Thomas Friedman is to Barack Obama as Bill Kristol is to...Rick Santorum?
I should think regular readers will follow, but just in case:
Friedman has been looking all year for a new presidential candidate who will pursue a grand bargain on the deficit, support mainstream internationalism and trade policies, and attack climate change with GDP-growing energy policy, somehow missing that practically everything he wants is supported by the guy in the White House.
Kristol has been calling nonstop for a new presidential candidate who he can trust to carry out neocon foreign policy but who is more reliable than, say, Mitt Romney. Definitely not Romney. Santorum is basically an orthodox neocon, probably the most reliable in the field.
Has Kristol just not believed Santorum had a chance? Does he have something against him? Is there some sort of pundit vision that makes you miss the obvious?
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Maybe he doesn't want to support a politician who isn't the first result of a Google search on his name ;)
ReplyDelete>Santorum is basically an orthodox neocon
ReplyDeleteYou're joking, right?
SANTORUM COMPARED ISRAEL, AMERICA'S MOST IMPORTANT ALLY, TO A BRUTAL REGIME.
Don't believe me? Here are his exact words:
"I believe we must fight for a strong Lebanon, a strong Israel, and a strong Iraq."
How DARE you suggest an ehrlicher Yid like Kristol support such a Holocaust denier.
Kylopod: Of course by a "strong Lebanon" and a "strong Iraq", Santorum meant a Lebanon and an Iraq that would stand up to Iran and in that way further Israel's interests (and America's, of course; to neocons, the two are synonymous). Perfectly in keeping with neocon thinking.
ReplyDelete(Of course maybe you yourself were joking--the over-the-top reference to Santorum as a "Holocaust denier" suggests as much--and I missed your irony, which notoriously is a hard thing to convey on the Net. Maybe there should be a special font to indicate it)
Yeah, I was joking.
ReplyDelete