Blogs and Stories
Palin's Mole at The Times
Did Bill Kristol use the Gray Lady to fight the McCain campaign's civil war?
Was John McCain’s senior foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann fired for leaking sensitive information to his friend, the longtime McCain backer and New York Times columnist William Kristol? Were Kristol, Scheunemann, and deputy communications director Michael Goldfarb at the heart of a feud inside the McCain camp over the Palin candidacy—with Kristol fighting the battle in his Times column? McCainiacs associated with the campaign tell The Daily Beast that whatever happened between Scheunemann and McCain on a formal level, it’s clear that there was a serious rift in the week before the election, and that the cause of the split boils down to one word: Kristol.
Kristol’s New York Times column—written inside what the McCain campaign considered enemy territory—was read with great interest. As Kristol used column after column to boost Sarah Palin, suspicions built inside the campaign that Kristol and McCain staffers close to him had written off McCain and were now determined to salvage Palin as a vehicle for Republican politics in the future, possibly the Republican nomination in 2012. Michael Goldfarb—who left Kristol’s Weekly Standard to work on communications for the McCain campaign—also repeatedly came under suspicion among McCain insiders for his close ties to Kristol and his “manic zeal” in fending off questions over the Palin candidacy.
There was a serious rift in the week before the election, and the cause of the split boils down to one word: Kristol.
As one McCain adviser put it to me: “In the last six weeks there was a remarkable echo. You could listen to arguments made by folks inside of the campaign who were close to Bill Kristol and then open up The New York Times and read them in Kristol’s columns. It was ‘set Sarah free,’ coupled with an agenda designed to appeal to the religious right and the more raucous elements of the party. They got their way often enough, and we started noticing that at many of the Palin functions it was nonstop ‘Sarah, Sarah,’ while John McCain all but vanished. Were they trying to get McCain elected in 2008, or to help Palin on the way to the Republican nomination in 2012? You can’t get yourself into a situation in which anyone can credibly ask that question.”
A scan of Kristol’s columns in The Times shows what the McCain insider was talking about.
His first two columns following the announcement of the Palin pick were devoted to general efforts to bolster Palin’s image and fend off criticisms that she lacked the necessary experience to fill out the Republican ticket. On September 1, in a piece headlined “A Star is Born,” Kristol argued that the Palin choice would bolster McCain’s image as a “shrewd and prescient gambler.” And on September 8, his column was devoted to debunking criticism of Palin’s qualifications and praising her as a woman “of the people.” “McCain didn’t just pick a politician who could appeal to Wal-Mart Moms. He picked a Wal-Mart Mom.” These pieces were crafted in what was in retrospect the golden age of the campaign. After a financial crisis erupted on Wall Street, however, the Kristol columns got became tactical in their orientation.
On September 28, Kristol wrote: “McCain needs to liberate his running mate from the former Bush aides brought in to handle her—aides who seem to have succeeded in importing to the Palin campaign the trademark defensive crouch of the Bush White House. McCain picked Sarah Palin in part because she’s a talented politician and communicator. He needs to free her to use her political talents and to communicate in her own voice.” The same column contains the first intimations of discord within the campaign, claiming that McCain had criticized his staff over their handling of Palin and suggesting that he had instructed Steve Schmidt and Rick Davis to “liberate” her to go on the offensive. He also suggests that the campaign recalibrate and focus its attacks on Obama’s “radical past,” especially on his relationship with Jeremiah Wright. The next week, Kristol advanced this line of attack in an interview with Palin herself. Palin wondered aloud why Obama’s relationship with Wright “isn’t discussed more”—a deviation from McCain’s own wishes, which were that Wright not be discussed at all.
On October 13, Kristol’s criticism reached the boiling point. “Fire the campaign,” he thundered. “What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads—they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.” Among the McCain tactics that had failed, he acknowledged, were the very ones he had advocated just two weeks earlier.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Justice Clinton?
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
Sonia Scores a KO
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
Torture Prosecution Turnaround?
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
Where Iran's Regime Learned Its Tricks
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
photoshockpenn
Who in the New York Times lead editorial staff thought that Bill Kristol was a suitable replacement for the vaunted and much loved William Safire. Even I as a liberal read the NYT for the William Safire columns.
Bill Kristol is a sad and disgraced replacement for the thoughtful conservatism of William Safire, he has shown none of the acumen and more than little of the knowledge of any of the thoughtful conservatives. Much to the chagrin of the NYT, Bill Kristol is an ideologue with delusions of grandeur, who cannot string two thoughts together with enough sense to work his way out of a paperbag.
I was and am appalled at the choice of the NYT staffers of Bill Kristol and will loudly proclaim that he is worse at writing and thinking than a bag full of monkeys trying to win "a" banana.
Garibaldini
The Neo Conservatives love using the Cultural Conservatives as shock troops, playing on resentments and paranoia about government while doing their level best to surpass Byzantium in Big Government Lust
snakesonablog
I agree that William Kristol is no replacement for William Safire. It is important to read conservative perspectives. I would love to see TDB's own Mr. Buckley writing that column.
sakura
Bill Kristol. It should be crystal clear by now that he is just a right wing nut.
Cellini
Even if Kristol had not intervened in the campaign, he should be fired for using his column to push the Republican ticket rather than to engage in good faith discussion. In other words, he wrote things that he could not have believed, but that he thought would promote the ticket.
funkychicken
"What emerges on a close reading is this: Palin and those closest to her inside the campaign were eager to wage a Lee Atwater-style campaign designed to demonize Barack Obama, with Palin as the figure leading the charge."
Hasn't the country suffered enough at the hands of these monsters? Jesus!
constantine
Mark my words and gird your loins. The entire Republican party is going to explode in hot geysers of blood and bile
and pathetic, old, whiteman envy and anger. We owe Sarah
a tremendous debt of gratitude.
wickie
OMG - I knew William Safire and let me assure you, Kristol is no Safire. None of this surprises me - the Times should fire him for his conflict of interest. He will then be free to roam with the Palin's, the Limbaugh's, the Hannity's, and all the other right-wing, no intelligence neocons.
Jefftitle46
McCain's campaign in my mind rated about a "C". Palin was the only bright spot in the entire thing, and she deserved to be brought out of the tank. McCain fought about like the British did in the war for American Independence. He made himself an easy target, fought back with kid gloves, and never got to the bottom of why the root of the mortgage crisis was the result of the Democrat's shake down of the banks. Maybe McCain believed the American public could not understand it. I disagree.
Then, McCain also lived up to his word that he "would not make Obama's citizenship an issue," even though Obama has proven to the world that his word is worthless.
The end result of all of McCain's grandiose gestures was enough to make a lot of people think Obama was far more shrewd and capable of running a government.
Who can really argue with it?
drgrrl
Bill Kristol is a large tumor on the face of the republican party. He is a rabid neocon that advocated for the Iraq war and every other disastrous Bush policy. I was one of those outraged when the Times hired him. A conservative viewpoint is one thing, but he is as rational as a sociopath. He needs to go the way of all the other neocons who destroyed this country.
kanderso
I like the idea of Christopher Buckley at the NY Times for a conservative viewpoint. It is needed. But Kristol. I would read his NY Times column and then click over to the WSJ for a more balanced view. That's not a joke. I really did. I wanted to know what conservatives were thinking about all of this. Kristol's columns were not giving me a not-rotten-in-Denmark kind of feel. I was impressed with Buckley's being not completely crazy in all of this; his post about why he supported Obama was wonderful. I assume he would still be a critical voice for conservatives, but he might also be rational. One last comment: I'm one of the 45% in South Carolina who voted for Obama. As a white female native Mississippian who will turn 40 next year (grew up in the 70s), it's really hard to take in that this is happening in my lifetime.
kelpcowboy
Someone in the main office screwed up. The Republican party is in the business of pandering to the economically and intellectually challenged by appealing to their fears and failings, not by actually asking one of the unnumbered and unwashed to represent the party. If the Repubs ever get back in office, she would be perfect for FEMA.
Iamadog
It's hard to have memory--it simply demands context at every turn. The NYT carried the Republican water with great enthusiam for the so-called Whitewater scandal. They were so rabid in the 'let's impeach our President for getting a xxx in the oval office" that it created a lunacy in journalistic group think that we still suffer from. They broke out the fife and drums for the war in Iraq though clear evidence was available that the reasoning for this folly was completely cracked. Mea Culpas? Too little, too late, obviously.
So how and why does the newspaper with a previous claim to real legitimacy arrive at this low point? Two reasons come to mind: a mindless fear of being labeled Liberal at the same time the Republican fanatical wing got smarter and smarter. They not only figured out how to manipulate the electorate to vote against their self interest, they figured out how to manipulate the "main stream" media to such a degree, it is too late to recover. There's much more but alas...
Bill Kristol? A drop in the bucket.
jmajacobs
After watching or reading Kristol, I need a shower. If it weren't for the fact that he's helped engineer things that have caused death (see: war, Iraq), he would be a character on the Simpsons. Why does this awful man have not one - but three jobs?? He should write about the unemployed. He can do his research by joining them.
Concordian
The New York Times should not wait until Bill Kristol's contract expires. He should be fired. Yes, Chris Buckley would be a wonderful replacement! As would Constantine, by the way.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.