Posted on 01/26/2009 12:09:11 PM PST by lewisglad
The famous neoconservative published his final New York Times column today. Scott Horton, who broke news on Kristol's involvement in the selection of Sarah Palin, reports on real reasons the Gray Lady didn't renew his contract.
It must have been a bittersweet moment, said a New York Times insider about
The New York Times decision not to renew Bill Kristols opinion column was because of the conservative writers sloppiness and uneven quality, according to a reliable source with first-hand knowledge of the decision. Today, the Times features a signature Kristol piece, discussing the heroic role of conservatism in modern American history and contrasting this with the fecklessness of American liberals. But only the last line is newsworthy: This is William Kristols last column.
Kristol was informed of the move sometime around January 13, when he was invited to a dinner with Barack Obama that included other conservative columnists and took place at George Wills house. It must have been a bittersweet moment, said the Times insider. Indeed, Kristol crowed about the Obama dinner: he and his comrades had gotten lamb chops in elegant surroundings, while a group of ostensibly liberal writers who met with Obama the following morning got coffee in Styrofoam cups. Except, as it turns out, that was a typical Kristol miscueaccording to columnist Andrew Sullivan, who was present, the morning gathering hadnt been served as much as a glass of water.
A source close to the Times says Kristol's ideology wasn't the issue. The problems were more fundamental.
The source makes clear that the decision not to renew Kristols contract is not related to his neoconservative ideologyKristols proximity to key Washington players ranging from Bush and Cheney to John McCain (whom he supported in 2000) was considered a distinct plus. His leading advocacy of the Iraq War also added to his appeal. Kristol was viewed as a mover and shaker whose ideas had ready impact on the political firmament in Washington.
The problems that emerged were more fundamental. Kristols writing wasnt compelling or even very careful. He either lacked a talent for solid opinion journalism or wasnt putting his heart into it. A give-away came in the form of four corrections the newspaper was forced to run over factual mistakes in the columns, creating an impression that they were rushed out without due diligence or attention to factual claims. A senior writer at Time magazine recounted to me a similar experience with Kristol following his stint in 2006-07. His conservative ideas were cutting edge and influential, I was told. But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.
Kristol also regularly commented on political developments in which he was personally engagedwithout disclosing the depth of his engagement. The Daily Beast previously highlighted his deep involvement in selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be John McCains running mate. In the campaign season that followed, boosterism about Sarah Palin became a staple of his writing, even at the expense of his relationship with McCain and leading figures in the McCain campaign. This conduct blurred the distinctions between being an actor on and observer of the political stage, raising some concern among the guardians of The Times credibility.
Tough as this was for Kristols promoters, he might still have survived as a columnist had it not been for an attitude of casual and reflexive disloyalty he publicly displayed towards The Times itself. A good example came in an appearance with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show on October 30. Heres the way Editor and Publisher described it:
Appearing once again on The Daily Show, Bill Kristol, Jon Stewart's favorite whipping boy (Bill Kristol, aren't you ever right?), on Thursday night defended the McCain-Palin ticket, at one point informing the show's host that he was getting his news from suspect sources. You're reading The New York Times too much, he declared. Bill, you WORK for The New York Times! Stewart pointed out.
That, apparently, was the last straw for the Gray Lady.
Despite the pink slip, all the news for Kristol is not so grim. The Washington Post has just announced that it will publish Kristol on a monthly basis. Has the Post made itself into the remainder bin for neocons?
Since when?
And of course Mo Dowd, Bob Herbert, and Paul Krugman are all models of fact checking and elegant style.
No, being a token conservative on the NYT Op-Ed page means walking a tightrope, and I guess Kristol wasn't very good at it. He managed to offend conservatives AND liberals alike.
Never been a big fan of Kristol anyway....he’s aiiiighttt.
Nor am I a fan of the Times.
Just how does one debate a block of wood without looking like an idiot?
..Damon being the wood of course..
Ouch!
It's hard to believe that Rich, or Herbert, or Krugman are all that accurate.
Probably the real reason for dumping Kristol is this: however useful his neocon connections may have been in the Bush years, they don't count for much in the Obama era.
The paper doesn't feel the need to have a second neocon columnist when the Democrats are in charge.
But it is nice to see somebody taking a swing at Kristol for accuracy and exactness, since Kristol was pretty bitchy and condescending talking about the students he used to teach.
Mr. Bill Kristol, paging Mr. Bill Kristol....please report to the showers for de-lousing.
I can only imagine have difficult it would be to associate the vile morons at the NYT.
I guess it’s time for the NYT to sack everyone of its journalists, fortunately their lousy financial state is going to aid them greatly in that endeavor.
FYI
The main reason is that the Old Gray Whore is broke and doesnt want a conservative voice taking funds that could be paid to a moonbat she cant afford to pay...
WILL the Main stream Media get bailed out?...I wonder if there isn’t a provision in the stimulus pkg for them....disguised as contraceptive relief.
Best to get out before the checks start bouncing.
>”the political firmament in Washington”
That phrase deserves a WTF!! I honestly DO NOT want Heaven to be like DC.... one would think that the never-ending political circle jerks would be more like Hell...
They only just now noticed that?
I’ll bet if Kristol had sex with Sweet Caroline like Pinch did, none of this would be happening. Kristol will get published somewhere else. Better to be forced off the ship rather than sink with it...
“sloppiness and uneven quality”
That’s really funny, coming from the Times.
Glad I wasn't the only one to have a big guffaw over that line...talk about an oxymoron: NYT and credibility in the same sentence. Add to it the concept of "guardians of... credibility" and you've got a real knee-slapper.
Aw, fer pete’s sake. One might make an argument that Kristol’s facts were occasionally unfactual, but to say he was an “uneven” (i.e., lousy) writer is just snide. And patently untrue.
“Speaking truth to power” has suddenly gone out of vogue.
Only The New York Times could make Bill Kristol look like a martyr. Sheesh!
“Ill bet if Kristol had sex with Sweet Caroline like Pinch did, none of this would be happening.”
Right. He would be at the clinic getting penicillin shots.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.