BILL KELLER ISN'T VERY BRIGHT (or else he thinks you aren't)

Instapundit ^ | 06/27/2006 | GLENN REYNOLDS

[Jameison]

BILL KELLER ISN'T VERY BRIGHT, or else he thinks you aren't. How else to explain this passage in his apologia for the Times' publication of classified information about the terrorist financial surveillance program:


"Some of the incoming mail quotes the angry words of conservative bloggers and TV or radio pundits who say that drawing attention to the government's anti-terror measures is unpatriotic and dangerous. (I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.)"


I realize that the Times' circulation is falling at an alarming rate, but it hasn't yet reached such a pass that its stories are only noticed when Rush Limbaugh mentions them.

A deeper error is Keller's characterization of freedom of the press as an institutional privilege, an error that is a manifestation of the hubris that has marked the NYT of late. Keller writes: "It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press. . . . The power that has been given us is not something to be taken lightly."

The founders gave freedom of the press to the people, they didn't give freedom to the press. Keller positions himself as some sort of Constitutional High Priest, when in fact the "freedom of the press" the Framers described was also called "freedom in the use of the press." It's the freedom to publish, a freedom that belongs to everyone in equal portions, not a special privilege for the media industry. (A bit more on this topic can be found here.)

Characterizing the freedom this way, of course, makes much of Keller's piece look like, well, just what it is -- arrogant and self-justificatory posturing.

[Jameison]

Is Bill Keller a 5 year old in a grown man's body? Curious minds demand to know.

[Jack Hammer]

Vapid ex culpa for treason.

[Clara Lou]

(I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.)"
What a dumbs__. As if the damage weren't already done, Billy-boy. What an obnoxious fool.

[Jameison]

"As if the damage weren't already done, Billy-boy. What an obnoxious fool"

Yup.
Can't believe the sucker actually said that.
And this idiot thinks he is the final arbiter of what should and shouldn't remain classified state secrets in America?
The mind boggles.

[Argus]

Seal Team 6 should pay a visit to W. 43d and dangle Keller out the window until he coughs up the names of his sources in the government. Those scumbags should then be tried for treason and hanged.

[Judith Anne]

Pride goeth before a fall.

Egregious hubris goeth before jumping the shark.

Actually, I wondered today if Keller wasn't doing this with CIA secrets to get attention for himself, like maybe he wants to be known as the modern Woodward-Berstein...lookin' for a Pulitzer, looking to become an icon, thinkin' he's baaad, trying to pull the Gray Lady out of the slump-dump...thinkin' people will buy his rag because he's so hot...

And the funny thing is, he's doomed to fail. Nobody likes the Times. Fewer and fewer advertisers are going to take a risk with a paper that 76% of the country thinks is run by traitors.

[Brad from Tennessee]

Falling circulation and shrinking ad revenue have forced the Times into layoffs in the newsroom. Quality is a thing of the past. Over the last few years the Times has been forced to increasingly correct itself in it's own pages. I found this one today:

"An article yesterday about the controversy over the construction of a dam in Laos that will provide the country a source of income misidentified the location of Thailand, which is expected to get some of the electricity produced as a result of the dam. It is to the west of Laos, not to the east. (Go to Article)"

[HoosierHawk]

All excellent points.

It will backfire on him and The Times.

[Brilliant]

I don't think he's stupid, just evil.

[atomicpossum]

Characterizing the freedom this way, of course, makes much of Keller's piece look like, well, just what it is -- arrogant and self-justificatory posturing.

SOP for the media, really.

[maine-iac7]

I could ask, if that's the case, why they are drawing so much attention to the story themselves by yelling about it on the airwaves and the Internet.)"

Because, unlike the 'people's right/need to know" which you filthy traitors used as your thinly veiled excuse to print classified information that helps our enemies, the people DO have a right/need to know that traitors like you exist that will put their lives at risk. Got that, you lily-livered puking traitor?

_{(that felt good)}

[Dustbunny]

He obviously thinks we are all quite stupid. I hope this ruins the New York Times. I pray they go down the tubes.

[maine-iac7]

I pray they go down the tubes to jail.

There. all better

[Dustbunny]

Yes, I pray the newspaper goes down the tubes and all responsible for printing leaks go to jail along with the leakers.

[Doctor Raoul]

New York Times? Get a rope!

[Recovering_Democrat]

This is news? :)

[GOPJ]

The founders gave freedom of the press to the people, they didn't give freedom to the press. Keller positions himself as some sort of Constitutional High Priest, when in fact the "freedom of the press" the Framers described was also called "freedom in the use of the press." It's the freedom to publish, a freedom that belongs to everyone in equal portions, not a special privilege for the media industry. (A bit more on this topic can be found here.)

Characterizing the freedom this way, of course, makes much of Keller's piece look like, well, just what it is -- arrogant and self-justificatory posturing.

ROTFLMAO Yep, Keller's a puffed-up embarrassment.

[Wristpin]

The only defense information they have protected since 911 is the contents of John Kerry's service record.

[Straight Vermonter]

I can never get enough of this chart.

[rfreedom4u]

Compare thsi to possesion of stolen goods. If documents are classified and you find them it is your duty to turn them in to the government. If you in turn make them public knowledge you are guilty of a crime. If I buy a stereo and it was stolen I am still in possesion of stolen goods. The NY times is no exception.