Damn Dirty Hippies

Back in February of 2003, the bountiful internets put forth a grand convergence of pro-war punditry, with National Review's Katherine Jean-Lopez interviewing The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol and The New Republic's Lawrence Kaplan:

Lopez: Is there anyone you can think of (nation, pol, constituency) the Bush administration has not convinced that going into Iraq is necessary who should and can be convinced?

Kaplan & Kristol: Liberals. Not liberals at The Nation or The American Prospect, who can always be counted on to favor tyranny over anything that strengthens American power, however marginally.

A friend quipped that the strengthening of American power as a result of the invasion certainly does seem marginal.

Comments

Did they say this in unison?

Posted by goethean | July 10, 2007 5:28 PM

Here is a partial list of people who Kaplan and Kristol did not deem necessary to convince: General Anthony Zinni, Lt. General William Odom, Sen. Paul Sarbanes, Sen. Bob Graham, Major General John Batiste, Gov. Mario Cuomo, Senator Max Cleland, Govenor Howard Dean. These people were mocked, abused, lied about (and lied to). These are people who were not dirty fucking hippies like me, but actual, smart, serious responsible people who could easily forsee the disaster ahead. The really remarkable thing about the quote is that Iraq led the US into an administration that favored tyranny over a stronger America. Not only were they wrong about everything that they ever said on this subject, they had it exactly ass backwards. Dirty fucking hippies indeed.

Posted by Peter Driscoll | July 10, 2007 5:36 PM

I have a check signed and ready to post to the first person who tells Bill Kristol to fuck off or shut the fuck up on live television. I'll double it if it's accompanied by a left hook to his cakehole.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | July 10, 2007 5:37 PM

Peter Driscoll,
Don't forget now Senator Webb. Hardly someone who could be called a DFH. He even wrote a WaPo editorial before the war saying that it was gonna turn into a clusterfuck.

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | July 10, 2007 5:42 PM

Don't forget Al Gore. As usual, he was right and he was right early on way before it was cool.

Posted by Chris Marshall | July 10, 2007 5:54 PM

Joe Klien's conscience--I forgot him. I forgot a lot of people (probably due to things DFH's do.) I am sure the list could go on and on. I guess because Webb was not in office, he was not a threat, so they just ignored him. After he became a Senator, they called him rude because he couldn't bear to speak to Bush about the fact that Webb's son was in mortal danger over nothing. Kristol and Kaplan still do not view him as important.

Posted by Peter Driscoll | July 10, 2007 5:54 PM

Any time Kristol says anything, PLEASE respond (in unison, if a group): "You've been wrong about evertything, please STFU!"

Posted by Barry in MIA | July 10, 2007 5:56 PM

Did they say this in unison?

Probably.

Posted by tb | July 10, 2007 5:58 PM

Funny how the right always makes liberals out to be Saddam-hugging tyrant lovers. After all, what have we stood for all these decades but civil rights, equal opportunity for all, human rights, and a strong constitutional democracy? Goes right along with dictator-love, doesn't it?

In any decent society Kaplan and Kristol would be dressed in clown costumes and placed in stocks in front of a large pile of rotten fruit.....

Posted by Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst | July 10, 2007 6:13 PM

I bet Lopez wanted to make a yummy Kaplan Kristol sandwich.

Posted by Bill O'Reilly's Felafel | July 10, 2007 6:17 PM

re: Saddam-lovers, well, the right was busy hugging Saddam right up until August 2, 1990. In fact there's a rather famous photo of Rummy and Saddam shaking hands in Baghdad...

as always, you can count on reich-wingers to turn on a rhetorical dime when it suits them.

Posted by r€nato | July 10, 2007 6:19 PM

I bet Lopez wanted to make a yummy Kaplan Kristol sandwich.

Posted by Bill O'Reilly's Felafel | July 10, 2007 6:17 PM

Geez, thanks for putting that image in my mind.

Posted by Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst | July 10, 2007 6:25 PM

But it seems clear that the architects of contemporary American foreign policy have little idea of how to go about encouraging the liberalization of an autocracy. In [Iraq] they [did not] realize that the only likely result of an effort to replace an incumbent autocrat with one of his moderate critics or a "broad-based coalition" would be to sap the foundations of the existing regime without moving the nation any closer to democracy. Yet this outcome was entirely predictable. Authority in traditional autocracies is transmitted through personal relations: from the ruler to his close associates (relatives, household members, personal friends) and from them to people to whom the associates are related by personal ties resembling their own relation to the ruler. The fabric off authority unravels quickly when the power and status of the man at the top are undermined or eliminated. The longer the autocrat has held power, and the more pervasive his personal influence, the more dependent a nation's institutions will be on him. Without him, the organized life of the society will collapse, like an arch from which the keystone has been removed. . . The speed with which armies collapse, bureaucracies abdicate, and social structures dissolve once the autocrat is removed frequently surprises American policymakers and journalists accustomed to public institutions based on universalistic norms rather than particularistic relations.

Posted by Jeanne Kirkpatrick | July 10, 2007 6:33 PM

Not liberals at The Nation or The American Prospect, who can always be counted on to favor tyranny over anything that strengthens American power, however marginally.

What assholes.

Kristol and Kaplan are like the dudes who are always calling into sports talk radio to complain about how the announcers on the national TV broadcasts always root for their home teams to lose and are biased against them and hate their city. (Yes, that's clearly the most likely explanation, not you being a giant homer.)

Posted by JP | July 10, 2007 6:57 PM

Thanks Jeanne. By the way, how is hell?

Posted by Mark | July 10, 2007 6:58 PM

Quite warm, thank you! Tell Podhoretz his spot is all nice and ready for him in the Circle 8 Club.

Posted by Jeanne Kirkpatrick | July 10, 2007 7:13 PM

those f*cking liberals - always count on them to ruin everything.

Posted by mewiththedoves | July 10, 2007 7:16 PM

3,600 Marines and Army soldiers could not make it to this blog to offer their thoughts.

Oops.

They weren't Yale material anyway.

Posted by Douglas Watts | July 10, 2007 7:22 PM

The speed with which armies collapse, bureaucracies abdicate, and social structures dissolve once the autocrat is removed frequently surprises American policymakers

Of course, one might expect it to be a little less surprising when the Americans are the ones doing the collapsing and dissolving, as when Bremer disbanded the Iraqi army and threw all the members of the Ba'ath Party out of work.

Posted by KCinDC | July 10, 2007 7:45 PM

Don't miss the second half of the Kaplan/Kristol answer in which we find this gem

[If] ever there was a humanitarian undertaking, it is the liberation of Iraq from a tyrant who has jailed, tortured, gassed, shot, and otherwise murdered tens of thousands of his own citizens.

That should be tattooed on their foreheads.

Posted by dk | July 10, 2007 8:19 PM

Don't forget Al Gore. As usual, he was right and he was right early on way before it was cool.

Too bad he ran from Clinton and bowed to Bush in 2000, like the gutless moron he is.

Posted by Chimchim | July 10, 2007 8:45 PM

Ah, Chimchim. A Naderite in our midst. Go away, Naderite.

Posted by Bloix | July 10, 2007 8:55 PM

Ah, Chimchim. A Naderite in our midst. Go away, Naderite.

Posted by Bloix | July 10, 2007 8:55 PM

Ah, Chimchim. A Naderite in our midst. Go away, Naderite.

Incorrect. Why must you apologize for Gore's greatest failing -- the one which gave us 8 years of hell?

Posted by Chimchim | July 10, 2007 8:58 PM

Did they say this in unison?

Isn't that how they say everything?

Posted by Peter Principle | July 10, 2007 9:09 PM

Ah, Chimchim. A Naderite in our midst. Go away, Naderite.

You know if Hillary sews up the primary, I'll almost certainly be voting for someone else. I vote strategicaly, I'm almost certainly in a democratic locked state. The value of a protest vote is rather low, but whenever I see the Commissar's start hissing at suspected disloyalty (in this case by daring to question Gore?!) making such creatures unhappy is a reward all on it's own.

Posted by Ed Marshall | July 10, 2007 9:10 PM

Let's back off the "tattooing on the forehead" talk when referring to Jewish people, okay?

Posted by Cupples | July 10, 2007 9:21 PM

My game: I print out the comments. Cross out any and all that are basically name-calling and save those that offer a perspective, mine or otherwise, and some supporting statements. You would be surprsed at how few Comments are remain!

Posted by fred lapides | July 10, 2007 9:30 PM

All your Base are belong to us!

Posted by Kevin J-M | July 10, 2007 9:44 PM

My game: I print out the comments.

Do you realize how bleak your life is?

Posted by Chimchim | July 10, 2007 9:55 PM

Yes, fred, the comments here seem to be nearly as trashy, on average, as those at Kevin Drum's place. I guess this blog has reached a tipping point that Ezra's hasn't (yet).

Posted by KCinDC | July 10, 2007 10:24 PM

dont forget brent "birkenstock" scowcroft.

Posted by ron | July 10, 2007 10:52 PM

The fabric of authority unravels quickly when the power and status of the man at the top are undermined or eliminated. The longer the autocrat has held power, and the more pervasive his personal influence, the more dependent a nation's institutions will be on him.

So we can hope for a speedy collapse of the Cheney/Chimp authoritarian-corporatist-moron cult?

Posted by Mike G | July 11, 2007 1:48 AM

I especially like this quote from Kaplan/Kristol:

"Having defeated and then occupied Iraq, democratizing the country should not be too tall an order for the world's sole superpower."

Well that did went swimmingly, did'nt it?

Not that they got warned or anything.

Arrogant morons.

Posted by Patrick | July 11, 2007 3:01 AM

Was this before or after Bill Kristol's standup comedy routing over the silly "pop psychology" idea that the Sunni and Shia somehow can't get along, or the Shia want to establish some kind of fundamentalist Islamic state?

Posted by melior | July 11, 2007 5:40 AM

chimchim is right you know.

Posted by merlallen | July 11, 2007 6:33 AM

chimchim is right you know.
merlallen

He is right to some extent about Gore. Personally I think Gore's biggest screw-up was bowing to advisers and putting "Joementum" on the ticket. His biggest liability was the "News" media's hatred of him and love for dubya, the "common man" from Texas..My 2cts on big Al..

Posted by Dean | July 11, 2007 7:37 AM

bowed to Bush

What would you have had him do, burn the U.S. Supreme Court?

gutless

Maybe

moron he is

Definitely not.

Meanwhile, there's this:

You know if Hillary sews up the primary, I'll almost certainly be voting for someone else. I vote strategicaly, I'm almost certainly in a democratic locked state. The value of a protest vote is rather low, but whenever I see the Commissar's start hissing at suspected disloyalty (in this case by daring to question Gore?!) making such creatures unhappy is a reward all on it's own.

So you'll vote for someone other than the Democratic nominee in the general election because some dude named Bloix smacked down some dude named Chimchim on a fucking comment thread. Good God, Democrats are such babies sometimes. A few hundred of such babies in Florida gave us the first four years of George Bush. I don't prefer Hillary either but you can be damn sure I'll vote for her if it comes to it. Ed Marshall, get over yourself.

Posted by Ryan | July 11, 2007 7:52 AM

I am an Obama fan. But if Hillary or Edwards wins the primary I will vote for our side. I think the greatest problem we have from the purists on our side. They would rather lose than vote for Hillary. So look for a Republican Pres. Those guys will hold their noses and vote.

Posted by Alan | July 11, 2007 8:35 AM

Dear Ed Marshall and Chimchen:

I hope in your purity that you enjoy the reign of President Giulani or President Thompson after the 2008 election. Especially since Norm Podhoretz and Bill Kristol will be in their kitchen cabinets.

There were lots of mistakes made in 2000 by lots of people (including moi) and the only one I can control is me. So the one mistake I will not make again is that I will never, ever, underestimate the damage a Republican Administration control by "movement Conservatives and Christianists" can do to the United States and world. Not just Iraq, but southside of Chicago through Darfur and Afghanistan and back to Columbia, millions are people are now dead who would still be alive if a 1,000 votes in Flordia (that were counted beyond dispute)had gone the other way. The Democrats could nominate a howler monkey and the monkey would get my vote.

Posted by Rick | July 11, 2007 12:47 PM

Especially since Norm Podhoretz and Bill Kristol will be in their kitchen cabinets.

Versus say Andrew Shapiro in a Clinton presidency? What's the difference? Except that I'd have to sit around for four years while they blew up the Mid East and know that I voted for it.

Posted by Ed Marshall | July 11, 2007 1:09 PM

dimwits like Ed Marshall, who pretend that they are better and purer then the rest of us sell outs should just simply be ignored. The 2004 election showed that the vast majority of Nader 2000 voters realized that they had made a horrible mistake and his support dropped to next to nil.... It seems the remaining Naderite fools (like Ed Marshall) love to hang around the blogosphere threatening to not vote for the Dems, if we dont do as they wish....who cares? The reason they are so bullyish is because they truly know that they have no influence whatsoever (maybe at the dailykooks, but not in the real world)...and so they threaten to repeat their great moment of 2000...when in their pique and high idiocy, they both showed the world and screwed the world at the same time.

Posted by Tim L | July 11, 2007 1:50 PM

Remember that part where I said I live in a Blue lock state? I *can't* "threaten" anyone no matter who I vote for. I don't know why you are freaking out, either. Other than a really, creepy, totalitarian tic about not pledging undying loyalty to Generic Democrat.

Posted by Ed Marshall | July 11, 2007 2:10 PM

you are a fafe and a fraud and a fool and i couldnt care any less who you vote for.

Posted by tim l | July 11, 2007 2:49 PM

Creepy.

Posted by Ed Marshall | July 11, 2007 3:00 PM

I would rather another incompetent, sell-out, Zionist-Republican administration to 8 years of having to hear liberals sing militarist Zionist-Democrat Clinton's praises while we bomb Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, send weapons to Israel, send weapons to Colombia, intervene in the politics of other sovereign nations, pressure countries to follow IMF recommendations, and basically continue treating the rest of the world as if we own it.

The Dick Cheney administration may have been disastrous in the sense of U.S. domestic policy issues, but it was also disastrous to U.S. Imperialism, and that (to those of us concerned with peace and justice and international law) is a good thing.

Bring on the next Zionist-Republicans I say. Let's run this fucker into the ground for real. When the dollar eventually collapses I'm pretty sure we won't be sending aircraft carrier fleets into the Persian Gulf and giving billions to scum of the earth like Fatah, the Venezuelan opposition, Iranian resistance groups, I could go on...

Posted by The dirty fucking hippie caucus | July 11, 2007 3:22 PM

Truth is, I'll be writing in Elliot Abrams' name for President.

I really think Elliot has the right experience and priorities for the job (of pretending to do what's in the US's best interests while following the most sociopathic fantasies of ultra-right-wing Israelis).

With Elliot in power, we won't need cabinet personnel to hide our shady dealings with terrorists or falsify intelligence. Elliot can do it all himself. When the world community complains about the situation of the Palestinians, Elliot will have the courage to say, "What Palestinians?" "You mean those filthy sub-human goyim squatters?"

And finally Americans will understand why most of the world hates their government with a passion.

Posted by The dirty fucking hippie caucus | July 11, 2007 3:36 PM

Alas, why don't any presidential candidates right or left have the courage to talk about the REAL issue confronting America right now? That is: the US' woefully inadequate military budget. The Pentagon gets only a little more than half the entire discretionary budget. That is not enough in this world where Osama bin Laden just might be hiding in your shampoo and the neighborhood 7-11 might be an al Qaeda sleeper cell...

Do we really need federal funding for Medicare or education? Student loans? What good are interstate highways if Osama strings together 150 consecutive 9/11's (which we know he has the capacity to do, if we ever leave Iraq)? Wouldn't our country be better served giving all of its budget to the Pentagon?

Posted by The dirty fucking hippie caucus | July 11, 2007 3:46 PM

I, an actual, self-identified, certified, dirty fucking hippie, resent not being caucused by the DFHC. Having said that, I couldn't agree more. If we start to educate ourselves, we might see what's actually going on and be unhappy. Its better to blame it on Bush.

Posted by Peter Driscoll | July 11, 2007 4:16 PM

Exit poll data is very damning with respect to Gore's failure in 2000. Take a look at how many Democrats went for Bush.

Posted by Chimchim | July 11, 2007 4:19 PM

"The speed with which armies collapse, bureaucracies abdicate, and social structures dissolve once the autocrat is removed frequently surprises American policymakers and journalists accustomed to public institutions based on universalistic norms rather than particularistic relations."
Posted by Jeanne Kirkpatrick | July 10, 2007 6:33 PM
What you describe as, "collapse... abdicate... dissolve" was, in the real world that we have to live in, a frantically active policy of the Coalition Provisional Authority, led by "the fucking stupidest guy[s] on the face of the earth," as they now call each other, to replace every Iraqi official or bureaucrat of any sort with twenty somethings who spoke no arabic language, and who were stupid enough, not only to vote for Bush, but to continue supporting him.
Ties to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq Early U.S. Missteps in the Green Zone By Rajiv Chandrasekaran Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 17, 2006; A01 Adapted from "Imperial Life in the Emerald City," by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, copyright Knopf 2006

Posted by Janus Daniels | July 13, 2007 4:42 PM