Fuck Up, Move Up

I guess Doug Feith was unavailable, so I see that Bill Kristol has a new gig:

William Kristol, one of the nation’s leading conservative writers and a vigorous supporter of the Iraq war, will become an Op-Ed page columnist for The New York Times, the newspaper announced Saturday.

Mr. Kristol will write a weekly column for The Times beginning Jan. 7, the newspaper said. He is editor and co-founder of The Weekly Standard, an influential conservative political magazine, and appears regularly on Fox News Sunday and the Fox News Channel. He was a columnist for Time magazine until that relationship was severed this month.

The Politico notes:

The New York Times’ hiring of Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol to write for its op-ed page caused a frenzy in the liberal blogosphere Friday night, with threats of canceling subscriptions and claims that the Gray Lady had been hijacked by neo-cons.

But Times editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal sees things differently.

I guess there are two ways of looking at this- one is that people are afraid of opposing viewpoints, the other that people see Kristol for what he is, a complete imbecile who has (take your pick) either been completely wrong about everything or lying about everything, and thus unworthy of the column. On the upside, letting Kristol’s views out in public might be a good thing, as people unaccustomed with the the two-bit rag the Weekly Standard will now get a good look at what the current Republican party looks like. From a blogging standpoint, this is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball.

As a side note, I would just like to point out that the past decade has completely demolished the concept of the Peter Principle, described here by Wikipedia:

The Peter Principle is a colloquial principle of hierarchiology, stated as “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.” Formulated by Dr. Laurence J. Peter in his 1968 book The Peter Principle, the principle pertains to the level of competence of the human resources in a hierarchical organization. The principle explains the upward, downward, and lateral movement of personnel within a hierarchically organized system of ranks.

If the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas.

92 replies
  1. 1
    garyb50 says:

    My wife knew Bill Kristol when they were kids. She says he was a little shit.

  2. 2
    D. Mason says:

    HAHAHA you think George Bush is smart enough to push a broom. You’re clearly suffering from BDS.

  3. 3
    Dug Jay says:

    I guess there are two ways of looking at this- one is that people are afraid of opposing viewpoints, the other that people see Kristol for what he is, a complete imbecile who has (take your pick) either been completely wrong about everything or lying about everything, and thus unworthy of the column. On the upside, letting Kristol’s views out in public might be a good thing, as people unaccustomed with the the two-bit rag the Weekly Standard will now get a good look at what the current Republican party looks like. From a blogging standpoint, this is the equivalent of hitting the Powerball.

    Pretty colorful writing. I can almost see the saliva dribbling from the corners of your mouth as your fingers raced across the keyboard. You may have at long last finally accomplished the total breakthrough into the utter looniness of the Left-wing blogosphere. Congrats.

  4. 4
    calipygian says:

    @Dug Jay – I challenge you to find one thing, just ONE thing, that Little Billy Kristol has said or written that wasn’t a) batshit insane and/or b) catastrophically wrong.

    You have until the year 2100 to complete your assignment.

    Go.

  5. 5

    calipygian, you made it impossible for dug jay by giving him the or option. If you’d just left it at and, he’d have had a sporting chance, because there’s the possibility–admittedly slimmer than Nicole Richie–that Kristol has written something that was not batshit insane and catastrophically wrong, but either? Come on.

  6. 6
    Michael D. says:

    The “Mainstream Media” is so frightened about being labelled as biased that they’ll just hire anyone, won’t they?

    Her’e my issue with all that:

    1. Conservatives say that liberals are “not in the mainstream.”

    2. They say the mainstream media is biased towards liberals.

    3. If the media is “mainstream” – and that’s what conservatives call it – and if mainstream means “representing majority opinion,” aren’t they contradicting themselves?

    If something is mainstream, then, to me at least, it represents majority thought. Conservatives can’t say liberals don’t represent mainstream though, while at the same time calling the media, which they say is biased, “Mainstream.”

  7. 7
    wvng says:

    I have this image of Dug Jay in a tee maze, trying to decide which way to turn: towards batshit insane or catastrophically wrong. Choices, choices.

    Planaria can learn to negotiate a T-maze, now we’ll see how a winger does.

  8. 8
    Dug Jay says:

    As requested by the simpleton, otherwise known as “calipygian

    From the always loony, Left-wing outfit, Think Progress on July 12, 2007:

    Top Intel Analyst Says Surge Is Failing, Kristol Counters It’s Going ‘Better Than Anyone Expected’
    Yesterday, Thomas Fingar, the top intelligence analyst in the Office of the National Intelligence Director, stated that “the most optimistic” assessment of the increase in troop numbers in Iraq is that it has not had a “significant” effect in reducing the violence…..

    …….

    This morning on Fox and Friends, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol ignored the intelligence assessment, instead offering his unfounded view that the “military situation is better than anyone expected”:

    The truth is if you look concretely on the ground in Iraq, the military situation is better than anyone expected. Better than David Petraeus expected. Better than those of us here at home who supported the surge expected six months ago. … And we’re going to win the war. I think we’re going to win this war if we just don’t lose our nerve here at home.

    Even Harry Reid and John Murtha agree that the military “surge” has worked and significantly reduced the levels of violence….just as Kristol stated six momnths ago.

  9. 9
    srv says:

    dog catcher in Kennebunkport, not Crawford.

  10. 10
    srv says:

    dog catcher in Kennebunkport, not Crawford.

    Shit, that wouldn’t work either. He’d have already been fired on a cruelty to animals charge. GW and Hucks kid, two peas in a pod.

  11. 11

    What’s next? A cat fight between Maureen Dowd and Ann Coulter?

  12. 12
    Tim F. says:

    The “surge” wasn’t intended to reduce violence, dumbass. Kristol himself pointed out, before the goalposts started their steady march towards irrelevance, that the point was to bring Iraqi factions towards reconciliation. How has that worked out?

  13. 13
    bob says:

    Bill Kristol: always wrong all the time. The lies are simply a subset of his wrongness.

  14. 14
    Dug Jay says:

    The “surge” wasn’t intended to reduce violence

    ,

    Says who, asshat? And in case you are as ignorant on this as nearly every thing you write suggests, the “surge” has brought about a very significant amount of reconciliation among the factions, much more than was ever expected. You need to get out more and start reading something beyond the drivel put out by those such as Think Progress and Media Matters or the HuffPo.

  15. 15
    Porco Rosso says:

    Gee Dug, That’s like giving Kristol credit for saying that water is wet. Sending in troops to police an area so that violence gets reduced. Whoa. You’d think he invented gravity. Wow.

    Now if Kristol had said “We need lots of troops to police Bagdad” immediately after we started our glorious occupation, well then I’d give him some credit. But after a few years of letting the place go to hell.

  16. 16
    Ted says:

    the “surge” has brought about a very significant amount of reconciliation among the factions, much more than was ever expected.

    What a cheerleader! Are your cheerleader breasts as big as Kristol’s? HOT!!

  17. 17
    Dug Jay says:

    Now if Kristol had said “We need lots of troops to police Bagdad” immediately after we started our glorious occupation, well then I’d give him some credit.

    It’s a real shame that liberals, especially the more extreme form of that species, never do any independent research on a subject prior to putting their little brain farts into print. As any reader of The Weekly Standard or viewer of Fox News Sunday knows, Kristol was in John McCain’s camp on this issue from the get go, arguing all along that we should send in more troops. He was an opponent of the Rumsfeld strategy.

  18. 18
    TheFountainHead says:

    Keep your friends close, and your idiotic enemies closer.

  19. 19
    Anne Laurie says:

    William Kristol is the MSM Village equivalent of the Slavic thug with the cattle-killer in “No Country for Old Men”. He’s a soulless, twisted, committed psychopath who gets paid for using words the way old-fashioned thugs got paid for using their fists — mayhem for money. The New York Times hired him to demonstrate their loyalty to the shrinking but still powerful cabal of Reichtards who want to bath the world in blood in a vain attempt to reanimate their shrunken… souls. Lightweight literati-gangstas like Bobo Brooks and Tom “Teh Unit” Friedman are too well-groomed and soft-handed to satisfy the Base’s thirst for kneecapping; only a time-tested monster with a track record of bloodlust will do for the jaded tastes of Darth Cheney’s cheerleaders.

  20. 20
    Andrew says:

    Says who, asshat? And in case you are as ignorant on this as nearly every thing you write suggests, the “surge” has brought about a very significant amount of reconciliation among the factions, much more than was ever expected

    If by “reconciliation” you mean “ethnic cleansing” then I agree 100%. Great seller. Would do business again. AAA+++++.

  21. 21
    Rudi says:

    PR – While I think Billy Kristol is just a “cheap media whore”, he’s always been pushing for more troops. Maybe his son could skip ROTC, not consider an analyst or logistics position, and be a platoon leader in Baghdada.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00879.html

    I repeat, I think Billy is scum, but he’s always wanted more war. Ask Juan Williams…

  22. 22
    Rudi says:

    What a cheerleader! Are your cheerleader breasts as big as Kristol’s? HOT!!

    I thought we have Michele Malkin in that outfit. I didn’t read that Billy is also a cross dress. In MM case, wre talking small teets.

  23. 23
    Dug Jay says:

    William Kristol is the MSM Village equivalent of the Slavic thug with the cattle-killer in “No Country for Old Men”. He’s a soulless, twisted, committed psychopath who gets paid for using words the way old-fashioned thugs got paid for using their fists—mayhem for money. The New York Times hired him to demonstrate their loyalty to the shrinking but still powerful cabal of Reichtards who want to bath the world in blood in a vain attempt to reanimate their shrunken… souls. Lightweight literati-gangstas like Bobo Brooks and Tom “Teh Unit” Friedman are too well-groomed and soft-handed to satisfy the Base’s thirst for kneecapping; only a time-tested monster with a track record of bloodlust will do for the jaded tastes of Darth Cheney’s cheerleaders.

    Come on, Annie. Did you write all those great big words all by yourself…or did you copy some from elsewhere? I must say that a lot of it sure sounds like the ode to Kristol that Katha Pollitt of The Nation published upon hearing of the NYT’s hiring of Kristol. And by the way, Bill responded late yesterday with the following entitled,Thug for Life:

    Give a holla to my neocons in the Bay,
    I’m livin’ in DC still clutchin’ on my AK.
    Tell ’em,
    “Thug for life,
    High till’ i die”
    When ’em stupid Nation witches ask why!

  24. 24
    Tim F. says:

    Says who, asshat?

    Bill Kristol, Jan. 2007:

    Keane-Kagan follows classic counterinsurgency doctrine by sending enough troops to provide security for the Iraqi people, especially in Baghdad, now the center of gravity of the conflict. With security established, training of the Iraqi army and political reconciliation can proceed. This plan is likely to be the basis for the new way forward soon to be announced by the Bush Administration.

    Our glorious war preznit, Jan 10 2007:

    This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad’s residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq’s Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace — and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

    More troops in Baghdad will reduce the violence, but we can’t keep more troops in Baghdad. Unless your patriotic College Republican friends start volunteering in greater numbers the “surge” will taper back to pre-surge numbers or less by the middle of 2008. If you haven’t noticed the pulldown has already begun. Once we’re back to a light footprint, what do you suppose will keep the order? Lingering good feelings? Use your head, brainiac.

    Now about that reconciliation. You’re right that I don’t have anything but partisan sources for the idea that the sectarian divide in Iraq if anything has gotten worse. As evidence, I haven’t cited the National Review once. Not once. I have no doubt that you will correct that shameful lapse on my part.

  25. 25
    wvng says:

    for Dug Jay, who is unable to follow the shifting goal posts on Iraq policy, still being stuck in the T-maze.

    from George Bush State of the Union 2007
    “I’ve made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq’s other leaders that America’s commitment is not open-ended. . . . A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.
    To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country’s economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation’s political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq’s constitution.”
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....110-7.html

    “It was clear to me that a decision has been made for a surge” of at least 20,000 additional troops, Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) said in a conference call with reporters. Smith said Bush believes “that the political processes have been overtaken by sectarian violence and that sectarian violence must be quelled so political processes can be restored.”
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00237.html

    “On Saturday, June 16, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with Iraqi officials in Baghdad in an attempt to establish some form of reconciliation within the Iraqi government, but he was met with great resistance by al-Maliki. Gates relayed the message that the purpose of having U.S. troops in Iraq is to buy the Iraqi government more time to create a working system but that “we are disappointed with the progress so far.””
    http://www.fpa.org/topics_info....._id=506352

    “Amid reports that the U.S. military surge has helped to stabilize insurgent attacks in Baghdad and a recent Pew Research Center poll that found 48 percent of Americans now believe the U.S. military effort in Iraq is going well, up from 30 percent in February, Biden said, “This whole notion that the surge is working is fantasy. “The surge was to provide breathing room. Breathing room for what purpose?” he asked the officials assembled from Iowa’s 99 counties. “To work out a coalition government to end this civil war.” Biden said there is “let me emphasize, no political progress among the major factions” in trying to govern Iraq.”
    http://www.swamppolitics.com/n.....a_fan.html

  26. 26
    Dug Jay says:

    Tim, arguing with you is a complete waste of my time. If I just wait you out, you will provide all the rebuttal to your own arguments that are warranted and needed, just as you did in your 1:11pm post above. Kristol and the President have been vindicated by the subsequent successful “surge.”

  27. 27
    Tim F. says:

    Too bad, looks like you didn’t use your head. You neither acknowledged that the end point of this “surge,” as described by both Kristol and the preznit, is reconciliation, nor did you provide the faintest evidence that reconciliation has proceeded. And I sincerely hope that you caught that the last bit was a joke.

  28. 28
    Wilfred says:

    Kristol is a die-hard Israel Firster. His column will be the staging ground for the incipient Bomb Iran campaign. The NYT is hardly a bastion of progressive thought, witness its Judith Miller wmd scamming in the lead up to the Iraq war.

  29. 29
    myiq2xu says:

    She says he was a little shit.

    Was?

  30. 30
    myiq2xu says:

    Tim, arguing with you is a complete waste of my time. If I just wait you out, you will provide all the rebuttal to your own arguments that are warranted and needed, just as you did in your 1:11pm post above. Kristol and the President have been vindicated by the subsequent successful “surge.”

    Thanks for nothing Jaybird. I just had soda coming out my nose.

    All thse comedians outta work and you’re trying to be funny.

  31. 31
    Dug Jay says:

    Again, Tim and wvng, there is no fundamental inconsistency between what Kristol or the President wrote/said earlier this year and the excerpted quotes above. In fact, many of the quotes have no bearing on the discussion at hand (e.g., Biden’s quotes which are outliers even among other dems). Their (and my point) is that the surge has been successful to-date, notwithstanding all of the naysaying earlier this year by virtually all Democrats and some Republicans. Obviously, the end game is not yet assured, even though all signs are currently favorable.

  32. 32
    Dug Jay says:

    Again, Tim and wvng, there is no fundamental inconsistency between what Kristol or the President wrote/said earlier this year and the excerpted quotes above. In fact, many of the quotes have no bearing on the discussion at hand (e.g., Biden’s quotes which are outliers even among other dems). Their (and my point) is that the surge has been successful to-date, notwithstanding all of the naysaying earlier this year by virtually all Democrats and some Republicans. Obviously, the end game is not yet assured, even though all signs are currently favorable.

  33. 33
    Tim F. says:

    Well that’s strange.

    BAGHDAD — The top American military commander in Iraq said Saturday that violent attacks in the country had fallen by 60 percent since June, but cautioned that security gains were “tenuous” and “fragile,” requiring political and economic progress to cement them.

    Security gains only make sense in the context of reconciliation. Amazing, that’s almost exactly what Bush and the neocon chorus argued back in January. And whatever happened to those benchmarks from the Bush speech that I linked? Run over by stampeding goalposts, apparently.

  34. 34
    Dug Jay says:

    myiq2xu I assume that the letters in your handle here are intended to communicate the concept that your IQ is twice that of others. If so, you badly need to upgrade the quality of your arguments. In the alternative, you might give consideration to revising your handle to something such as : “myiqb0.”

  35. 35
    D-Chance. says:

    Am I A Karma Karma Karma Karma Karma Chameleon?

    Yes, Kristol is going to toally wreck the credibility of the Grey Lady…

  36. 36
    calipygian says:

    Its useless to argue with an idiot, but any result of the surge that doesn’t result in a unified Iraqi government is not a success by any standard.

    And when you have a Kurdistan Oil Minister cutting deals with an oil company run by a guy who also serves on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, that doesn’t look, smell, taste or feel like a unified Iraqi government to me.

    In fact, it looks like the President’s own advisors are selling Iraq policy short and betting on an ultimate failure of the surge.

    Oh, BTW: Iraq War cheerleaders like Richard Perle, Scooter Libby and Tony Snow are midwifing the deal.

    http://www.upi.com/Internation....._oil/3128/

    http://the.honoluluadvertiser......20338.html

  37. 37
    Dug Jay says:

    calipygian finally writes something with which I can agree: Its useless to argue with an idiot… Since I am perfectly capable of finding Links at Raw Story, Kos and other windbaggery sites, I have no need for calipygian’s help, and agree that he’s an idiot not worthy or capable of debate.

  38. 38
    The Other Steve says:

    The explanation is actually really simple.

    My local rag, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune has a Republican columnist. Her arguments are illogical, emotional, childish, and batshit insane. There is a supposedly Liberal counterpart, who I find writes a rather inane column, but he’s the brother of one of the local mayors and has been there for a while.

    Now the trick question.

    Guess whose column generates the most letters to the editor? The most buzz? The most hits on the website?

    It’s the batshit insane Republican.

    If you want to see Kristol gone. DO NOT READ HIM! DO NOT LINK HIM! DO NOT RESPOND WITH A LTE.

    He’ll be gone in 3-4 months if nobody reads him.

  39. 39
    calipygian says:

    @Dug Jay-

    If you notice, the links are to UPI (owned by the Moonies, the same people that publish your beloved Washington Times) and a Washington Post article in the Honolulu Advertiser. So go fuck yourself.

  40. 40
    myiq2xu says:

    myiq2xu I assume that the letters in your handle here are intended to communicate the concept that your IQ is twice that of others. If so, you badly need to upgrade the quality of your arguments. In the alternative, you might give consideration to revising your handle to something such as : “myiqb0.”

    From the quality of your commentary, I conclude that if brains were C-4 you couldn’t blow your nose.

    Try someone more at your intellectual level, say like Paris Hilton?

  41. 41
    calipygian says:

    Dug Jay – Just in case you want to join us in the real world, here is the official Kurdistan Government Press Release on the Hunt Oil deal:

    http://www.krg.org/articles/de.....38;rnr=223

    Mr Ray L. Hunt, CEO of Hunt Oil Company in Dallas, Texas, said, “We are very pleased to have the opportunity to be a part of these landmark events by actively participating in the establishment of the petroleum industry in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.”

    Here is the membership of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from a press release:
    http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2005/10/wh102705.html

    James L. Barksdale of Mississippi
    Arthur B. Culvahouse of Virginia
    William O. DeWitt, Jr. of Ohio
    Admiral James O. Ellis (Ret.) of Georgia
    Donald L. Evans of Texas
    Martin Faga of Virginia
    Lee Hamilton of Indiana
    Ray Hunt of Texas
    David E. Jeremiah of Virginia
    John L. Morrison of Minnesota
    Elizabeth Pate-Cornell of California

    I’ll let you draw your own conclusions. But you’re obviously too fucking stupid to draw the correct ones.

  42. 42
    Ted says:

    Their (and my point) is that the surge has been successful to-date, notwithstanding all of the naysaying earlier this year by virtually all Democrats and some Republicans.

    Shorter Jaylbird: Why the hell does only 25% of the country agree with my cheerleading?

  43. 43
    Porco Rosso says:

    Dug Jay sed.

    “As any reader of The Weekly Standard or viewer of Fox News Sunday knows, Kristol was in John McCain’s camp on this issue from the get go, arguing all along that we should send in more troops. He was an opponent of the Rumsfeld strategy.”

    Oh so now your saying he’s as relevant as John McCain. Cool.

    The sad part is that Kristol was actually the NYTimes second choice. They really wanted Jonah “doughy pantload” Goldberg.

  44. 44
    cjenk says:

    Your interpretation of the Peter Principle is different from the way it was explained to me. The way I understood it; “The least competent person gets promoted first.” So if you’re a good dishwasher you won’t get promoted because good dishwashers are hard to find. If you’re a lousy dishwasher you get promoted to fry cook and on up until you get a job that you are good at. And if you’re really incompetent you get to be president. So according to that interpretation Peter Principle is vindicated.

  45. 45
    The Other Steve says:

    I see no mention of more troops, in their March 2003 editorial cheerleading the war.

    Although there is mention of these imaginary weapons of mass destruction.

    Whatever happened to those, Dug Jay?

  46. 46
    The Other Steve says:

    I’ll let you draw your own conclusions. But you’re obviously too fucking stupid to draw the correct ones.

    It’s not a question of intelligence. It’s a question of honesty.

  47. 47
    Dug Jay says:

    God save us from the morons like calipygian, myig2xu, et.al. For example, what on earth does the list of members of the President’s FIAB do to prove a single relevant adverse fact about Iraq? In fact, the list shows a rather wide cross section of political views, including long-time House foreign affairs Democrat Lee Hamilton, among others. I guess for a tin foil hatted nitwit such as calipygian, the presence of Hunt on the FIAB means something nefarious notwithstanding the fact that Hunt is the leading US independent oilman and a widely recognized expert on Middle East affairs, having been involved in the region for several decades. As for myiq2xu, it has already been amply demonstrated that his real intellect and knowledge hasn’t advanced beyond junior high levels.

  48. 48
    calipygian says:

    the presence of Hunt on the FIAB means something nefarious notwithstanding the fact that Hunt is the leading US independent oilman and a widely recognized expert on Middle East affairs, having been involved in the region for several decades.

    Exactly. And as head of Hunt Oil, he has actively taken steps to undermine US policy by encouraging Kurdistan to act independantly from Baghdad.

    Thanks for help proving my point, douchebag.

  49. 49
    myiq2xu says:

    John, you are making a mistake. Bloody Bill Kristol has NOT fucked up.

    Kristol has done exactly what he was hired to do – push propaganda.

    If you hired a hooker to suck your dick, would you be happy if she only gave you a tug job, or worse, if she refused to engage in any sexual activity and lectured you on the dangers of AIDS and other STD’s instead?

    Kristol is a whore and he’s has been doing exactly what he has been paid to do.

  50. 50
    myiq2xu says:

    As for myiq2xu, it has already been amply demonstrated that his real intellect and knowledge hasn’t advanced beyond junior high levels.

    That’s because I’m in touch with my inner child. I should warn you though, he’s a mean little fuck.

    Dumbass.

  51. 51
    Dug Jay says:

    Get over it, myiq2xu. You prove with each successive post that you are likey not even a junior high graduate. In fact, I assume that when your babysitter finds you are at the computer again, she will make you sit there in your doo-doo filled diapers until mommy gets home to change you.

    And to the other moron who thinks Hunt’s actions are undermining US positions on Iraqi oil, he needs to dig a little deeper to learn that just the opposite is true.

  52. 52
    myiq2xu says:

    Get over it, myiq2xu.

    Oh puhleeze. I’ve had pimples on my ass that bothered me more than you.

    Project much?

  53. 53
    The Other Steve says:

    Changing the subject a bit. This is the kind of guy who would support Ron Paul. :-)

    I know someone who is a manager at the company he ran. They’ve had a terrible time just trying to stay in business since the CEO went fugitive. They had to get the courts to remove him from the companies board, etc.

  54. 54
    The Other Steve says:

    And to the other moron who thinks Hunt’s actions are undermining US positions on Iraqi oil, he needs to dig a little deeper to learn that just the opposite is true.

    Is it possible for you to have a reasonable debate without turning to insults?

  55. 55
    RSA says:

    Never having been right is obviously a low bar, one that even Bill Kristol has probably accidentally jumped over from time to time. It’s more useful to look at how disastrously he’s been wrong when he has been wrong. From MediaMatters, a few excerpts:

    American and alliance forces will be welcomed in Baghdad as liberators. [2002]

    The battles of Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably. [2003]

    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. [2003]

    It’s one thing to be wrong. It’s another to be so wrong that it demonstrates a complete divorce from reality on a subject on which one is supposed to be an expert.

  56. 56
    racrecir says:

    Michael D. Says: aren’t they contradicting themselves?

    That’s what being the Party of Ideas means. Illusions, delusions, misperceptions, fantasies, hyper-active defense mechanisms and sheer ignorance greatly enhance idea generation.

  57. 57
    Tevian says:

    Bill Kristol wasn’t wrong when he suggested that the Republicans had been sitting around the Palm way too long. I forget exactly when that was, sometime in the mid-90s, but he was right, if not inclusive enough. (And whoever’s sitting around the Palm today, they’ve been there too long as well).

    I don’t see what the problem is with Kristol writing an OpEd in the Times. The First Amendment has not actually been repealed yet. Kristol knows how to abuse the English language as well as the rest of the Times columnists. And, the Times did say Kristol was given an opinion slot, not that he’s been hired to report 2008 vote counts from Ohio or Florida. Not that those might not again prove a matter of opinion.

  58. 58
    Sirkowski says:

    As cjenk said, this seems to rather validate the Peter Principle. I’ve read the book about 15 years ago, so it’s a bit blurry, but I seem to remember the Peter Principle being about how increasingly incompetant people get as you climb in the hierarchy.

  59. 59
    Robert Johnston says:

    Never having been right is obviously a low bar, one that even Bill Kristol has probably accidentally jumped over from time to time.

    Perhaps. But if you exclude instances of the so-blindingly-obvious-that-agreement-is-universal-except-for-people-in-need-of-more-medication cases? I’ve got my doubts. Even in half those cases, Kristol’s one of those set for a course of extra pills.

  60. 60
    Robert Johnston says:

    If the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas.

    Well, I’d say it’s largely true, but requires a bit of elaboration.

    1) When people lack ambition, money, and connections they’ll never rise to a level where they’re incompetent.

    2) When people have ambition, money, or connections, but not more than one, the original Peter Principle holds

    3) When people have two of ambition, money, and connections, they rise part their level of incompetence to their level of dangerousness.

    4) When people have ambition, money, and connections, they blow past their level of dangerousness and reach a level where you just pray futilely that they don’t touch anything.

  61. 61
    Perry Como says:

    As any reader of The Weekly Standard or viewer of Fox News Sunday knows, Kristol was in John McCain’s camp on this issue from the get go, arguing all along that we should send in more troops. He was an opponent of the Rumsfeld strategy.

    That’s kind of like arguing you should use a pair of scissors, instead of a pair of nail clippers, to cut your own head off. One option will accomplish your goal quicker than the other, but your goal is fundamentally fucking stupid.

    In Bill Kristol’s case, he would argue that after you amputate your own head with a pair of scissors, you should go ahead and bisect yourself with an ice pick. He’s just that smart.

  62. 62
    John Cole says:

    I was under the impression that the Peter Principle implied that you were promoted above your level of competence. I don’t think they are competent enough to be dogcatcher or street-sweeper.

  63. 63
    Perry Como says:

    I don’t think they are competent enough to be dogcatcher or street-sweeper.

    I’m trying to figure out what you have against dog catchers and street sweepers.

  64. 64
    Zifnab says:

    I was under the impression that the Peter Principle implied that you were promoted above your level of competence. I don’t think they are competent enough to be dogcatcher or street-sweeper.

    But they are barely competent enough to serve as mascot and mouthpiece. And look – there they are. You continue to remain under the delusion that Bush calls the shots. He’s got about as much say in how the government is run as my roommate’s pet dog has say in the carpet color. At best, each of them can piss on it till we remove the offenders or change it to make them stop.

    Fortunately, my roommate’s dog is housebroken.

  65. 65
    TenguPhule says:

    Their (and my point) is that the surge has been successful to-date, notwithstanding all of the naysaying earlier this year by virtually all Democrats and some Republicans.

    When you play whack a mole, do not confuse empty holes with lack of moles.

  66. 66
    Zifnab says:

    President: Mission Accomplish!
    America: Can we come home now?
    President: Not until the job is done!
    America: So the mission isn’t accomplished yet?
    President: You’re with the terrorists~! Wiretap his phone line!
    America: Oh. :(

  67. 67

    […] John Cole: if the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas. […]

  68. 68
    Blake says:

    You make an interesting point about the Peter Principle here, John. For a long time industry has instead operated on the Dilbert Principle (the most incompetent people in any organization are systematically promoted into management, where it is perceived they will be able to do less harm). I think you may have stumbled across a third phenomenon, maybe one in search of a name, because it appears to be a combination of the two. It’s clear that Mr. Kristol is not only being promoted due to incompetence, a la Dilbert, but that he will actually be able to do a lot MORE harm than he already has, given the much larger audience.

  69. 69
    ThymeZone says:

    I do not agree that outrage at the Kristol hiring is “being afraid of opposing viewpoints.” That’s just a rhetorical device.

    I’m not outraged, but very disappointed, that this monster — and I use the word deliberately — would be given space on that newspaper’s pages.

    Opposing viewpoints, by, say, printing an occasional OpEd piece, are one thing, but giving a sick imbecile like this his own space in the paper? I can’t compute it, the only way it makes sense is that the NYT is whoring itself out for attention. And, that’s tragic.

  70. 70
    OxyCon says:

    Didn’t the NYT already suffer a huge crediblity scandal when they published the works of a serial liar (Jayson Blair)?

  71. 71
    Zifnab says:

    Opposing viewpoints, by, say, printing an occasional OpEd piece, are one thing, but giving a sick imbecile like this his own space in the paper? I can’t compute it, the only way it makes sense is that the NYT is whoring itself out for attention. And, that’s tragic.

    At this point, I just don’t know who they think they’re selling papers to. Anyone who regularly reads the NYT Op-Eds probably has a firm enough grasp of politics to know who Kristol is – namely PNAC Iraq War Cheerleader. When did NYT regular subscribers become war advocates? Play like this and the NYT Op-Eds will start looking like the WaPo Op-Eds, when opinion pieces start flatly contradicting front page stories.

    Didn’t the NYT already suffer a huge crediblity scandal when they published the works of a serial liar (Jayson Blair)?

    Or for that matter, Judy Miller?

  72. 72
    myiq2xu says:

    Has anybody considered that the NYT is hiring Kristol for the same reason that Howard Stern has a job?

    Maybe they are hoping that people will subscribe to their rag just to see what outrageous thing Kristol will say next.

  73. 73
    ThymeZone says:

    Has anybody considered that the NYT is hiring Kristol for the same reason that Howard Stern has a job?

    Well, yeah, and that’s what makes it so tragic IMO.

    If a great paper has to hire the political equivalent of Charles Manson to sell its rag, then …. it won’t be a great paper any more. It will be just another crass, cynical media whore, the paper/web version of Wolf Blitzer or Brit Hume.

  74. 74
    Porco Rosso says:

    Or it could just be that it’s Rupert Murdoch’s world now, and the rest of us are just living on it.

  75. 75
    Jake says:

    May the readers of the NYT treat him with the same love and respect WP readers shower on Chuckie Krauthammer.

    Mwahaha!

    And may all bloggers everywhere take a few nanoseconds to figure out how to post links.

    Amen.

  76. 76
    mellowjohn says:

    jeez, some of us had way too much time on our hands this afternon, didn’t we.

    haven’t you people ever heard of football?

  77. 77

    … haven’t you people ever heard of football?

    Anyone know who beat the Steelers today?

  78. 78
    myiq2xu says:

    Anyone know who beat the Steelers today?

    The injury list

  79. 79

    […] John Cole: If the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas.   […]

  80. 80
    conumbdrum says:

    As I understand it from perusing the book twenty years ago, the Peter Principle works like this: in a hierarchy, a good worker keeps getting bumped upstairs until he or she hits the ceiling of their own ability… that is, they end up with a job they don’t or can’t perform adequately. Because of this, they don’t get promoted again. Peter called this “rising to one’s level of incompetence.”

  81. 81
    Anne Laurie says:

    Or it could just be that it’s Rupert Murdoch’s world now, and the rest of us are just living on it.

    True fact: The Doberman Pinscher breed was developed by a Swiss native, Louis Doberman, who served as his community’s dog catcher *and* tax collector. He wanted a “Protection Dog” that would not only exhibit the natural guarding behavior of existing breeds (Rottweilers, various Shepherds, the Airdale-like German Pinscher), but would look like a scary, threatening, barely-controllable canine piranha on crystal meth. The new breed would prove irresistible to the functionaries paid by the robber barons to do their hands-on dirty work (union busting, worker intimidation, peon harrassment) during the first Gilded Age.

    The difference between a mistrained “junkyard” Doberman Pinscher and William Kristol is that Kristol chose his own vocation.

  82. 82
    myiq2xu says:

    Q: What’s the difference between Bill Kristol and a big steaming pile of dog shit?

    A: The smirk.

  83. 83
    Porco Rosso says:

    Tevian. “I don’t see what the problem is with Kristol writing an OpEd in the Times. The First Amendment has not actually been repealed yet.”

    Hey, if they want to further solidify their reputation as the paper of refuse, that’s fine by me.

  84. 84
    CDB says:

    Propaganda…Kristol is useful. Why not promote him?

  85. 85
    DavidTC says:

    As a side note, I would just like to point out that the past decade has completely demolished the concept of the Peter Principle, described here by Wikipedia:

    No, not really. The Peter Principle assumes people are hired at the bottom and pulled up. The presidency, however, is not reached through merit, and thus the person at the top wasn’t competent. This resulted in a very interesting failure mode of the Peter Principle, namely, it is assumed that the promotions make some rational sense.

    The inherent, unnoticed-until-now assumption in the Peter Principle is that people are promoted when they do well. The Bush administration though, and, in a sense, the entire Republican machine, do not reward based on performance. They reward based on ideology.

    So, people are promoted until they reach their level of ideology. And, oddly enough, that seems to have produced almost the same effect as the Peter Principle…people, because they are willing to say the right things, get promoted into positions where their ideology isn’t strong enough, and end up disagreeing with Bush. (Look at Comey for example.)

    We’ve had an amazing turnover in the administration, and, yes, a good portion of it was due to scandals, but a smaller, harder-to-see portion of it was people getting ‘promoted to the level of their ideology’. They were okay with some level of it, and thus got promoted until they were no longer okay with what they were being asked to do, at which point they resigned or were let go.

  86. 86
    liberal says:

    Tevian wrote,

    I don’t see what the problem is with Kristol writing an OpEd in the Times. The First Amendment has not actually been repealed yet.

    Moronic. The First Amendment has to do with the government and the press, not what’s at issue here, which is the whether the Times’ hiring of a imbecilic thug is legitimate.

    And if you’re insinuating that public pressure on the press to, say, not hire imbecilic cheerleaders of war crimes is against the First Amendment, you’re simply wrong.

  87. 87
    liberal says:

    Zifnab wrote,

    You continue to remain under the delusion that Bush calls the shots. He’s got about as much say in how the government is run as my roommate’s pet dog has say in the carpet color.

    The Buffalo Beast observed:
    Charges: … Is so clearly not in charge of his own White House that his feeble attempts to define himself as “decider” or “commander guy” are the equivalent of a five-year-old kid sitting on his dad’s Harley and saying “vroom vroom!”

  88. 88

    I’ve finally been able to track down Kristol’s “secret” fraternal name that they use at all the (insert name of World Domination Oligarchy Conspiracy here) get-togethers.

    It’s “Assmonkey McDouchebag.”

    Now, if you know the secret handshake, you, too, can become a New York Times columnist.

  89. 89
    Margaret says:

    Hey, I fit the definition of a Liberal these days since that word has been re-defined like so many other concepts, words and properties have been re-defined by the neocons. I have been known to read many conservative commentators. I don’t read Bill Kristol because he’s always wrong, it has nothing to do with anything other than that. Maybe if he wasn’t so laughably and consistently wrong I would read him.

  90. 90
    skip says:

    Kristol’s hiring merely reaffirms an old journalistic tenet. You can be wrong about everything—even matters of war and peace— and be wrong for years at a time, just so long as you are “right” about Israel.

  91. 91
    liberal says:

    Margaret wrote,

    I fit the definition of a Liberal these days since that word has been re-defined like so many other concepts, words and properties have been re-defined by the neocons. I have been known to read many conservative commentators. I don’t read Bill Kristol because he’s always wrong, it has nothing to do with anything other than that.

    Exactly.

    If you think your beliefs should have some kind of connection to reality, you’re a “liberal” these days and have to put up with people contesting your philosophy of knowledge.

  92. 92
    skip says:

    Lewis Lapham alone had it right. The whole nation went hysterical after 9/11. That was a surprise in itself. but the real stunner was how the press bought into the White House’s questionable read on it all.

    I am just one of many who has yet to recover from being called a traitor by supposedly sane people. Now they want to just “leave that behind us and move on.”

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] John Cole: If the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas.   […]

  2. […] John Cole: if the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas. […]

Comments are closed.