Bill's first column appears today in The New York Times and while many of his critics may agree with his opening graf, in which he thanks Barack Obama for hurting Hillary Clinton, they will probably quickly part ways when he says the nation can't afford an Obama presidency. Like many conservatives and fellow Fox analysts, he is starting to warm to Huckabee (knowing they could be stuck with him) and dreams about a Bloomberg candidacy that would, he claims, draw votes from Obama. In this, of course, Kristol reveals his insipidness -- what are the chances that Bloomberg would even run if Obama (as opposed to Hillary) gets the Democratic nod, and if he did, how many Dems would vote for Bloomberg in that case?
My favorite moment is when he refers to "the writer Michelle Malkin," as if she is David Halberstam or David McCullough or Leo Tolstoy.
And Kristol notes, in hearting Huckabee: "His campaigning in New Hampshire has been impressive. At a Friday night event at New England College in Henniker, he played bass with a local rock band, Mama Kicks." Like I've written before: Derek Smalls for president!
2 comments:
yes, a perfect example of a lunatic:
"We don’t want to increase the scope of the nanny state, we don’t want to undo the good done by the appointments of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, and we really don’t want to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory in Iraq."
the good done? victory? spoken like a true wignut. if this man had actually taken the space to justify these comments, he would be utterly destroyed by the blogosphere who would fact check the hell out of any ridiculous comment he makes. so instead, he does what all wingnuts do, he makes sweeping, matter of fact statements that appear to need no support because he think's they are so obvious. he's made them plenty of times before about iraq and other issues, especially when he's being interviewed. time and again he is just flat out wrong, but apparently that doesn't matter and they gave him a column anyway.
What's the deal with not linking to the source material you're writing about? It's pretty annoying.
Post a Comment