Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 18, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

Star-Spangled Baggage
Science Finds New Routes to Energy

The Divide

Truthdig Bazaar more items

A/V Booth

Colbert to Kristol: ‘Which Dictator Do We Take Down Next?’

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Apr 28, 2006
Colbert Kristol

“The Colbert Report’s” Stephen Colbert gleefully pummels The Weekly Standard’s William Kristol over his leadership of the neocon organization Project for a New American Century (PNAC).

“The Colbert Report” host achieves what few traditional media interviewers can do: make neocon leader William Kristol stammer and sweat about his support for the Iraq invasion.

Crooks and Liars:

Bill Kristol, who is one of the major players in the group called PNAC, joined the set of the “Colbert Report,” and I think was taken off guard right at the outset of the show because he had to answer questions that our media never asks. PNAC envisioned America attacking the Middle East since the middle ‘90’s and for some inexplicable reason (that was a joke) the media never questions him or his members which have lined the walls of Bush’s cabinet about PNAC and how it influenced our foreign policy, which led us to attack Iraq.

Colbert immediately called him on it and Kristol was quite embarrassed talking about it.

Colbert: Speaking of thinking alike, you were a member, or are a member of the Project for the New American Century, correct?


Square, Site wide
Kristol: I am.

Colbert: Were or am, am?

Kristol: Were and am.

Colbert: How’s that project coming?

Kristol: well. it’s…(stammering)


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Ed Rush, May 2, 2006 at 8:01 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hear hear Dave Raithel. That’s exactly how it works, isn’t it? Colbert was certainly funny but change doesn’t flow from that. In fact, by appearing to go out on such a limb, the limits of what possibly can be said in public are clearly set. Kristol’s a war criminal, right? But could Colbert say that? Even if he backed it up with the reams of evidence that exist? Simply not possible. That is just too-o-o wacky. The jokes are fun, but in the end, they’re just jokes, which is why they get a lot of play. For my money, Galloway at the US Senate was far “braver” and definitely more substantive. Not surprising that there was very little mainstream press reaction compared to the Colbert thing - perhaps the good ‘ol boys in the US press gallery couldn’t understand his Scots accent? The silly bugger should have told a few jokes.

Report this

By candide, May 1, 2006 at 8:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Every time I see or hear Bill Kristol I wish that his ex-Trotskite parents had resorted to abortion.

Report this

By Ryan, April 30, 2006 at 11:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I would bet anyone $100 that the things Kristol says are going to happen

1. Attacking Iran
2. Military Draft
3. Dems win House, Repubs win Senate in 2006
4. Guliani or McCaine in 2008

He called for 9/11 a year before it happened, called for a few major theater wars, preemption, and vast military spending. 

This guy is a stronger prophet then Jesus =)

Report this

By Dave Raithel, April 30, 2006 at 10:37 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In these times, all motives are suspect, so let me say first that I enjoy both the Colbert Report and The Daily Show for their being, unfortunately, the most trenchant and accurate social and political commentary I hear. I do have one concern that I’ll express here. People familiar with the notion of “repressive tolerance” might recognize my observation that to some extent, what Colbert and Stewart, etc., do also serves to innoculate (for lack of a better word)their objects of ridicule from the possibility of significant political change. Kristol is a war criminal, and as befuddled as he appeared, he now gets to add to his resume his being cool enough (or chill enough, or whatever colloquialism now fills the use)to suffer satirical queries. That gets turned into the idea that people who are adequately secure in their positions fear no laughter at their own expense (because afterall, none of us is perfect and we should all be humble enough to laugh at ourselves, even when we are right…)The bourgeoisie are best at appropriating forms of cultural opposition and rendering them useless. Nothing that truly threatens established power relations survives. The Bushes may be offended, but will do nothing different, and their supporters will dismiss the barbs as rude bad taste. Is it possible that the true social effect of the work by Colbert (and I know there are others) is that it allows everyone to reassure themselves that since he doesn’t get jailed or shot for it, everyone knows we are still a “free” country with a “democratic republic” government? The implication then is that things aren’t so bad, afterall…

To paraphrase some dead German philosophers: All contradictions, even the funny ones, are absorbed….

Report this

By jami, April 29, 2006 at 11:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

colbert seems to be the bravest man on television these days:

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.