Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Kristol vs Schmidt, Round 2

The war of words between conservative columnist Bill Kristol and Steve Schmidt, former campaign manager for John McCain's 2008 presidential bid, has ensnared another senior adviser, Mark Salter, who has come to Schmidt's defense after a recent appearance by Kristol on "Fox & Friends".

During that appearance, Kristol reiterated a battery of charges -- first made in an outstanding piece by Politico's Jonathan Martin -- including that Schmidt accused Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the vice presidential nominee, of suffering from postpartum depression, and that Schmidt had gone into the e-mail account of a McCain staffer to find out if the staffer was leaking information to the media.

"This was not a well-run campaign," said Kristol. "Schmidt did not behave very honorably."

Enter Salter who, upon watching Kristol's interview, e-mailed the Fix to rebut several of the charges in it.

Salter, who is widely seen as McCain's alter ego, insisted that Schmidt was the "primary defender" of Palin once she was named the vice presidential nominee and the "architect of the campaign's communication strategy" aimed at pushing back on attacks against her.

As for the e-mail kerfuffle, Salter acknowledged that a "keyword search" of the entire campaign staff's email was conducted after "damaging" and "unfair" leaks began to make their way into the media. (Salter rejected the idea that a single staffer was targeted.)

"The keyword search discovered an email from a staffer to a reporter that contained derogative and inaccurate information about another staffer, information which had made its way into the press," said Salter. "Appropriate disciplinary action was initiated against that staffer by senior management, which, again, included Steve Schmidt and others."

While this fight is largely academic -- after all, McCain lost and President Obama won -- it reveals the still-raw feelings left from a campaign that came up short.

It's hard to see either Kristol or Schmidt/Salter backing down in their respective charges so this story may play out for weeks to come as the two sides battle for control of the rough draft of the campaign's history.

By Chris Cillizza  |  July 3, 2009; 11:40 AM ET
Categories:  Republican Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Liberal Groups Defend Climate Change Vote
Next: The Case Against Richard Nixon

Comments

Chrisfox, I have read the Nightmare Years, the idea that reading books is irrevalent to be informed can only be made by an illerate moron. I don't watch or read commentarys from the right or left, I am to be busy reading history which is my passion. But its obvious thats where you get all of your information.

Posted by: vbhoomes | July 6, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

vbhoomes, it has nothing to do with how many books anyone has read, recently or otherwise.

To claim the Nazis as leftist is just plain idiotic, that's a whitewashing of the right for half-educated right-wingers who need everything nice an' simple. The idea that their ideology is capable of totalitarianism is more of a contradiction than they can handle, so there is this stupid revisionist idiocy that claims the Nazis were Communists.

You have to back away about seven miles and cross your eyes before the two totalitarianisms look anything alike.

To base this claim on nothing stronger than the inclusion of the word in the name suggests that you haven't done a lot of reading yourself. Unless one counts Hannity an' Coulter and whoever wrote "Liberal Fascism."

Go read a dictionary of political terms and stop writing like a cretin.

Then you might want to read Shirer's "The Nightmare Years."

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 5, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

"Hitler loved to play the populist card. "

He also had a mustache.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 4, 2009 6:24 PM | Report abuse

vbhoomes wrote: "Populism is the lowest common denominater in politics, and is played only by charlatans."

Huckabee. Palin. Gore (at the end). Tancredo. Edwards. Paul.

It's a nondenominational kind of thing.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | July 4, 2009 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Connect the dots........

Just as Mitt Romney oozes up from the slime with appearances on Meet The Press and various Fox News programs and as Carl Cameron offers a fluff piece on a July 2nd Special Report that would make the Obama water carriers on the networks blush, reminding one of a twelve year old girl gushing at a Jonas Brothers concert, Vanity Fair publishes a hit piece on Sarah Palin that cites sources inside the McCain campaign not mentioning that many like Nicole Wallace who were critical to the point of sabotage of Sarah Palin's Vice Presidential nomination were Romney operatives. Coincidence?

I think not. This is exactly how the Romney camp played ball unsuccessfully back in the primary campaigns.

It would be interesting to see if Sarah Palin's resignation leaves her free to Van Helsing like mount an assault on the Romney camp within the Republican party.

Posted by: ERASMUS_JR | July 4, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Nodebris, I wasn't making the argument that the Nazi Govt assumed control of businesses but that like a lot of you liberals, Hitler loved to play the populist card. So I know I am not dealing with an idiot who never reads books, please tell me whick books on Hitler and the Nazi's you have read. Also please list the books you have read in the last 8 weeks. If you are not well read, this will be the last post you ever get from me.

Posted by: vbhoomes | July 4, 2009 7:08 AM | Report abuse

But really, does anyone really care who wins the argument about whether K or S is dumber?

Isn't that like the study investigating whether Kansas is really flatter than a pancake? They're both pretty darn flat, regardless, right?

Posted by: nodebris | July 4, 2009 3:18 AM | Report abuse

vbhoomes is one of those historically illiterate idiots who think that because the word "socialist" appears in the Nazi's name, they are left-wing? Incredible. I thought you'd have to be too dumb to form a sentence to think that.

Posted by: nodebris | July 4, 2009 2:47 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who believes anything Kristol says is an idiot immune to fact and oblivious to history. That includes the WaPo management that hired him after the NYT fired him. Effing idiots.

Posted by: nodebris | July 4, 2009 2:45 AM | Report abuse

Nazi anti-bolshevism was a prime mover after nationalism and anti-semitism, so it is difficult to hear Hitlerism and Stalinism as a combined idea. What they shared in common was absolute totalitarianism.

==

Stalin had a cult of personality about him, and such a cult is often part of a Fascist political system. But to call Stalin a Fascist is absurd.

The whitewashers of the right who want to identify all totalitarianism as leftist have some 'splaining to do, foremost being why the Nazis rounded up the Socialists first. Doesn't make a lot of sense to round up and murder one's "allies."

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 4, 2009 12:17 AM | Report abuse

Kristol, Perle, Wolfowitz, Schuenemann and the rest of the neo-cons...they all share an agenda which is not in the best interest of the United States of America. I'm glad they're out!

Posted by: joy2 | July 3, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

austin mark,

Just echoing support for your posting. One of the tragedies of US education is that, despite fighting in a war against fascism, very few Americans know what fascism was.

Posted by: Kili | July 3, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for your post Mark, its nice to hear from someone who actually reads history. Like most people, I grew up reading William Shirers books on Hitler and Nazi Germany, I'm just about through reading Ian Kershaws' biography on Hitler, it makes a good compliment to Shirers work and gave me more fuller view of Hitler. Yes you are right he totally he thought the jews and soviet bolshevism were one and the same, and was always planning to make war on them. When the UK proved a tougher nut to crack, he thought he could bring the UK to peace terms by taking the Soviet Union out. As usual, he understimated his adversaries. He thought they wouldn't put up much of a fight. And there's no mistaking Hitler always played the populist card to the German people. As I have said before in previous post, Populism is the lowest common denominater in politics, and is played only by charlatans.

Posted by: vbhoomes | July 3, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

mnteng:

Thanks for the insight! Context is everything.

Posted by: sverigegrabb | July 3, 2009 4:39 PM | Report abuse

vbhoomes said:
". . . just for Historical perspective, Hitlers party was the National SOCIALIST Party."

Just for historical perspective, the nation just north of South Korea is officially named the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea".

I wouldn't consider North Korea much of a democracy, nor a republic. Would you?

Just for historical perspective, the nation that formerly completely surrounded the city of Berlin was officially named the "German Democratic Republic".

I wouldn't consider East Germany was much of a democracy, nor a republic. Would you?

Idiot - it's called PROPAGANDA.

Posted by: critter69 | July 3, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes, did you ever see the Kinsley satiric column on WaPo influence-grease I posted for you earlier?

Modern fascism as practiced by Mussolini was a coherent form and easier to study than "national socialism".

It was, at its simplest, a modernization of late feudalism, in which "power centers" like regions, cities, the steel industry, the mining industry, the labor unions, etc. were viewed as corporate groups [not to be confused with US corporations but more analogous to trusts or monopolies] that would reach consensus under the heavy hand of il duce, but which would be given just enough rope to feel like they had a stake at the table.

Fascism so defined was anti-capitalist and anti-socialist and anti-communist. It was its own thing. It was by definition authoritarian and anti-democratic, but did not have to be totalitarian. Thus it was a model for Franco and Peron.

Hitler admired it, but fascism had no racist or nationalist unifying principle. It was more a balancing act of power groups heavily guided from the top. So the Nazis are more difficult to define. Nazi anti-bolshevism was a prime mover after nationalism and anti-semitism, so it is difficult to hear Hitlerism and Stalinism as a combined idea. What they shared in common was absolute totalitarianism.

When I hear liberals confuse fascist "corporatism" with the American system for attracting investment called the corporation I find that similarly grating.

All of these notions have defining principles and they are clearly different from each other. I am probably incapable of explaining each to the satisfaction of true believers, but I ask them to read more, and in more depth, in good faith, so we can try to use terms that have a common meaning.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | July 3, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Chrisfox just for Historical perspective, Hitlers party was the National SOCIALIST Party.

==

Yeah, the word is in the party name. And that word is the only evidence you'll ever find that the Nazis had anything to do with Socialism. Of all the attempts you righties make to rewrite history to whitewash your failed ideology, this one is the most ridiculous.

Ever hear of the Lincoln Brigade? Communist front organization in the 50s?

They didn't have anything to do with Lincoln, either.

Fascism is totalitarianism of the right. Got that? Totalitarianism, right wing? Now go put a compress on your head if it just exploded.

Fascism and Communism are opposites. They have totalitarianism in common. Little else.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 3, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

chrisfox8 is obviously from the planet Earth. Here on Earth fascism and communism are not the same. They do have a few things in common but that does not make them the same. Please read some books regarding Karl Marx and Hitler. Please get real ThisIsReality.

Posted by: keith2366 | July 3, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Mark Hemingway and Bill Kristol both attempt unsuccessfully to dismiss strong suspicions that Governor Palin suffers from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Specifics about the McCain-Palin campaign must see the light if Republicans and the country are to avoid the danger and inevitable crises were an NPD to achieve high office. See: John Edwards, Bill Clinton.

Palin’s documented behavior fits the description of an NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) to a tee. Palin is very probably NPD, and possibly ASPD as well. You need a shrink for an official diagnosis, but you don’t need a shrink to compare Palin to the DSM-IV’s NPD traits to make your own conclusion. A “pervasive pattern” of behavior for 5 of 9 traits is required for an NPD diagnosis — I count 8 out of 9.

Humorously, Hemingway attempts to disprove Palin’s screaming NPD with a Google search for +Palin +”Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” on HuffPo (http://bit.ly/AxUr2, http://bit.ly/Rbg0N), rather than the much more specific and direct +Palin +npd or +Palin +narcissist, which would reveal many, many people who have reached the same conclusion: Palin suffers from NPD. Here’s just one HuffPo example Hemingway misses with his (intentionally?) poorly framed search: “Diagnosing Sarah Palin” (http://bit.ly/dlk3J)

“Two therapists responded to my request to diagnose Sarah Palin, independently identifying her condition as Narcissistic Personality Disorder”

Based on his poorly targeted search, Hemingway concludes “a meme that gained currency among those on the far left who actively despise Palin”. More likely, nearly everyone with even a little knowledge about NPD comes to the same conclusion: Sarah Palin suffers from NPD.

Please, shine a lot more light into the campaign.

Posted by: member5 | July 3, 2009 4:13 PM | Report abuse

i just love watching republicans fight like a bunch of little kids tussling over the tattered remains of their dreams of world domination.

Posted by: wa_idaho_lonewolf | July 3, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

chrisfox8 said that "Anyway, fascists and Communists are at opposite ends of the political spectrum."

I'm not sure what planet chrisfox8 is from but, on the planet earth, fascism and communism are so close as to be nearly indistinguishable from each other. Of course, most Democrats don't even know that Bernie Madoff is one of their own, so what can you expect of them?

Posted by: ThisIsReality | July 3, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone watching her resignation video? She is breathless and just plain weird - rattling on about all kinds of unrelated crap.

If you don't serve out first term as governor you have no political future. Next stop: A talk show on Fox.

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 3, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Chrisfox just for Historical perspective, Hitlers party was the National SOCIALIST Party. It combined nationalism with the populist card. Hitler wanted to exterminate the so called aristocrat element within Germany after the War. Combine their hate for jews and the american left hate for jews, you can see you have far more in common with the NAZI's than you thought.

Posted by: vbhoomes | July 3, 2009 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Please list three instances where Bill Kristol has been right. About anything. No historical time limit--go back as far as you wish. I have no idea why this clueless clown continues to get newspaper space. But of course, he is now in the Washington Post, So maybe this is the last rung on his ladder.

Posted by: lowercaselarry | July 3, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

And now Sara Palin announces she's not going to seek reelection in Alaska. I wonder what she IS going to do.

This just gets better and better. For democrats.

DAStubbs,
Minneapolis

Posted by: dastubbs | July 3, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

It's great to see that you freaks eat your own!

Posted by: Woodstocknative | July 3, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Chill out jpenergy...nobody is saying you can't worship Sarah..enjoy dude.

Just don't expect the rest of us to drink your Kool Aid. :)

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 3, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

WOW!..."It's great that all the facist Communist America--haters and Obama worshippers on blogs like this are still on their Sarah Palin-bash, because it proves how great of a pick for VP she was. While all these facists and Communists cloak themselves in the Democrat mantel (because they're ashamed to call themselves what they really are), their hatred for Sarah Palin knows no bounds and is understandable because she is a true patriotic American, while they only give lip--service to America."
This guy makes a great case for Planned Parenthood.....It could happen to you!
TURN OFF the Radio or at least put on music the stuff your listing to can/did rot your brain

Posted by: jpenergy | July 3, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Correction to my previous post, I meant Bill Kristol in my references to him.

Posted by: kind671 | July 3, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

LOL "Kristol-nacht" is brilliant.

Bravo, Chris.

And you're right, Chris. The GOP would rather die than adapt. Thus, they will.

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 3, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

What I think is important for people to realize from this regarding the Sarah Palin candidacy is that the right-wing operatives like Bill Cristol wanted her is PRECISELY because she is stupid and that they could manipulate her into doing whatever these operatives wanted without pusback because she isn't smart enough to understand the ramifications of what they want to do. In other words, Sarah Palin would be President in name and get all the benefits of the office, but people like Grover Norquist, Bill Cristol, and Dick Cheney would have all the power.

Posted by: kind671 | July 3, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Schmidt-Kristol is a microcosm of the big debate going on in the GOP and it looks to me like the Kristol-nacht side is winning. They're the ones who want to go even further to the right, even more intolerant, keep alive the culture war, the divisiveness.

It's pretty clear that Palin was chosen as a ploy to grab disgruntled Hillary supporters to McCain, as though women are shallow enough to vote for one of their own with no regard to the quality of the person they're voting for, and this decision will take its place alongside the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor as a way to keep America out of the war. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Palin not only failed to bring in the vagina vote (cynicism deliberate), she alienated a lot of people who might have voted for McCain.

Schmidt is saying that the GOP needs to broaden its appeal, lay off the social conservative crap, the small-town real-Americans crap, while Kristol just wants to go on with more of the same losing strategy. Stoke up the teabaggers, oppose Obama on every front, do everything possible to bring calamity to the nation so the GOP can use it to advantage.

Might not quite fit the definition of "treason" but it sure stinks.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 3, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

HONOR?..something of which Kristol knows not...false pretext for war....callous disregard for war victims....convenient lies to prove any political point...perhaps only Bernie Madoff has led a more delusional existence....

Posted by: josephfranklyn | July 3, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Armpeg said:

"It's great that all the facist Communist America--haters and Obama worshippers on blogs like this are still on their Sarah Palin-bash, because it proves how great of a pick for VP she was. While all these facists and Communists cloak themselves in the Democrat mantel (because they're ashamed to call themselves what they really are)...."

I really think you do not know what "fascist" and "communist" mean.

I suggest you look up dificult words like these in a dictionary before you use them and embarrass yourself again.

Posted by: megman | July 3, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Asked about the accusation, Schmidt fired back in an e-mail: “I'm sure John McCain would be president today if only Bill Kristol had been in charge of the campaign.”

“After all, his management of [former Vice President] Dan Quayle’s public image as his chief of staff is still something that takes your breath away,”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24392.html#ixzz0KDkHu3Vw&D

You've got to love these GOP cat fights and hissy fits. They give "limp-wristed" a new definition.

Posted by: WhatHeSaid | July 3, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

And oh, by the way it's "fascist." I think a "facist" would be someone who spends a lot of time on that social networking site.

Anyway, fascists and Communists are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. You are a strikingly ignorant human being.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 3, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Merry1 - I am old enough to recall that the press in general, and in turn: Hated HST, loved [but like they loved grandpa] DDE, worshiped JFK, disliked LBJ, hated RMN, never gave GF a break, never gave JC a break [these two were aftermath of Watergate cynicism victims in my view], loved RWR, were close to neutral on GHB, did not trust WJC, gave GWB a free pass until late in the game and are giving BHO a free pass, so far.

I have always thought it had more to do with personalities, and the times, than with politics.
No prez was more approachable than GF but post-Watergate he could not catch a break. None was more charming than RWR, and even criticism of him was disarmed by him. But enough time had passed since Wgate that RWR never caught any dirt for his HUD scandal, or even his record deficits. BigRed [Dowd] won her Pulitzer for her WJC+Monica columns. The Cold War was over so catching out WJC in petty lies was big news, I guess.

GWB had a good personal relationship with a lot of the corps, it seems.

Listening to old Helen go after BHO yesterday made me think he might not get 8 years of softballs.

But HST let the press know that he did not like them. So much for that relationship.

Anybody have a different take?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | July 3, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

It's great that all the facist Communist America--haters and Obama worshippers on blogs like this are still on their Sarah Palin-bash, because it proves how great of a pick for VP she was.

==

That's some pretty sharp reasoning there, champ.

Everyone says she's not fit for the job, that "proves" she is.

Wow.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 3, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

sue1047: If Palin isn't stupid then we have no use for the word. Have you ever heard her speak? Or read a transcript? I have three macaws in the next room who string together words they know, and they make more sense than she does.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 3, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

It's great that all the facist Communist America--haters and Obama worshippers on blogs like this are still on their Sarah Palin-bash, because it proves how great of a pick for VP she was. While all these facists and Communists cloak themselves in the Democrat mantel (because they're ashamed to call themselves what they really are), their hatred for Sarah Palin knows no bounds and is understandable because she is a true patriotic American, while they only give lip--service to America.

Posted by: armpeg | July 3, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

PERFECT!

The hypocrite fundamentalist-led republican party is finished. The ideas of the failed neocons within rejected by all but 20% of the nation.

Posted by: onestring | July 3, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

The country is grateful that Kristol is pulling a Cheney and shooting his friends and allies rather than fomenting another multi-trillion-dollar vanity war.

Posted by: hairguy01 | July 3, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Mark-the Kinsley satire was perfect! Nailed it in one. When did that start, the love affair of the press with the administration? it was rampant with BushII, but before that? It just crept into our lives. No one asks hard questions any more.

Posted by: Merry1 | July 3, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Kristol the pistol...who never fired a gun...NeoCon wuss - opinions and nothing else...put him in the field and he wets his pants...

Posted by: teammugs | July 3, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

I love it when the zionist and neocons fight among themselves... LOL!!!

Posted by: demtse | July 3, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

CC: I have received this warning when returning to this link:

Warning: Visiting this site may harm your computer!
The website at voices.washingtonpost.com contains elements from the site cdn1.eyewonder.com, which appears to host malware – software that can hurt your computer or otherwise operate without your consent. Just visiting a site that contains malware can infect your computer.
For detailed information about the problems with these elements, visit the Google Safe Browsing diagnostic page for cdn1.eyewonder.com.
Learn more about how to protect yourself from harmful software online.
I understand that visiting this site may harm my computer.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | July 3, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Amazing -- it's like two blind half-wits trying to shoot each other, but shooting all the other repub halfwits instead!

But back in the *real* world, Kristol could care less about the Bimbo -- he's merely stirring up the dust to achieve the cynical, terrifically shallow neo-con agenda by forcing some sort of party republican consensus in the near-term.

As soon Kristol and his evil brethren at the AEI realized that their BIG PUSH to decimate Iraq backfired so badly -- that all they've done is hand Iran one of the world's largest oil fields at the expense of thousands of dead and crippled US service men and women -- they realized that the only way they can now achieve their profoundly stupid, immoral agenda is to lead the USA toward war with Iran.

I don't doubt their veracity and capability in this regard -- the neo-cons will use every dirty trick they can muster, along with the guidance of the powerful Israeli lobby, to see us involved in their war.

Sadly, I wouldn't take any bets on us not being involved in a war with Iran in the very near future. I pray it will never happen, as it would be the most insanely stupid thing we could ever do as a country, but they successfully used their money, their lies, their propaganda, and their subterfuge to get us into Iraq, and the only way to 'cover' that mistake is war with the Persians.

.

Posted by: Frank57 | July 3, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

This is typical of the attack dog mentality which was the standard fare of the neo con when they find themselves losing ground due to event beyond their control.
The only reason Palin lost was the fact that she was completely unprepared for the role after McCain selected her on the ground of winning the female voters who supported Hillary Clinton. Second thing was the fact that she went on the attack using the typical GOP tactics and it does not help that Tina Fey did a great parody of her that almost fooled many people including me. This upset the conservatives very much. Third his selection contradicted his message branding of being experienced (advertising mistake number one)
As for Bill Kristol, his verbige of attacking Schmidt illustrate the deep anger that the neo-conservative have when they lost power at both level of the government. The only reason he wanted Palin was the fact that she has the credentials that he was looking for to represent the party to the voters in the general election. It doesn't help when the economy tanked rapidly which forced the party to argue against the Democratic majority which failed miserbly as seen other post-elections.
I presumed that there will be several rounds of broadside from all around including FOX News (circular firing squad style) which will make people tired of the shennanigans and focus on something important.

Posted by: beeker25 | July 3, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Hi bhoomes - WaPo has run a tongue-barely-in-cheek column by Kingsley about this today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/02/AR2009070202686.html

I have thought Salter to be among the good guys for many years and although have never met any of these gentlemen I am inclined to believe him. His presentation of the events sounds credible, does it not?

I am always reminded of the admonition of the great cross-examiner Irving Younger - whose book on x-exam should still be the bible it was in 1967 - that the most sincere person you meet is probably a big liar. Still, from this distance, I take Salter-Schmidt, FWIW.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | July 3, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

sverigegrabb:

Bill Kristol is a friend of Randy Schuenemann, the unnamed staffer against whom disciplinary action was taken after leaking internal discussions about the campaign. I think Kristol is still trying to defend Schuenemann's honor against detractors and has developed a dislike for Schmidt and the senior McC people. Who said chivalry is dead?

Posted by: mnteng | July 3, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Schmidt is an essentially honorable guy, despite his politics which I generally disagree with. Kristol on the other hand is a rancid ideologue, a truly vile human being, which makes it all the more depressing that Fred Hiatt, another rancid ideologue, gives him real estate in the WaPo to spew his nonsense. Cilizza was quite useful during the campaign, but watching his embarrassing performance with that sniveling runt Dana Milbank in whatever that two-guys-in-smoking-jackets routine was, it's now clear that he's a swooning gossip merchant, he should go work at TMZ. As for the WaPo, it's done. In two years it will be toast, if not sooner, just like the NYT. This current generation of Grahams and Schulzbergers are the genetic scrapings from the bottom of the barrel.

Posted by: H1000 | July 3, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

my conclusion when madam palin first burst on to the national scene is unchanged: she's far better suited for a bowling alley than the oval office. that she is still taken seriously as a g.o.p. presidential candidate is indicative of how far removed the republican party is from being a serious participant in the national discourse. identifying one's self as a republican is starting to get the same reaction as identifying as a baptist and rightfully so.

Posted by: jimfilyaw | July 3, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Schmidt may be a Republican, and a lobbyist in the pay of foreign governments (ie Georgia) but he’s a far better man than the odious, pathologically dishonest Kristol.

Posted by: kevrobb | July 3, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

What needs to be brought out every time Bill Kristol fires off another round is that he was an early, ardent force behind Palin's nomination for Vice President. He and other conservative Republicans swooned over Sarah Palin after she served them lunch one summer day 2008. The New Yorker Magazine published a marvelous article about how Sarah Palin wowed them. Bill Kristol had a lot invested in Palin's appearance on the ticket and he believes she received short shrift from Steve Schmidt and others when in fact it was clear to everyone else that Palin was unprepared for her role. She is not a stupid person but she lacks everything we need in a leader starting with basic knowledge of how the wide world works and that it's not all about her. She's intellectually lazy; why think about things is her credo? So, Bill Kristol can drag this little cat fight on as long as he wants, the bottom line is he backed a bad candidate. She may have appeared pretty and smart and clever but that was only makeup. Underneath there was nothing. A blank. Empty space.

Posted by: sue1047 | July 3, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Firstly, thank you very much indeed for my Fix fix--I was casting about for how to get my dose of political news to counteract this endless, steady, sickening stream of Michael Jackson coverage, and you provided it. I was almost ready for another installment of the Gov. Sanford and his wayward willy saga--that will tell you the degree of my desperation!

I'm intrigued by why Kristol got involved in this. Of course he's a prime Neo-Con, but what's the connection with Palin (other than that she's a conservative Republican)? Former bad blood with Schmidt? A feeling that if Schmidt had handled the campaign better, McCain would be occupying the WH? (delusional, but that never stopped the Neo-Cons before.) Other?

Posted by: sverigegrabb | July 3, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Oh no you Don't CC, do not try to change the subject about the scandal uncovered at the WP yesterday. I want answers: Who in the White House was going to be at Katherines Salon later this month? Who were sent invitations? Why did the WP bury the story in the Style section? The WP needs to provide answers if they hope to regain any credibility as a news organization. This a major news scandal, people need to fired or jounalists at the Post who have any self-respect left, should resign in Protest. Does the WH vet your Postings everyday CC and were you planning to be at this salon?

Posted by: vbhoomes | July 3, 2009 12:30 PM | Report abuse

The circular firing squad continues.

Posted by: bpai_99 | July 3, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

eating their own.

Perfect!


Posted by: newagent99 | July 3, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I score Round 2 for Schmidt.

Posted by: JakeD | July 3, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company