but, not his reputation *in tatters* after his "supper" w/ Zer0Bambi...
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 Kristol’s opinion column was because of the conservative writer’s 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 Kristol’s 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 Will’s 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 miscue—according to columnist Andrew Sullivan, who was present, the morning gathering hadn’t 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 Kristol’s contract is not related to his neoconservative ideology—Kristol’s 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. Kristol’s writing wasn’t compelling or even very careful. He either lacked a talent for solid opinion journalism or wasn’t 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 engaged—without disclosing the depth of his engagement. The Daily Beast previously highlighted his deep involvement in selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be John McCain’s 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 Kristol’s 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. Here’s 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?
Yea, now that theyre out of power, hes out of power.
The new world is one where its all liberal, all Democrap, all the time.
Bill Krystol is a big govt conservative which basically means he wasn’t a conservative at all. More like a mid-20th Century liberal.
However the criteria the NYT is using to can him are laughable. The entire NYT news/editorial staff are inveterate left wing hacks who lie and misrepresent things religiously.
Too funny.
Proclamation:
There will be no dissident voices heard in the land of the new King. just the beginning
“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.”
Is the NYT serious, after all the problems they’ve had with fictitious pieces? That’s laughable.
Hardihar, the Old Gray Whore. Perfect. May Kristol continue to flourish in a more hospitable matrix. Imagine having to work for the NYT. Uck.
Using my phone to post right now. Check out any recent article about Patterson moving on to another Senate choice. An affair with Pinch and possible tax problems for Sweet C are mentioned constantly. If you can’t find anything, write back and I’ll find something for ya when I get home.
Translation: They need a “conservative” willing to trash Sarah Palin. I suspect we’ll be seeing Kathleen Parker on their opinion pages any day now.
“But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.”
when did that ever stop the SLIMES on a Leftist Article?
It was Commie Purges....They will Punish anyone they think
was too tough on “The Chosen One”...
An earlier thread on Kristol had
the anti semite, anti war, 9/11 Truther Third Party Loons
ranting away against him.
Marxist Obama and his lemmings are the ones to rant against. But then again The Third Party Loons have so much in common with Obama.
I find this a bit hard to swallow.
Kristol should never have taken a job writing for the enemies of the US, and them leaking stories about his so-called bad writing is evidence of their perfidy.
When will the rightwing learn you cannot be friends, or even colleagues with anti-Americans.
HAR har har
If it really was that, and not ideology, we'll see them replace him with another conservative.
I'm not holding my breath.
Really?...I'm gonna have to change my opinion of him.
Step aside... the lightning may strike us both.
Breathless, anonymous sourced hit piece. That so goes with the Times. Bill, not my favorite guy, a big supporter of Palin. Not all bad. Welcome back from the pit. Hopefully, you will get the soil off of your clothing before you come back out in public.
Kristol is a good writer. They're just being snippy because he didn't show proper deference to the NYT. You'd never hear David Brooks making cracks about people reading the NYT too much. So Brooks stays and Kristol goes.
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.