TNR BLOGS

July 04, 2009 | 11:58 AM
July 04, 2009 | 11:32 AM
July 04, 2009 | 8:16 AM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
20.10.2008
Sarah Palin's Brain

Anyone looking for further evidence that Bill Kristol is auditioning for the role of Sarah Palin's political enabler--beyond his deadening drumbeat of "Sarah is awesome!" columns in the Times--can find plenty of it in Jane Mayer's New Yorker piece on the Alaska governor's unlikely veep rise:

The most ardent promoter, however, was Kristol, and his enthusiasm became the talk of Alaska’s political circles. According to [GOP activist Paulette] Simpson, Senator Stevens told her that “Kristol was really pushing Palin” in Washington before McCain picked her. Indeed, as early as June 29th, two months before McCain chose her, Kristol predicted on “Fox News Sunday” that “McCain’s going to put Sarah Palin, the governor of Alaska, on the ticket.” He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball, and possibly siphon off Hillary Clinton’s supporters. He pointed out that she was a “mother of five” and a reformer. “Go for the gold here with Sarah Palin,” he said. The moderator, Chris Wallace, finally had to ask Kristol, “Can we please get off Sarah Palin?”

The next day, however, Kristol was still talking about Palin on Fox. “She could be both an effective Vice-Presidential candidate and an effective President,” he said. “She’s young, energetic.” On a subsequent “Fox News Sunday,” Kristol again pushed Palin when asked whom McCain should pick: “Sarah Palin, whom I’ve only met once but I was awfully impressed by—a genuine reformer, defeated the establishment up there. It would be pretty wild to pick a young female Alaska governor, and I think, you know, McCain might as well go for it.” On July 22nd, again on Fox, Kristol referred to Palin as “my heartthrob.” He declared, “I don’t know if I can make it through the next three months without her on the ticket.”

It worth recalling that before Kristol achieved media ubiquity as Weekly Standard editor, Fox News commentator, and Pinch Sulzberger's Worst Mistake, he was best known for having been Dan Quayle's chief of staff during the first Bush presidency or, as this magazine dubbed him at the time, "Dan Quayle's Brain." Now, there's little reason to imagine that Kristol would want to give up any of his lucrative media gigs. But if you believe the people Scott Horton has been talking to, he sees Palin as a blank slate, a charismatic but unformed political figure who could be an effective messenger for the tenets of neoconservatism, just as soon as she's been taught them. 

This is, after all, the dream of any would-be political guru: Find the shallow but appealing vessel into which your can pour your hard-won political wisdom, then claim credit for your creation. Kristol had decidedly limited luck doing this with Quayle; Karl Rove, by contrast, was essentially hailed as the political mind of our time for performing a similar role with the late-blooming George W. Bush. (Bush's Brain is the title of both a Rove biography and a documentary.)

By contrast, strategists who work for self-evidently gifted politicans never get anywhere near the credit. James Carville and Dick Morris (among others) certainly got career boosts from their associations with Bill Clinton, but no one ever imagined they invented him. Likewise, the Davids--Axelrod and Plouffe--may have run a nearly flawless campaign for Barack Obama, but no one imagines his "brain" is anyone's but his own. Sarah Palin, by contrast--well, Kristol won't be the only GOP handler eager to play Henry Higgins to her Eliza Doolittle:

 

--Christopher Orr

Posted: Monday, October 20, 2008 2:34 PM with 20 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

maxblum13 said:

October 20, 2008 2:53 PM

FWright said:

In fairness to Kristol (!), would indulging Judith Miller still count as Sulzberger's worst mistake.  Kristol's columns are uniformly terrible, but they have yet to get a few hundred thousand people killed, as far as we know.

October 20, 2008 2:55 PM

zardoz67 said:

I think the more apt comparison is that William Kristol wants to be Svengali to Sarah Palin's Trilby.  

October 20, 2008 3:05 PM

icarusr said:

Or perhaps Young Master Will is the Palin's Trigbaby Daddy.

October 20, 2008 3:18 PM

psantillana said:

basketball?

October 20, 2008 3:19 PM

drozenson said:

Poor Bill: there's something irresistable about a statuesque, athletic shiksa...

October 20, 2008 3:28 PM

cspencef said:

OK, am I missing something, or is it usually Republicans in search of Higgins/Svengali figures?  Surely it isn't that simple, is it?

October 20, 2008 3:59 PM

The Plank said:

Another bit that jumped out at me in the Jane Mayer piece I cited earlier was her description of the

October 20, 2008 4:32 PM

AlanSP said:

"He described her as “fantastic,” saying that she could go one-on-one against Obama in basketball..."

Really? Leaving aside for the moment the fact that, if true, this would be completely irrelevant, it seems like a pretty big stretch to say that she could match up with him on the court.  I know she played in high school and all, but he's got 9 inches or so on her, and he's got a pretty sweet jump shot (he's a good passer too, but that wouldn't help one-on-one).

But this isn't really a fair comparison.  After all, she's running for VP, not President, so what's *really* important is that she could probably beat Biden one-on-one.

October 20, 2008 4:41 PM

JosephCuomo said:

Chris Orr-

To paraphrase David Brooks, Bill Kristol is a fatal cancer to the Republican Party.

In other news, though: can anyone put a muzzle on Joe friggin Biden?

The man has diarrhea of the mouth. Here's his latest pearl (courtesy of the NYT blog):

_____________________________________________________________________________

The campaign of Senator John McCain is trying to capitalize on some potentially ambiguous words from Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, at a Seattle fund-raiser Sunday night.

Mr. Biden predicted that Senator Barack Obama, if he is elected president, will quickly face a challenge from some hostile power or terrorist group eager to test the resolve of the rookie chief executive.

“Mark my words,” Mr. Biden warned at the Seattle fund-raiser, according to reports from network producers traveling with him, “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember, I said it standing here, if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

He added, “He’s going to have to make some really tough--I don’t know what the decision’s going to be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s going to happen.” He said he could envision four or five scenarios that might arise to challenge the new president, citing Russia or the Middle East as possible sources of trouble.

He then called on the donors to be prepared to rise to Mr. Obama’s defense because he will need to make some difficult and unpopular choices in response. “I’ve forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I’m not being falsely humble with you,” Mr. Biden told the donors, by way of reassuring them of his and Mr. Obama’s toughness and preparation. “I think I can be value added, but this guy has it. This guy has it.” . . .

The McCain campaign has been e-mailing the Biden remarks around, citing them as evidence that electing Mr. Obama would be risky. Mr. McCain, in remarks prepared for delivery at a campaign rally in Missouri this afternoon, was preparing to say that the United States cannot afford to elect an untested chief executive who might be a temptation to terrorists or others who wish the nation ill.

“The next president won’t have time to get used to the office,” Mr. McCain is planning to say, according to excerpts released by the campaign. “We face many challenges here at home, and many enemies abroad in this dangerous world. Just last night, Senator Biden guaranteed that if Senator Obama is elected, we will have an international crisis to test America’s new president. We don’t want a president who invites testing from the world at a time when our economy is in crisis and Americans are already fighting in two wars.

“What is more troubling is that Senator Biden told their campaign donors that when that crisis hits, they would have to stand with them because it wouldn’t be apparent Senator Obama would have the right response. Forget apparent. Senator Obama won’t have the right response, and we know that because we’ve seen the wrong response from him over and over during this campaign. He opposed the surge strategy that is bringing us victory in Iraq and will bring us victory in Afghanistan. He said he would sit down unconditionally with the world’s worst dictators. When Russia invaded Georgia, Sen. Obama said the invaded country should show restraint.”

He is planning to add, “We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: hoping for our luck to change at home and abroad. We have to act. We need a new direction, and we have to fight for it.”

October 20, 2008 4:43 PM

JosephCuomo said:

Just when Obama receives the endorsement of Colin Powell--and just when conservatives like Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, David Gergen and Christopher Buckley are attacking the GOP ticket--Biden has to open his mouth and give McCain a chance to change the narrative.

But more importantly, wtf was Biden thinking? Was he trying to show off his powers of prediction?

“Mark my words," said Joe Biden. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember, I said it standing here, if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

Sometimes Biden seems like Sarah Palin without the lipstick. That, or everyone's garrulous, blowhard uncle, who dominates dinner with his long, pointless, semi-alcoholic rants.

October 20, 2008 4:56 PM

Wasatcher said:

Joe! Hey Joe! It's the ECONOMY, stupid!

October 20, 2008 5:07 PM

ironyroad said:

Yawn.  Biden is already known as someone who often has a good point and makes it honestly and with due complexity, therefore badly.  What he was saying is that there is a possibility that some state or non-state actor will try to test Obama's mettle after he takes office.  In this they will make the same mistake that the Clintons, John McCain, Sarah Palin, and Jeremiah Wright have made.  I feel personally confident that Obama will handle it well, if it happens, as his mettle has already been tested rather more than McCain's over the past two years, and I'd rather have Obama's stability and resolve than McCain's erratic buzzing around.

October 20, 2008 5:24 PM

JosephCuomo said:

ironyroad-

You write: "I feel personally confident that Obama will handle it well, if it happens, as his mettle has already been tested rather more than McCain's over the past two years, and I'd rather have Obama's stability and resolve than McCain's erratic buzzing around."

Yes, I'm fairly confident that Obama will handle said test, if indeed it does indeed occur, but why the hell would Biden even consider bringing something like this up? It doesn't help the ticket, it isn't a convincing argument, it's hypothetical nonsense.

All Biden has to gain by this is the unlikely prospect of voters looking back on his statement AFTER the election, and thinking how wonderfully prescient he was.

Which is to say, Obama is winning, he's winning convincingly, he's receiving an unprecedented number of endorsements from prominent Republicans (Powell, Adelman, Buckley), and an unprecedented number of prominent Republicans (Noonan, Brooks, Gergen) are attacking the McCain/Palin--only two weeks before the general.

Why, why in god's name, would Biden be out there blabbering like this, flapping his lips, and giving McBush ammunition to fire back at him?

October 20, 2008 5:52 PM

ironyroad said:

Because I don't think Biden even saw what he said as giving McBush (neat name, btw!) any potential ammunition.  I think he saw it as describing a hypothetical situation down the road that we will have to deal with.  It was a tactical error, no doubt, but the content of what he said *didn't* mean for Biden, and shouldn't mean for anyone who reads it correctly, that it's a reason to vote for McBush.

Perhaps he was even trying to establish some parameters for such a situation -- so they could say, we've been thinking about this a long time -- we even mentioned it during the election.

October 20, 2008 7:52 PM

Crock1701 said:

Yeah, that Biden point is controversial how?  I think it would be likely for either one, though certainly Obama.  Does everyone forget what happened last summer in the UK? Two days after Gordon Brown took office, the British found two car bombs in London and a third tried to drive into an airport.  Al Qaeda looks at the calender.

October 20, 2008 9:24 PM

JosephCuomo said:

ironyroad-

You write: "It was a tactical error, no doubt, but the content of what he said *didn't* mean for Biden, and shouldn't mean for anyone who reads it correctly, that it's a reason to vote for McBush."

I don't think that it's a reason to vote GOP either, but, yes, it was a tactical error, and, yes, I agree that Biden didn't see what he was saying as giving ammunition to the other side. But that's my point, ironyroad: he should have seen this. With only two weeks to go before the general, he should have checked himself, restrained himself--he should be measuring every single syllable that he says. Which is exactly what Obama is doing--and has been doing--which is also another reason that he deserves to win.

Unlike his running mate, BHO knows how to keep a cool head in a difficult, high-pressure situation, like the final days of a national, presidential campaign.

What Biden has done here, even if unintentionally, is change the subject from the economy to foreign policy, and in doing so he has allowed McCain an opportunity to change the conversation, an opportunity to dominate a news cycle, an opportunity to put the Dem ticket on the defensive--and toward what conceivable purpose, other than the glorification of Biden's sad, insecure, middle-age ego?

"Mark my words," said Joe. "Remember, I said it standing here, if you don’t remember anything else I said." This is all vanity, ironyroad, it's Biden's lurching attempt to make himself look saavy and prescient, to boast in advance of an event that no one will remember he predicted.

And in this way, Biden has descended, at least for one day, at least for one news cycle, to the level of a vain, uncertain, babbling old man, a man like, well, John McCain.

As for establishing some parameters, as you put it, for such a situation in the future, who, who the hell is going to remember Biden said this nine months from now (that is, six months into an Obama administration)? Who the hell is going to care? If there is a crisis, all attention would (and should) be focused on that crisis, and that crisis alone.

Tell me, ironyroad, what voter, what single living human being is going think nine months from now: Hey, wait a minute, didn't Joe Biden tell us there was going to be a crisis like this (even though he had no idea what it would be), didn't Joe Biden tell us that Obama would be tested, didn't Joe Biden tell us that we were going to have to rally around our new president?

In other words, it was a foolish thing to say, ironyroad, it was a blunder, a tactical error, and with this nation's entire future on the line, there was no real excuse for it, none whatsoever.

October 20, 2008 9:41 PM

ironyroad said:

"Tell me, ironyroad, what voter, what single living human being is going think nine months from now: Hey, wait a minute, didn't Joe Biden tell us there was going to be a crisis like this (even though he had no idea what it would be), didn't Joe Biden tell us that Obama would be tested, didn't Joe Biden tell us that we were going to have to rally around our new president?"

Apart from myself, Iron Y. Road, I guess nobody.  I say that because I don't really want to argue a point that neither of us can predict.  On the other hand, I think you're being a bit over-dramatic about this whole deal.  The shift toward Obama is also occurring because people increasingly recognize his approach as potentially more effective in international crisis decision-making also.

October 21, 2008 1:19 AM

frilz1 said:

Palin only plays well with the hard right and the McCain campaign did the only thing possible by keeping her exclusively in front of patisan friendly audiences. Letting her be interviewed by Katie Couric was a disasgter and having her appear at a Philadeplphia Flyers hockey game, where she was met with a loud chorus of booing and curses, were all the evidence they will ever need that hand picked crowds are all she's good with.

October 21, 2008 6:29 AM

JosephCuomo said:

ironyroad-

You write: "The shift toward Obama is also occurring because people increasingly recognize his approach as potentially more effective in international crisis decision-making also."

I hope you're right, but so far, the only crisis the voters are facing right now is economic. And Obama is seen as the one who can better steer us out of this financial mess.

Indeed, McCain's own people have acknowledged publicly that as long as the focus is on the economy, they lose.

So once again, ironyroad, the question is this: why give McBush an opportunity to change the subject?

Especially when there was no conceivable advantage to be gained, other than for Joe Biden to stroke his own fragile ego.

October 21, 2008 9:21 AM