If Kristof’s wishes were horses

January 1, 2007

If you missed the NYT’s Nick Kristof’s year-end piece yesterday, it was a sight to behold.

Kristof noted that the president’s legacy “doesn’t look good right now,” and imagined a future obituary that described Bush leaving office “vilified and disgraced.” Kristof proceeded to offer 10 suggestions for the president to pursue in 2007 that might help him “rescue” his legacy. It’s quite a list.

* Negotiate with Iran and Syria, and “renounce permanent military bases in Iraq.”

* Start working on an Israeli-Palestinian peace plan.

* Confront the genocide in Darfur.

* Dump Dick Cheney and get a new VP.

* Expand the government’s efforts to combat AIDS.

* Address climate change.

* Give up on the idea of attacking Iran.

* Give up on privatization and embrace a Clinton-like approach to Social Security reform.

* Address our disgraceful inequities in health care and pursue Carter’s idea of comprehensive coverage for children up to age 5.

* “Steal [policy ideas] from your critics and rivals.”

It’s enough to make me wonder if Kristof has been watching the same president as the rest of us the last six years.

It’s not that I’m opposed to Kristof’s suggestions; but rather it’s rather silly to offer the president advice that he would almost certainly find amusing. Most of these prescriptions might even work, but they are entirely antithetical to everything the Bush White House has done and believed.

As Matt Yglesias put it:

I agree with Nick Kristof — George W. Bush would be a pretty good president if he reversed, um, all of his ideas about public policy and started governing like a liberal Democrat.

I suspect this isn’t going to happen. Call it a hunch.

Yeah, right, this’ll REALLY happen. Has Kristof been smoking crack?

  • The fact that any form of political moderation is antithetical to the Bush administration makes it easier for more people to see the abject and broad failures of Bush and the neo-conservatives. In two years time, Bush and his “conservative” sycophants will bare the blame for the “Great Diminution” of the modern conservative movement. Too much spending and too war is hardly conservative.

  • So what if Kristof wants to throw a list like that out for public consumption? Although—it would have more “oompf” to it, had he added something like “T-minus 107 weeks, and counting, Georgie….”

    It’s going to be so-oooooo funny, watching Bush the Baboon scramble about like a…well, like a baboon—trying to reincarnate a legacy that’s beyond saving. His actions over the past 6 years have reminded me that the name “Benedict Arnold” was also once held in high esteem in this country, as well….

  • Too much spending and too war is hardly conservative should read [t]oo much spending and too much war is hardly conservative.

  • A drunk won’t reverse course until he hits bottom. Things can still get worse, so to Bush it’s “party on.” Unfortunately the rest of us are along for the ride.

  • In other words — just give up and let them convert us to Islam. Remember, if you do not convert to Islam, you will either be taxed as a non-believer or beheaded as a non-believer. Of course, if there were a great number of non-believers paying tax, then the caliphate would be able to afford cradle-to-grave health care for the believers. I give you one guess as to how the non-believers would fare.

  • Interesting that he pretty much admitted straight out that Bush has planned for permanent military bases in Iraq all along.

    I mean, we knew that but for a neocon of the cravenness of Kristol to just flat out say it is pretty breathtaking.

    I can hardly wait for the retractions and clarifications to follow after Karl Rove gets off the phone with dear sweet Nicky. šŸ˜‰

  • I had that same reaction when I read that waste of time in the NY Times. Apparently all it takes to be published in one of the nation’s premier newspapers is to spin out fluff like Kristof’s. You’d think some editor would’ve demanded more. I seldom find enlightenment in the press anymore. Journalism used to produce information and opinion from informed and opinionated specialists, many of whom were also gifted writers. Now it’s just another form of what corporation owners regard as entertainment for the masses, judged by the same criterion as other sources of advertising, i.e., market share. Thank the Fates (and Al Gore) that the internet showed up just about the time that print and TeeVee journalism died. Needless to say, I’m very glad that we have the ‘net and especially The Carpetbagger Report.

  • Too bad that Kristof forgot to ask for a pony, too. But then, (if we believe fallenwoman), perhaps Muslim apologists aren’t allowed to have ponies…

    Seriously, I really wondered to what extent Kristof’s tongue was firmly in cheek with his list — especially in light of his closing comment (paraphrasing from memory here) that rather than reacting with annoyance, GWB should take this list seriously. Closing this way hardly suggests that Kristof really thinks that Bush is going to follow ANY of these suggestions: rather, Kristof seems to be setting some markers so that he can preen about “how I told him so” down the line, when the administration really starts melting down (or going crazy, though I’m not sure how we’d distinguish the two events…)

  • Kristof’s comments indicated that the only way Bush can undo his horrible legacy is to behave like a Democrat. He doesn’t expect Bush to change. He is offering talking points to those campaigning for 2008. It is the best summation of why the country needs to vote a Democrat into the Presidency. And in a sense the only way to save Bush’s legacy is to undo it as quickly as possible so that his action only have implications for a decade or two and not for centuries.

  • I have to admit I am puzzled at why people are so chuffed with Kristof (sic, not Kristol). It’s not a heavyweight piece but hey, this is a holiday weekend and it is perfectly straightforward and defensible on its own terms. Is he catching surplus rage that ought by rights to be directed at the Decider in Chief?

  • I don’t know what the fuss is all about. I haven’t seen ONE, “advisory”-type editorial or op-ed piece — in either NYT or WashPo — in the past 6 yrs, where the advice had a snowball’s chance in hell of being taken seriously.

    The Democrats should do this (usually from repubs, but not always), the president ought to do that, the mayor would be well advised to do something else, the State Legislature should change course and… It’s *all* along the lines of “if wishes were horses”, totally unrealistic, and I check them out only to see if I agree with any of the wishes. I suppose it’s the writers’ way of registering opposition to this or that but I think they’d be shocked, if their opinions were actually acted upon.

    Kristof is actually quite good (IMO) when he gets on one of his hobby horses — genocide in Darfur, protection of women (slavery, forced prostitution, “honor” rapes etc) and climate change but I don’t think the editors would permit him to write on just those three subjects, twice a week and all year ’round.

    I get

  • Well, yes, but remember that it’s silly to offer this president any advice in print, since he doesn’t read.

  • Hey, we all have our dreams. Pray, let Kristof express his no matter how far-fetched. Some of my dreams are pretty unrealistic too, like World Peace under Bush or a #43 hunting trip in ’07 with his good buddy, Cheney.

  • W reminds me of George in the Seinfeld episode where he ends up doing right by always doing the opposite (well, except that W is to dumber than George and hasn’t figured this out yet.) I’m sure Nick offered his list in this spirit.

    Looks like something his Dad would do if stuck in the same bad situation…

    (Man – I never thought I’d be saying that but Bush I is a freaking genius compared to his kid. Maybe Mrs. B was stepping out on him.)

  • Borat said Bush was strong, but not strong like his father, Barbara.

    It wouldn’t be very Turmanesque if Bush changed his course now would it?

    Didn’t Truman drop that second atomic bomb on Japan.

  • ***In other words ā€” just give up and let them convert us to Islam. Remember, if you do not convert to Islam, you will either be taxed as a non-believer or beheaded as a non-believer.***

    The preceding comment brought to you by Fallen-and-can’t-get-up-woman.

    Damn, lady—you just can’t manage to keep your face off the floor, now can you? Here’s a novel concept—let the Islamists come over to “this” side of the pond. They make much better targets up close—and they make really good cat food, too. You need to go out and compare the price of a shotgun shell to the price of 100 pounds of cat food….

  • Hey, RainWoman, here’s a fun exercise.

    “if there were a great number of non-believers paying tax, then the caliphate would be able to afford cradle-to-grave health care for the believers”.

    Now, perform these simple substitutions;

    For “non-believers”, insert “middle class Americans”.

    For “caliphate” (I can’t believe you actually used that), insert, “Bush administration”.

    For “cradle to grave health care”, insert “tax cuts”

    For “believers”, insert “rich”.

    See? The sentence still makes sense, and sounds a lot more accurate to me. However, go on and change my mind – I’m always willing to back down in the face of superior logic and assembly of facts. What, exactly, makes you think the Muslims want to force us all to adopt Islam? I remember the Russians were going to do that to us with Communism, but they turned out to be a couple of billion people short of the number needed for serious conversion. Take a look at who’s been forcing their religion on others for the last couple of centuries. Now, picture yourself in a mythical country anywhere, and make your pitch for getting forced to adopt Islam rather than Christianity.

    Rewriting history is not allowed, you will have to use actual facts, please.

  • You know there is something more than immoral about fighting a war against Wahhabist Sunnie Caliphatist extremists in Iraq and displacing millions of innocent people to avoid actually imposing a sane border control policy in America that inconviences several thousand Saudi Arabians whose first cousins pay to support those same Wahhabist Sunnie Caliphatist extremists.

    “Fighting them here” simply means not giving student and tourist visas to terrorists.

  • Hereā€™s a novel conceptā€”let the Islamists come over to ā€œthisā€ side of the pond. They make much better targets up closeā€”and they make really good cat food, too

    That’s a really great line, Steve (#20). Should get wider circulation.

  • …but for a neocon of the cravenness of Kristol..

    This was an article by Kristof, right? I wasn’t aware he was a neocon. Did he write some OpEds in 2002/2003 supporting the Iraq war? I don’t recall seeing any.

    • Comments are closed.