Re: Bill Kristol Must Resign!

The Iraq war, of which Kristol was a leading champion, has bankrupted
the country, and destabilized the entire region
---
first of all, it's not a war
second - it's a waste of US soldiers and our tax dollars

their countries - their problems

On Jul 5, 10:38 am, "M. Johnson" <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Bill Kristol Must Resign!Immediately, if not sooner…byJustin Raimondo, July 05, 2010
> Bill Kristol isdemandingthe head of GOP national chairmanMichael Steele, who, in amoment of honesty, questioned the wisdom of invading and occupying Afghanistan. Yet Kristol has never been elected to anything: indeed, thepretentiouslittlegremlinoncethreatened to quit the GOP, back in the 1990s, whenthe Republicansin Congressvoted to deny fundingto Bill Clinton'sBalkan adventure. Kristol, who had thrilled at the opportunity to "crush Serb skulls," as he put it, stamped his foot and declared his imminent defection. Too bad he never followed through on his promise. Now he's assuming the mantle of Republican kingmaker: based on hisatrociousrecordas the GOP'sgrand strategist, it's Kristol, not Steele, who should resign.
> Having dragged the GOP down to utter defeat with eight years of "big government conservatism," i.e.perpetual warandballooning deficits, and handed the country over to thetender merciesof theObama cult, it seemsKristoland his fellow neocons aredeterminedto drag the party all the way down to the status of an irrelevant sect, i.e.the neoconservativeswrit a bit larger. TheIraq war, of which Kristol was aleadingchampion, hasbankrupted the country, anddestabilizedtheentire region, just as Republican critics of the war such as theCommittee for the Republic, andtop Pentagon leaders, feared it would.
> It is nonsense to pretend that there was no resistance to the neocons'fanatic warmongeringon the right. As the neoconservatives werelying us into warwithtall talesof Iraqi WMDs, a group ofauthentic conservatives, includingC. Boyden Grey, a former official in the first Bush administration,William Nitze, son of Ronald Reagan's top arms negotiator Paul Nitze, andJohn B. Henry II, a Washington businessman and direct descendant ofPatrick Henry, issued a manifesto descrying the rise of an American empire. To cross that Rubicon, they warned, would mean the end of our old republic. It would bankrupt us, and lead us down the path to a form of collectivism impelled by militarism: "America has begun to stray far from its founding tradition of leading the world by example rather than by force."
> These are, essentially, the argumentsthe Old Rightmade and has continued to make down through the years, fromJohn T. FlynnandGaret Garrettin the 1930s and 40s and continuing down to the present day in this column, and in such magazines asThe American Conservative,Chronicles, and in such political manifestations as theRon Paul movement, and theBuchananandPerotcampaigns. These are not liberals. (only Flynn was ever a Democrat, and FDRcured him– permanently – of that habit).
> Speaking of the Democrats, I was shocked –shocked, I tell you! – by thestatementput out by the Democratic National Committee's Brad Woodhouse:"John McCain and Lindsey Graham will be interested to hear that the Republican Party position is that we should walk away from the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban without finishing the job. They'd also be interested to hear that the Chairman of the Republican Party thinks we have no business in Afghanistan notwithstanding the fact that we are there because we were attacked by terrorists on 9-11. And, the American people will be interested to hear that the leader of the Republican Party thinks recent events related to the war are 'comical' and that he is betting against our troops and rooting for failure in Afghanistan. It's simply unconscionable that Michael Steele would undermine the morale of our troops when what they need is our support and encouragement. Michael Steele would do well to remember that we are not in Afghanistan by our own choosing, that we were attacked and that his words have consequences."
> This was immediately followed by a chorus of horrified reactions fromGlenn Greenwaldandotherdefendersof theoldliberal agenda, whorememberedthe same sort of rhetoric being employed against war critics – i.e. themselves – in the run-up to the Iraq invasion. After all, they want to know, what aboutall those Democratswho had just voted to essentially withdraw from Afghanistan – "without finishing the job" – during the recent congressional debate over military appropriations for our endless Central Asian campaign? Are they, too, "rooting for failure" and "undermining the morale of our troops"?
> The liberals nearly fainted with horror: why,wedon't do that kind of thing! That's a page taken from Karl Rove's handbook,they exclaimed: but liberal Democrats are better than that! But are they really?
> Sure, Woodhouse is reading from page one ofthe Rovian script, but, come to think of it, it's also a page torn from <a...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.