Skip to comments.Kristol: ‘Mood is Bleak’ at White House (uh-huh)
Posted on 10/18/2005 11:35:27 AM PDT by pissant
click here to read article
Then you must have missed his support for the War on Terror.
I still like Mort. One of the oh so few dems I do like.
Thank you for your post, you just made my afternoon.
LOL. Hold yer fire then. We want you around these parts still...
Well as a conservative and an advocate of smaller government, I wouldn't want anyone to try to live up to Irving Kristol's reputation. I remember what he did in 2000 but I also remember 2-3 years ago his rag of a magazine taken as absolute truth when it advocated the invasion of Iraq, which it did endlessly
Actually, unlike you neo-coms, we call out other conservatives when they're acting like they want a nice write-up in the Style Section.
Neo-coms never question their leaders, as evidenced by none of them calling out Farrakhan for his latest rantings about levees being blown up.
LOL. Call Blocking is in order!
?!?! Neo-com, please define. I never supported Kristol nor any of other faux conservatives
Yes, but its human nature to jump out of the foxhole and on the "popular" bandwagon when your being attacked.
We just whine about it later, and blame someone else.
Neo-Com not Neo-Con
Priceless.....though I do not condone it.
William Kristol was one of the original Neocons, and his Mother Getrude Himmelfarb was also a Neocon. They had stellar careers and as far as I know not in backstabbing. The Weekly Standard and Kristol were big proponents of The War on terrorism as most on freerepublic,and we realize Rome was not built in a day. kristol thinks we and the white House give a crap what he thinks. He is so small both physically and mentally that he should drive a Scion as his limousine.
Domestically, he has criticized President Bush most particularly on immigration and spending as have many conservatives.
I began reading Bill Kristol (who has one of the nation's BEST conservative mind's) long before GW ever came upon the National scene, and he doesn't base his opinions on who is in office, not now, no ever. Don't look for him to change. And that is a GOOD thing.
Yep. And Rove or Libby (1) would not have testified anew and (2) would have stepped down. Thus, the question is really: Who has not testified? Wilson, Plame, Pinkus come to mind...
Oh Sh*t. That's good!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.