’t possibly know the whole story yet. A lot will depend on Obama’s success or failure–and it is way too early to predict that as well. Actually, with some exceptions, I think Obama is off to a pretty good start–and a very good start overseas. Since the President is not an ideologue, he will want to make adjustments along the way. (Additional help to state and local governments will be necessary next year–some will call this a second stimulus package.)

But the hyperbolic squirming on the right remains a vastly entertaining show…and a reminder of what we’re well rid of.

Related Topics: Barack Obama, neoconservatives, Weekly Standard, William Kristol, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Morning Must Reads: Secret

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

    A Tale of Two Economies: Mitt Romney vs. Republican Governors

    The great recession has left the state of Ohio battered and bruised–and Mitt Romney would have you believe it’s Barack Obama’s fault. Writing in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer on May 4, Romney advised Ohioans that the President has delivered them “paltry results,” and that their state is in need of “a fundamental change in direction.”

  • http://privcorr.blogspot.com/ wvng

    Now that’s a blogger’s post if I’ve ever seen one. Great job, Joe!

    More like this, please. What the repuglican party and its operatives need is constant ridicule from public spaces. Then maybe, just maybe, they’ll start to understand that they are ridiculous.

  • http://privcorr.blogspot.com/ wvng

    Speaking of ridiculing repuglicans, here’s Yglesias: Do Political Science Departments Ignore Conservatism?

  • pintortwo

    Go Joe!
    I’ve criticized you recently (but that’s what great about forums like this- we can debate people we respect or otherwise might agree with [or at times with whom we have little common ground], and receive criticism in return…) but this is the Joe I like.

  • queencersei

    The only thing that will convince the GOP that the tide has turned against them is another election loss. And even then I’m not so sure. I could see some moderate GOP candidates winning in some races, causing Bill Kristol et all to draw all the wrong conclusions.

  • anon76

    Nice post Joe, except that you forgot what Kristol is actually best known for over the past 20 years: being categorically, catastrophically wrong about everything he writes about. A Kristol article about the crash of President Obama is excellent news- for President Obama.

    Say, why no Swamp posts about the recent revelations of Lord Cheney’s manipulating the CIA-Congress relationship?

  • mrtoads

    “This is, of course, lazy hackery. And wishful thinking.”

    That’s been the entire content of Kristol’s work for as long as I’ve been aware of it.
    How he got to be considered a “neoconservative wise man”, I was never able to understand.

  • queencersei

    “How he got to be considered a neoconservative wise man, I was never able to understand.”

    He is considered a wise man from the same crowd who still insist that Sarah Palin is some sort of political genius.

  • pafro

    I agree anon76, but there is a corollary to Kristol being fantastically wrong whenever he opens his mouth that he is also famous for.
    -
    Kristol is perhaps the most classic example of failing upwards. I mean by 2006, everyone on the planet knew or should have known how fantastically stupid Kristol is. TIME Magazine saw that as some reason to hire him.
    -
    After his FAIL grew to be even too much for TIME (a huge step for a magazine that has endorsed FAIL by Jeffrey Rosen as recently as a month ago), Kristol was enthusiastically hired by Pinch Sultzberger (btw a man that has leaned on the crutch of brain damaging nepotism almost as much as Kristol) for the New York Times.
    -
    In a flurry of blatantly poor journalism, Kristol set a modern day NYT’s record for most corrections attached to an opinion column in less than a year. Even this amount of FAIL was to much for Pinch, and he had to let his childhood buddy walk.
    -
    Seeing this pattern of epic FAIL, the Washington Post figured they would hire Kristol to balance out the other blatantly dishonest and FAIL-filled commentary of George Will and the Krauthammer (who is also a TIME alumni).

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    It’s refreshing to know that if Joe ever feels writer’s block coming on, he can can always pick up a Kristol or Krauthammer column and have some instant-hackery to respond to.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Way to go Joe. It’s about time somebody put Bill Kristol in the public stocks of public opinion and threw rotten tomatoes at his head for being consistently wrong in his personal quest to amass partisan power at the expense of the health and the wealth of the nation. Kristol, who should still be cowering in a corner somewhere, overcome by the shame of his near traitorous act of almost foisting the intolerably inept, empty vessel of Palin on a nation and a public still reeling from the effects of the idiocy in the last white house, is instead still carrying the banner for a triumphant defeat of the best president history, timing, lady luck and good fortune could muster so he could be replaced by the quitter from Wasilla at time still to be determined down the road — Shame on you Bill! But I promise if you’ll just be quiet from now on you can still earn the thanks of a grateful nation.

  • patgo

    Joe, give us your take on what is going on at with the C STREET BAND?

  • centfan

    So did the size of government, relative or otherwise, peak in 1980? If we all “turned away from big government libralism” in 1980 then obviously the trend has been a shrinking government until 2008. Reagan and Bush and Bush made sure of that didn’t they? Didn’t they satisfy our hunger for no taxes, no services, and no central control?

    Oh, that’s right, Clinton signed for a school lunch program and ruined all the savings from the wars.

  • dunedweller

    But the hyperbolic squirming on the right remains a vastly entertaining show…

    Maybe for some, but I’d like to see less of it validated in our media and/or seriously considered in our public discourse.

    Good post Joe.

  • grape_crush

    Picking on Kristol is like plucking an overripe, low-hanging conservative fruit.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Yeah, but eating it for breakfast taste good.

  • ilikechips

    ha ha Fata$$ Joe Klein panders to the libtard posters here and gains much praise. Liberals are so out of touch. You guys look like fools. No wander why Fox news kicks the liberal MSM’s ass.

  • Commenter 2B named later

    I know this is a radical suggestion, but perhaps the time is ripe to start dissociating the marketing terms “conservative” and “liberal” from the respective Republican and Democratic party lines, since on many issues (such as foreign policy) those terms do not accurately describe the party positions?

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    Wow. Seems like most of you have mistaken Klein’s hyper defensiveness for insight. I guess as long as the right people attack Klein he’ll keep writing what you consider to be good posts. That it took Klein all these years to figure out what the Right was all about says it all, but he’ll never admit error outright. Go ahead, ask Joe if he was in favor of the Iraq invasion.

    I was going to post all of Klein’s ridiculous statements vis-a-vis FISA and wiretapping and alternate them w/ what we’ve learned about Bush’s illegal wiretapping over the week, but Swampland isn’t worth the effort.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Not as radical as it sounds.

  • billiecat

    Bill Kristol predicts Obama is crashing and Sarah Palin is making a shrewd political move. ’nuff said.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    @cincinnatus,

    Actually you needn’t go all the way back to the FISA debate to find examples of JK going off the rails.
    He’s on record as thinking that holding torturers accountable for torture will interfere with the creativity and flexibility that the CIA requires going forward in this dangerous age.

    That doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy the show when he gets into it with those who are even further off the rails.

  • bushidowarrior

    Great article Joe!! Just to get a balanced view I listen and sometimes read the articles by Bill Kristol. More recently the articles concerning Palin’s resignation. After listening to him or reading his articles I truly struggle to understand what planet he is from that only he can discern certain information from the Republican babble that’s being placed in the media lately. I can only assume they are speaking in “tongues” and only the select few can understand it. I sure can’t.

    Lastly, whether or not the outrageous attacks on President Obama are warranted or not..the real debate should focus on the Republicans taking responsibility for the mess that we are in, both in Iraq, and at home. In just 8 years they have managed to destroy this country! I would like to see them debate the merits of what they have done and take responsibility before moving on to attack the Democrats and President Obama who have been left to clean up the mess.

  • deconstructiva

    Dear Mr. Kristol:

    Thank you for Sarah “Tough It Out to the End” Palin; talk about sarahdipity for everyone. Flowers enclosed. Anything else that you can do to help split the social / fiscal conservative coalition – their world views are NOT the same – please go for it. I have your back; I love you, man.

    Sincerely,
    decon

    (he might take this seriously? ha!)

  • oaksavanna

    What Fox news never tells you when they claim to be the #1 rated news show:…They are the only cable news show included in the basic cable package. If you want the others you have to pay more. Why is that? Media Mogul and uber-republican Rupert Murdoch has decided this. The rich run the republican party through the media by only giving the one point of view. Rush Limbaugh also has high ratings for the same reason. His radio show is ‘packaged’ in with a bunch of other shows, a freebie. Poor suckers don’t know they are being played.

  • nelsonic01

    I like Joe Klein a lot, but I find myself cringing at how many of his Swampland posts are predicated on other people writing about him. Surely all the important debates we need his mind on don’t center on comments people have made about his work.

  • James, Los Angeles

    Funny. I just read this anecdote about little Billy Kristol this past weekend:

    “The talk turned to William Kristol, then Dan Quayle’s chief of staff, and how he got his start in politics. Irving recalled how he talked to his friend Harvey Mansfield at Harvard, who secured William a place there as both an undergrad and graduate student; how he talked to Pat Moynihan, then Nixon’s domestic policy adviser, and got William an internship at the White House; how he talked to friends at the RNC [Republican National Committee] and secured a job for William after he got his Harvard Ph.D.; and how he arranged with still more friends for William to teach at Penn and the Kennedy School of Government.

    “With that, Prof. Katznelson recalled, he then asked Irving what he thought of affirmative action. ‘I oppose it,’ Irving replied. ‘It subverts meritocracy.’ ”

    Some people skate through life on greased bearings, don’t they?

    Source (link) CAMPOS: To the manner born — By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (end link)

  • maurice2u

    “I know this is a radical suggestion, but perhaps the time is ripe to start dissociating the marketing terms “conservative” and “liberal” from the respective Republican and Democratic party lines, since on many issues (such as foreign policy) those terms do not accurately describe the party positions?”
    .

    Not radical at all, and probably warranted. Of course it is not in the interest of either political party on the whole. It would only benefit a majority if speaking of non-direct political citizens and long term intellectual growth of the nation. Based on our history and propensity for embracing relative ignorance, I don’t expect to see such a dissociation happening anytime soon.
    .
    If there is any fortune at all to come from our current plight(s) it is that our technology has put oh so much more of our foolishness on display for the 30 and under generations to observe and be disgusted by. The only question is whether the pampering, distractions, and relative ease of life that same technology provides will be enough to render them complacent when their 40′s come about and the true weight of the world is on their shoulders.
    .
    We shall soon see as the baby-boomers become inevitably irrelevant by the force of time, what our nation and world shall evolve into within the massively globalized and communication connected 2010′s.

  • http://deepbraindiary.com/2009/07/13/drumming-up-some-drama-for-your-viewing-pleasure/ Drumming Up Some Drama for Your Viewing Pleasure? | DEEP BRAIN DIARY

    [...] the Swampland, Joe Klein writes about Bill Kristol in much the same tone as a exterminator writes about silverfish.  Schadenfreude is a dish best [...]

  • pafro

    I wonder what Klein, Kristol, and Krauthammer talked about around the ole office when they were all deemed equally worthy of writing for Time? My guess is they all told each other how prescient and profound they were for calling the Iraq War right, and complained about all the dirty hippies.

  • pafro

    No. Simply because I mostly hear complaints like this from Republicans who don’t want to carry the lead weight of being Republican any longer.
    -
    As but one example, an acquaintance of mine has taken to describing himself as a ‘Libertarian’ or ‘Conservative’ and describing Republicans like Bush 2 or McSame as ‘not conservative’.
    -
    Somehow, this ‘libertarian’ guy always finds reasons to oppose libertarian sounding policy like letting women control their bodies, decriminalization of drugs, or death with dignity laws (i.e. just like Bush-McShame). Further, this guy has voted for every Republican he possibly could, including the shamelessly corrupt Rick Renzi (multiple times). Therefore, he is a Republican.
    -
    I suspect most whining about not wanting to be called a Republican happens under very similar circumstances.

  • deconstructiva

    Whatever happened to conservative tenet of government staying out of our lives ala Goldwater?

  • joaquimaugustoleal

    Bill Kristol has been known for…

    -introducing Sarah Palin to a waiting world, touting and defending her (even now).

    OF COURSE HE DOES. HE IS AN INTELLIGENT PERSON.
    EVEN YOUR TIME MAGAZINE WROTE ANOTHER (THANKFULLY SUPPORTIVE) COVER ON HER.

    COULD MR KLEIN EXPLAIN WHY EUROPE BLAMED THE LEFT FOR THE FINANCIAL CRISES AND NOT THE RIGHT?

  • deconstructiva

    Bill K., cheer up / Joe K., condolences, have a drink: maybe Sarah can’t leave. Alaska may face more “she won’t leave” risky business – http://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2009/07/13/palins-constitutional-train-wreck/ Imagine Joe and Bill addressing this in MMA match (I’ll bet on Joe)….

  • juniusredivivus

    The first rule of good government: ask for a policy recommendation from Bill Kristol, and do the exact opposite.

    The second rule: never begin a land war in Asia.

  • Cliff

    Your use of all caps renders your arguments particularly compelling.

  • jcapan

    I’m w/Cincy.

    “That doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy the show when he gets into it with those who are even further off the rails.”

    But PD, given that it is just that, a “centrist-rebuts-a-nutter show,” how does crap like this, or our further investment in Kristol’s ravings by posting in response to the blatantly obvious (kudos Joe!), advance progressive legislation?

    I look at Joe’s charming slams of rightists (week in and week out) as distractions. It’s a tired sctick–The Weekly Standard, Kraut, Kristol–one would think he’s debating great thinkers here as much attn. as he pays these pukes. The dems have all the power, pressure should be coming from the left (you know, the 10s of millions of progressives out there who JK & co. wholly ignore).

  • maryrossi

    Even if they realize they are wrong — wait, ESPECIALLY if they realize they are wrong — they will never, ever admit it. That’s their total strategy, isn’t it? What’s really at question is why this country has gone along with it for so many years.

  • rose83

    pourmecoffee was right about Joe: he can’t resist responding to anyone who attacks him. Whether it’s Kristol or Greenwald. And I personally would rather he focus on the former.

    If you call Joe’s attention to a centrist thinker who attacks him for being too right-wing, I suspect he will respond similarly.

    Any ideas? I get most of my centrist news on Swampland so I can’t make any suggestions.

  • jcapan

    “And I personally would rather he focus on the former” ?

    Really? You’d prefer he engage with Kristol?

    And IMO, centrists all drink the same estab. kool aid–they don’t attack one another for being R or L. In fact, centrists rarely call one another out at all, unless it’s for the most trivial or egotistical of slights.

  • bartonkeyes

    It’s difficult to take any of your “arguments” seriously when you lack even a basic grasp of American political history. You’re so eager to play the victim that it bothers you not that your claim of the “conservatism of the past 30 years” has no basis in fact. The Supreme Court has been evenly split during that period, Bill Clinton occupied the White House for eight of those years and, in the sixteen Congressional sessions, Democrats controlled the Senate eight times and the House ten times. You’re either paranoid, Joe, or just plain stupid.

  • rose83

    “Really? You’d prefer he engage with Kristol?”

    Yes. Or rather, I would prefer he engage with critics on the left, but to be honest Joe isn’t so much engaging here as attacking. It doesn’t matter in this particular instance because there is no productive discussion to be had with Kristol. But when he does respond to Greenwald, I find his posts rather uninteresting and unproductive. His posts have the same tone of snark and setting up of strawman arguments – yes, Kristol’s ridiculous but Joe is still strawmaning him a little.

    So yes, I would prefer that he use this kind of tone – “What a lawyer this boy is! His work has nothing to do with journalism; it’s all about building his myopic case. To read him, about me, you’d think that I was some kind of frothing nut exclusively and constantly attacking liberals. Swampland readers, like Bill Kristol, know that this is not the case, that Greenwald is engaging in crude Big Lie propaganda” – with people on the right rather than the left.

    Of course I know that Joe’s brutal – if superficial – attacks on the right help shied him from Greenwald’s attacks. And I won’t enable that process by praising Joe for taking aim at soft right-wing targets like Kristol; I agree with you on that. But I still see little to gain from similarly superficial debates between Joe and critics on the left.

    This all sounds more dismissive of Joe than I actually am. Some of his foreign policy reporting is very good, and I don’t mean to suggest Joe is incapable of deeper discussions. It’s just unfortunately not his style.

  • jcapan

    Rose, thanks for the response. I’ll have something to add later, but against my better judgment, I’m going to work now!

  • hermitcrab56

    “The fact is, we may be at a hinge of history, a natural correction after the conservatism of the past 30 years. We are certainly in the midst of a turn toward moderation after the radical right-wing excesses of the Bush Jr. years.”

    Anybody who considers the control of Congress to the Democrats “a turn towards moderation” can’t possibly be taken seriously. Let me know by what possible scale Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Charles Rangel, Patrick Leahy et al. are moderates, or what they’ve passed would be consided anything but liberal excesses. But that’s the trouble with most political thinking; the other side is always “far-whatever” and our side is moderate. We are hardly at a fringe of history, just another swing of the pendullum from one side to the other. those experts on the left predicting the fall of the Republican party have such short memories; it was the same thing said about their party just a few years ago. The Repubs took over after the Democrats screwed up on such an epic scale. they’ve done the same and now its the Dems turn for awhile. It’s how the system works, it’s done pretty good despite the wailing and crying from both sides all the time. But without that crying all these little wonks on both sides who actually sound just like their opposites would be out of work.

  • dougalmac

    “Bill Kristol has, for the past twenty years, played neoconservative wise man with gradually diminishing effect.” And let me add: with a consistent proclivity for getting it wrong, no matter what the issue. After 8 years of Bush, Cheney and their cronies selling America to anyone who could write the RNC a big enough check, our image abroad was shattered, our regulatory powers were a joke, the economy was in ruins, and the Bush Administration just coasted along so they could hand the whole mess off to Obama. Now the NEO-CONS are screaming like starving dingos because Obama hasn’t fixed everything in the first 6 months of his presidency. Puh-lease! You CON clowns had 8 years to make America great, and for most of it you had a majority. You still blew it miserably. Now serious people are trying to fix the mess you and your ilk created. Go away and be quiet, already. And that especially goes for self-appointed knee-jerk CON pundits like Kristol.

  • dougalmac

    “It’s how the system works, it’s done pretty good…” Put down the crack pipe if you think “the system” has worked pretty good. Systems that work good don’t bring the country to the brink of financial disaster. Systems that work good don’t allow countless scores of individuals to rape our financial and currency markets at will. Systems that work good don’t run-up unprececdented levels of red-ink and debt that will be paid for by generations to come. If the last 8 years has taught us anything, the “system” has been broke and needed fixing for a long, long time. Have any of you CONS EVER heard of “fiscal conservatism?”

  • 53_3

    “Anybody who considers the control of Congress to the Democrats “a turn towards moderation” can’t possibly be taken seriously.”

    Now, uh, hermit, maybe you need to crawl back into your shell to rethink this.

    It seems to me that you just did the very same thing that you ranted against afterward!

    1. I won’t beat myself up!
    2. I won’t beat myself up!


    99. I won’t beat myself up!

  • jj0dak

    A coment on the Hard Choices article. A greenhead is a drake mallard. I am offended that Joe would refer to them as crooks that created a Ponzi scheme.

  • jcapan

    OK Rose,

    I agree that ego drives most of Joe’s engagement with his colleagues or “inferiors” (i.e. how he sees the blogosphere). Thus the tone of his past discourse w/GG was inherently limited by thinly veiled condescension and personal grievance. However, and perhaps it’s my own viewpoint, but the juxtaposition of their two strains of thought, regardless of Joe’s techniques, is still productive. Of course, if it remains superficial it offers a lot less. As with Joe’s single engagement with one of us per week, usually 5 minutes after he submits a post with the first commenter asking the simplest question … it’s a charitable pat on the head, but real dialogue, some back & forth (a la KT), that ain’t happening.

    Anyway, nice imitation of Joe’s snark/strawman/sctick.

    Finally, I agree that Joe occasionally makes some spot-on points, and I do agree with him in some areas, but that doesn’t negate the essential intellectual dishonesty of his “show,” precluding a huge range of voices left of center (as if they didn’t even exist).

    I mean, imagine pretending you’re a Wharton scholar but you ignore completely gender criticism about her work!?

  • kathy

    thanks for this JLA. very funny

  • kathy

    jcapan and Rose:

    I’m not sure why Joe shouldn’t be refuting people who challenge him, and where better than here? God knows we tangle with people who challenge us here.

    Also think these guys, who are doing this on their own time, as KT has made clear, aren’t under any obligation to do “reporting” here.

  • FlownOver

    Crabby: That would be the familiar and widely recognized Coburn-Inhofe Scale. You can find it as an appendix to the DSM–IV.

  • readeroftealeaves

    Kristol has become a cautionary tale; apparently, that’s the price of a coddled existence — he hasn’t had to test his assumptions against reality since at least 1980 (if he ever had to test them at all).

    There’s valor in making the effort to grasp the true nature of the world’s shifts and changes; unfortunately, Kristol preferred to serve an ideology by using his talents to help very self-satisfied, ideologically driven people deny observable reality. Ultimately, Kristol’s conduct — particularly his support of someone as unstable as Sarah Palin — is a form of intellectual and moral cowardice, and IMHO his growing irrelevance is one more symptom that we are now at some kind of “hinge of history”.

    IMHO, that’s both a sign of the times, and a basis for optimism.

    None of us probably gets a good read on ‘reality’, but it’s always heartening to seem someone try. Great post, Joe Klein. Good on you.

  • rose83

    “Also think these guys, who are doing this on their own time, as KT has made clear, aren’t under any obligation to do “reporting” here.”

    That’s a good reminder…

    I don’t think Joe should never respond to people who challenge him; however, he is in no danger of that! And the reduction of political discourse to personal disputes is a serious problem.

    I’m also not sure it’s possible for a public figure like Joe to muse in blog posts with no consequences; of course you’re right that Joe’s obligations are limited by his “voluntary” status here on Swampland, but regardless of his intentions his work here still has a wider impact.

  • rose83

    “Anyway, nice imitation of Joe’s snark/strawman/sctick. ”

    My imitation skills are not that good! It was a direct (and linked) quote.

  • retiredsoldier

    To show you how politically segregated we have gotten over the years, I would note that if Teddy Roosevelt – the man who created the Modern Presidency with all the Bells and Whistles displayed by Obama – were alive today and had been able to run in 2008, he not couldn’t. Why? The current Republican Party would have run him out of town on a rail, coated with Tar and Feathers, There is no room in the Republican Party for the Progressive Republicans that were Teddy’s wing of the party. They were as fiscally Conservative as any other group of Republicans, but they were still Progressive enough to foster continuing political and social improvement. It was Teddy’s administration that cleaned up the mess left over from Reconstruction, and it was Teddy’s administration that eliminated – temporarily – the Racial Segregation that existed in the District of Columbia. It was restored in 1912 when Democrat Woodrow Wilson was Inaugurated.

  • jcapan

    “God knows we tangle with people who challenge us here.”

    True Kathy, but most of us also make choices about who is worthy of our attn. e.g. SZ vs. “the Spob.” IMO, that’s the equiv. of what Joe does when he jousts with the nutters. Consciously or otherwise, it legitimates them as voices worthy of his estimable powers. Whereas the non-crazy who could offer so much to our “small-pond” political discourse are ignored. I’d say this is ever more serious given the scope of the crises we face. The same narrow and incestuous debates are insufficient (as well as a principal reason why the form will die out, sooner rather than later).

    And whether this blog is a form of charitable giving on their part or not is irrelevant, IMO. I don’t expect reporting-quality work or nonstop serious topics, for that matter, but at the same time can you say their work in dead tree is anything other than marginally better?

    In the end this meta-discourse is rather pointless where the MSM is concerned. We will not change them. I don’t condemn Joe out of some absurd notion that I’ll be heard, but it is helpful in understanding why our system is so utterly dysfunctional.

  • apollyon07

    My interpretation of the 2008 election was more that it was people desiring competence and fresh faces more than more government…so yes, I think that the majority of the people have not quite turned away from their desire for less government.
    .
    Many more people self-identify themselves as conservative over liberal, even if many more people self-identify with the Democratic Party over the GOP.

  • apollyon07

    And no, the current crop of leaders are in no way moderate, on either side. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.

  • hermitcrab56

    Hey Doug, you need to chill a bit, you’re starting to froth at the mouth. Anybody who happens to disagree with you is not necessarily a CON. I voted for Obama. I don’t expect him to fix it in six months, or even two years. I just don’t think what the Democratic Congress has pushed through could be mistaken for fiscal conservativism. You don’t have a very great grasp of history. When it comes to selling the country to anybody who would write a check to the RNC they’re just following the example of Clinton/Gore who sold secrets and technologies to the highest bidders for the DNC. I just find it funny that you think NEO LIBS are going to do better than NEOCons. As for the system working, I was refering to the political system. The economic system is always going to be subject to greedy crooks. Fortunately that doesn’t affect the current leadership of the Congress. Where’s Dan Rostenkowski when the country needs him?

  • hermitcrab56

    Amen

blog comments powered by Disqus