A day after the Huffington Post first reported it (see below), The New York Times has announced that it has indeed hired conservative pundit, and Fox News analyst, Bill Kristol, as a new regular op-ed columnist. Liberal bloggers had been up in arms over the move. Kristol said, in an interview with Politico.com, that it gave him some pleasure to watch their "heads explode." Kristol was perhaps the most influential pundit of all in promoting the U.S. invasion of Iraq and has strongly defended the move ever since.
Times' editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal defended the move. Rosenthal told Politico shortly after the official announcement Saturday that he fails to understand “this weird fear of opposing views....The idea that The New York Times is giving voice to a guy who is a serious, respected conservative intellectual — and somehow that’s a bad thing,” Rosenthal added. “How intolerant is that?” Of course, some would argue that Kristol is not "serious, respected," broadly speaking. Unlike the Times’ other regulars, Kristol will write only once a week, with his first column set for Jan. 7, and he has just a one-year contract.
In the July 14, 2006 issue of The Weekly Standard, which he edits, Kristol called for a "military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions--and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement."
But opponents may take heart from this precedent: Kristol's predecessor in one of the "right" spots at the Times, John Tierney, was laughed off the page in short order.
44 comments:
If they were going to hire anyone, I would have liked to see them add Thomas Sowell to their staff. But its still a good move- Kristol is excellent.
Can anybody name 1 thing Kristol has been right about?
Just 1 thing.
Anybody?
....crickets.....
“The idea that The New York Times is giving voice to a guy who is a serious, respected conservative intellectual — and somehow that’s a bad thing,”
The question is how someone who had been so disastrously, lethally wrong about every important question of the last six years is "respected" and considered a "serious intellectual" in Mr Rosenthal's world.
To say nothing of Mr Kristol's repeated calls for the NYT to be prosecuted for practicing journalism.
Does that give Mr Rosenthal the Younger no pause? Or is there some sort of wink-and-a-nod code of Legacy between Abe and Irving's boys?
"...serious, respected conservative intellectual." Surely, Rosenthal is joking. The NYTimes can do better than this well-dressed hack who has never been right about anything important. He couldn't even tell Dan Quayle how to spell p-o-t-a-t-o.
it's hardly a "weird fear of opposing views..." in fact, it's not fear of any sort... it's pure incredulity that a "newspaper of record" would consent to give valuable column inches and printer's ink to a well-known government propaganda pusher... an actual "opposing view" would be welcome, certainly preferable to white house talking points regurgitation... puh-l-e-e-e-eze...
http://takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/
The most leftwing columnist in the Times is a mainstream economist. They provide a full range of views from center right to far right.
If Kristol is a serious, respected conservative, the conservative movement needs its head examined. "William the Bloody" deserves the vanity editorship he has now. There are many serious conservatives. Why pick this moron?
Ah, yes. Freedom of speech. Only when the Times was doing its job by revealing the illegal wiretapping operations of the Bush administration, Mr. Kristol was calling the Times a nest of traitors who deserve jail. This is no friend of free speech.
The earlier commenter Jim has it right. It's a Rosenthal/Kristol crime family thing. Nepotism at its worst.
Now that we don't have Judith Miller to kick around any more...
Honestly, this news has ruined my weekend. Calling Kristol a serious intellectual is ludicrous. As everyone everywhere has noted, the man is never right. He doesn't ever deserve to be right.
There are thousands of great writers in America. Why in hell would the NYT choose this man when Ann Coulter is available?
Just shoot me.
Enough said.
That's all I have to say. Except this:
Bill Kristol needs psychological help, and the NY Times ain't helping.
How truly embarrassing.
Kristol is a case-study in how being witty and having a large vocabulary is not the same thing as being intelligent.
How stupid is Rosenthal? Playing the intolerant card and claiming Kristol is "serious" and "respected?" Um, dude, Kristol has managed to be wrong about everything he's ever commented on. The only people who respect him are guys talking pigeons in the park and Dick Cheney. Same diff.
There's a serious disconnect between our pundit class and reality.
Profanity somehow seems inadequate.
There now, I suppose I have been intolerant of opposing views on the war getting into the Times.
I'll get my staff working on a 10,000 word explanation of that right away.
As a life time reader and ardent supporter of the NY Times I am appalled, disheartened, and finally, feel that the integrity of the paper has now gone beyond a point of no return.
I for one, shall no longer be reading the paper whether in print or online.
HOW! CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME HOW THIS IS HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY!
the mainstream media, led by the NY Times, has failed this nation, and this entire country. hundreds of thousands if not millions are dead because of it. and how do they work to regain their credibility. they hire a man who could not, be every conceivable measure, have any less credibility on foreign policy issues.
is there any rationality left in this country? where is the major outrage? where is the movement by Times readers to revolt. this equal time argument is garbage. there is equal time to opposing views, and then there is giving space to someone who has destroyed the reputation of this country by spouting biased political rhetoric without any remote resemblance of the truth. i literally cannot take this anymore. what the hell kind of precedent is the Times setting. can we please start a movement to simply destroy the Times membership already. please, how much more damage can we let them do before we all get together and force them to be more responsible.
for those who are interested, Media Matters has a nice collection of Kristol's BS here:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200712290001
Can anyone seriously imagine Rosenthal blasting conservative critics in the dismissive terms he uses against liberal ones? Like Congress, the NYT is suffering from a major case of battered spouse syndrome.
Oh, and one more thing: Kristol couldn't find his ass with both hands. He's a proven idiot. Can't the conservatives come up with anyone who has a record of being right about something, anything.
Kristol is a an agit-prop con artist who has openly espoused the use of deception as a public virtue. He is a Straussian, through and through. Not enough people are calling him and his enablers out on this.
Just when Time Magazine gets rid of this guy, he gets picked up by the New York Times. It's just so wrong.
People are trying to be informed in this country, which is why they read the paper and watch television news. They have no idea the extent to which they are being lied to. We are in real trouble because these guys are given such huge platforms to re-write history and blur reality.
I believe strongly in freedom of speech. However, we should have more control over who gets the bullhorn.
When will people start losing their journalism jobs for lying?
i'd like to know how much kristol's personal financial portfolio, undoubtedly heavily vested in soviet style government contractors, has benefitted from the war he created.
It's not about opposing views, it's about putting a fact-challenged flat-earther on the op-ed page. One that doesn't care if your kids or my kids get killed as long as it costs him nothing but notoriety.
Kristol is not a journalist nor is he a fair dealer with facts about anything more challenging than what day of the week it is..
As soon as this was confirmed, I wrote an e-mail to the NYT objecting. Since then I have cancelled all online and other subscriptions to the new home of the NeoCons.
I guess their objective is to out Murdoch Murdoch. Can Page 3 girls be far behind?
Right on to Rootless-e for pointing out that the Times runs the gamut from center right to far right.
David Brooks, Maureen Dowd, Thomas Friedman,
who-the-hell-is-Roger Cohen (and does he ever write on any subject that is remotely interesting?)
...all tools of the Republican party.
SOME "liberal newspaper"...Paul Krugman and Bob Herbert and That's IT.
And the news has Elisabeth Bumiller, Michael Cooper, Katharine Seeley, Sheryl Gay Stohlberg, and Adam Nagourney...ALL biased against the Democrats and willing stenographers for the Republicans.
The Times USED to be a great newspaper.
No more.
Uh, yeah... so we all know that Rosenthal's dad (and previous NYT op/ed editor), besides being a hardcore homophobe, was also a stalwart neocon, right? He won an award called the "Defender of Zion" along with Podhertz, Pipes, and others of similar ilk. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, my friends.
I don't want to pay for a subscription to a newspaper that wants to hire Bill Kristol as a columnist, the same Bill Kristol that wants to bomb Iran.
I don't want to pay for bundled cable tv and thereby finance fox faux news.
I'm sick of the Judy Millers and lazy NYTs editors that brought this country to war on fraudulent intelligence. I'll be damned if I'll pay to see Republican propaganda in the editorial column on the paper of record, unless the news division fact checks it.
It's hard to understand that the NYT feels the need to give the editor of the Weekly Standard and Sunday Fox news program regular another bullhorn for his Republican party propaganda. Bye bye NYT. Go f*ck yourselves.
"Rosenthal told Politico.com shortly after the official announcement Saturday that he fails to understand “this weird fear of opposing views...."
-----------------
I have opposing views also. Israel should be cut off, or moved to another part of the world, and neocons should be put on trial for the traitors that they are.
We should be encouraging opposing views, isn't that right Rosenthal?
Kristol is predictably, dependably, consistently wrong. But I'm not all that upset the Times is giving him a little Op-Ed real estate to demonstrate just how wrong leading conservatives have been.
Give Kristol some journalistic rope and he's guaranteed to hang himself.
Perhaps if the Times had someone from farther left to add balance. I have no problem with presenting Mr. Kristol's views as opinion, but I do take issue with the media limiting the range to the left they allow.
Maybe they just figure it's the best way to keep him from trying to sick the feds on them.
Either that, or both the Times and WaPo can see their demise written on the internet wall, and they're doing their best to ensure that they won't be missed.
It's not about free speech. It's about judgment. The Times will never regain its credibility until it understands intolerance of bad judgment is essential to a good newspaper, and good government. Until then, we will be stuck in an incestuous cesspool of incompetence (Frank Rich and Krugman excepted).
Kristol is a Bush propagandist and a liar. He uses the "liberal elite," the same words used by Rush Limbaugh, Neal Boortz and other Bush toadies on the radio. The real problem is the "lying elite," which clearly includes the New York Times. Remember Judith Miller? The Times stands for nothing.
He's a voice of gravitas and significance on the Right. The NYT has been sinking in the quicksand with its too liberal orientation. This move restores balance and may help them begin building readership among Right demographics who read more, and buy more product, than Left readers.
larrybowa -
Are you serious? "Krsitol is excellent"? Have you ever read anything he's written? The man has been wrong in virtually every public utterance he's ever made. Why would you think someone who has proven himself time and again to be clueless is "excellent"? I can't wait to hear your assessment of GW...
Rosenthal defense about hiring Kristol is to claim that NYT readers fear "opposing views". What a ridiculous argument. Negative reaction to the NYT hiring Bill Kristol is not about fearing opposing views, it's about giving credence (and a platform) to a person who championed a war of choice and who has been wrong on almost everything in regard to foreign affairs to date. Will the New York Times hire Anne Coulter next? (And then try to justify it). The Kristol decision is a true misstep by the NYT.
This is Judy Miller's perfect remplacemt Hurray for Time's shareholders.
Bill Kristol (R) Tel Avid will do a good job.
The single benefit to readers of the Times' Op-Ed section of a Kristol incumbency is in learning first-hand the latest lunatic views of the neocon cult without having to access one of their insipid rags.
This actually could prove both fun and funny.
No conservative voice? What's David Brooks - a flaming liberal? Kristol is without credibility, he's a partisan hack. Moves like this are why the NYT and other papers are losing circulation.
What, did Ann Coulter turn them down? This is just the same ivy league press circle jerk happening again.
My goodness. As the comments on this page make clear, Rosenthal is right. The Left is scared to death of being confronted with opposing views. It has become the most intolerant movement in the country. Thank goodness the American people have the good sense not to give the far Left too much political power, or we'd have a Stalinist state.
Funniest event of the year!! The NYT has spent decades spreading biased liberal BS to its readers. Now the remaining readers of this Democrat Party Newsletter are so blindly drinking the Kool Ade of socialism that they accuse their own version of Tass of being biased towards Conservatives because they hire 1 conservative writer who will write one story a week. If the Liberal Agenda is so weak that 1 writer can tear it down maybe they need to reconsider that agenda.
I see that the trolls are out in force to regurgitate their witless right-wing talking points. They hope that endless repetitions of bullshit will lead their weak-minded cohorts to believe the conservatives. They themselves probably still believe that Iraqis were involved with 9/11 and that Saddam had WMD. Information cannot argue with an open mouth.
I don't mind opposing views. I'm not afraid to discuss issues. But Kristol has been wrong about Iraq. No WMD, no ties to al-Quaida, had nothing to do with 9/11, and to think that the Iraq military was a threat to the US is a gross insult.
Besides Kristol has his pulpit on Fox news. I think it would have been better for the NYT to hire a libertarian.
Post a Comment