Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Is Charles Krauthammer Ever Honest?

Charles Krauthammer's view on calling presidential debates is about as trustworthy as Dick Morris. Krauthammer declares Mitt Romney the winner. Krauthammer says that all Romney had to do is show up.

”I think it’s unequivocal — Romney won, and he didn’t just win tactically, but strategically. Strategically, all he needed to do was basically a draw, he needed to continue the momentum he’s had since the first debate, and this will continue it. Tactically, he simply had to get up there and show that he’s a competent man, and somebody you can trust as commander-in-chief.”

Krauthammer is a man who helped further the Bush administration's bogus case of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Former Office of Special Plans staffer Karen Kwiatkowski wrote that Krauthammer was using talking points fed from Pentagon neoconservatives.

I suspected, from reading Charles Krauthammer, a neoconservative columnist for the Washington Post, and the Weekly Standard, and hearing a Cheney speech or two, that these talking points left the building on occasion.

The height of Krauthammer's chutzpah is when in 2004 he declared in 2004 that President George W. Bush won the war in Afghanistan.

President Bush put in place a military campaign that did in two months what everyone had said was impossible: defeat an entrenched, fanatical, ruthless regime in a territory that had forced the great British and Soviet empires into ignominious retreat. Bush followed that by creating in less than three years a fledgling pro-American democracy in a land that had no history of democratic culture and was just emerging from 25 years of civil war.

Krauthammer wrote in 2009 that President Barack Obama was committed to losing the war in Afghanistan. Krauthammer penned this masterpiece after Obama's West Point speech.

I would therefore defer to their judgment and support their recommended policy. But the fate of this war depends not just on them. It depends also on the president. We cannot prevail without a commander in chief committed to success.

And this commander in chief defended his exit date (vs. the straw man alternative of "open-ended" nation-building) thusly: "because the nation that I'm most interested in building is our own."

Remarkable. Go and fight, he tells his cadets -- some of whom may not return alive -- but I may have to cut your mission short because my real priorities are domestic.

Has there ever been a call to arms more dispiriting, a trumpet more uncertain?

I would love someone to ask Krauthammer how could Obama lose a war Bush won. The Charles Krauthammer archives is the gift that keeps on giving.

Krauthammer can't even tell on the history of a war still going on? There is no reason to trust his opinion on the outcome of a presidential debate.

Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home