Danny Doom’s Booze Cabinet

I thought I got rid of this guy. Kristol Ball, always wrong, but I guess he still has a forum somewhere, like anyone else. The Economist, thankfully, tackles his ridiculousness in solid form here:

He seems to get most things wrong, but I have a perverse fascination with his logic, largely because it is so unsound.

I know what he means. Someone so off on everything–it’s compelling in a way. But, eh, not that compelling.

You can see why I enjoy Sullivan sometimes:

Kristol, who is always wrong…

You can’t go…wrong…with a sentence that begins like that. Kind of reminds me of a song…oh yeah, this one!

These are the magic words I have been waiting for:

This is William Kristol’s last column.

I would hate to take credit for Bill’s unemployment at the New York Times, but I will if necessary. The column is typically nutty, full of the revisionist history that Kristol is infamous for. He lost me right off the bat:

Conservatives have been right more often than not — and more often than liberals — about most of the important issues of the day.

Wrong again! I’m sure Irving’s son will still spout his fish lips on other outlets, but it’s good to clear him off the esteemed pages of the New York Times. Victory is mine!

Thanks to Nikkos for the tip!

Imagine how Bill Kristol could have mocked me, if I had wrote the lyrics to a song back in 2007 about how wrong he is all the time and then he turned out to be right about everything. That song would be sitting there looking real dumb, out of touch and outdated before it was ever heard.

But thankfully, this is Bill Kristol we are talking about here. He never lets you down. You can mock his inaccuracy all day and night, year after year, and never have to worry about him suddenly turning around and getting something right. In that spirit, the Booze Cabinet offers congrats to the celebrated Mr. K for winning Andrew Sullivan’s Von Hoffman Award for “for stunningly wrong political, social and cultural predictions.” Hats off. He earned it!

But really, shouldn’t that award be named for him by now?

I’ve had zero problems with the transition moves of Barack Obama, but now Rick Warren? This fucking tool of the religious right is going to give the invocation at his Inauguration? I’d rather he choose Rev. Wright than this chump. I’d rather he choose…well, I can’t think of any religious figure I’d rather he choose. How about None?

I’m all for the unifying nature of Obama’s presidency and the possibilities that that may bring, but I believe that it is incumbent upon certain elements to prove worthy of such outreach. Rick Warren and the gay-baiting religious right are not even close. Fuck. Them. Let ‘em stand out in the desert and wait for their water!

Why is it necessary to inaugurate the President of the United States with a religious nut? Can’t you leave them out of this for once? God, I’m so sick of religion in this country.

UPDATE:

This is what I’m talking about:

Statement by Rea Carey, Executive Director
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

“President-elect Obama campaigned on a theme of inclusivity, yet the selection of Rick Warren to give the invocation is a direct affront to that very principle. This was a divisive choice, and clearly not one that will help our country come together and heal. We urge President-elect Obama to withdraw his invitation to Rick Warren and instead select a faith leader who embraces fairness, equality and the ideals the president-elect himself has called the nation to uphold.”

Professionally Wrong New York Times columnist Bill Kristol’s job appears to be on the line, or at least, his contract is ending soon. There’s no doubt that the song “Kristol Ball” has helped shed light on Mr. Kristol’s propensity for Wrongness (listen to a clip at iTunes, or just buy the album here!), and so, if forced, Milk at Midnight will take credit if and when his career takes a dive.

But in all seriousness, I have no problem with conservative writers; it would just be great if they prized factual information and used it as a basis for their thoughts. Bill Kristol has demonstrated none of that talent. So, off with his head!

Bill Kristol is the gift that keeps on re-gifting itself. I see where Andy Sullivan went back and re-read Kristol Ball’s book from just a few years ago–man, would I feel dumb if I had that on my bookshelf–and not surprisingly, his shit is all wrong wrong wrong!

its tone and content are shockingly off-base, and most of its core assertions and arguments categorically refuted by history. In fact, it would be very hard to think of a piece of analysis so riddled with misconceptions and errors and so self-evidently wrong in almost every respect only five years later.

How is this man on television and in print on a regular basis, getting paid to spout his always-wrong bullshit? It’s quite amazing. He must…know people? Ah, that’s it. Sullivan follows up:

Look: we all get things wrong. But that means a responsibility to set them right. Has Kristol ever publicly acknowledged or taken responsibility for these flatly wrong assertions of his, assertions that led to a war that gave us the slaughter, ethnic cleansing, torture and displacement of hundreds of thousands of people?

Nope, he’s just like his president.

One of the many many many reasons that John McCain is going to lose to Barack Obama this November can be summed up by a headline that I love to see:

“Religious right feeling left out in race.”

The religious right (wrong) were a fad and a farce, and could only have thrived in the same kind of atmosphere that would elect a George W. Bush. A minor, if disastrous, blip on the radar. Now, back to the fringes of society!

The one and only Kristol Ball is at it again:

In the short time since he was named an Op-Ed columnist at The New York Times, Bill Kristol has written a series of sloppy, error-plagued and incomparably hackish columns.

In his latest, Kristol introduces such an amazing groundwork for logic that, if followed, would mean that neither Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John McCain are strong enough candidates to be their party’s nominee. Or, in other words, Kristol’s argument for McCain’s chances are actually even more effective as arguments against his chances. It’s a world of pretzel logic. That’s my guy, Bill Kristol!

UPDATE:

From Glenn Greenwald:

There is now a correction appended to Kristol’s last column in order to correct two factual errors he made (that makes a total of four corrections in less than six months that Kristol has been writing a once-a-week NYT column). It reads:

Correction: May 21, 2008In his column on Monday, Bill Kristol said he could not find a recent primary in which the candidate who would go on to win the nomination lost by as big a margin as Barack Obama lost by (41 points) in West Virginia. Mitt Romney won the essentially uncontested Utah primary on Feb. 5 with about 90 percent of the vote.

Also, the California Supreme Court is based in San Francisco, not the state capital, Sacramento.

The correction is intended to downplay the significance of Kristol’s error (“Mitt Romney won the essentially uncontested Utah primary on Feb. 5 with about 90 percent of the vote”), but it fails to note that McCain also lost the Arkansas primary by 40 points to Mike Huckabee.