Bill Kristol: NYT's newest columnist??!!

from today's New York Times

"William Kristol, one of the nation’s leading conservative writers and a vigorous supporter of the Iraq war, will become an Op-Ed page columnist for The New York Times, the newspaper announced Saturday....."

I can't believe this!!

The "Newspaper of Record" hires someone as an op-ed columnist who advocated "...that the government should consider prosecuting The Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions...."

Was there anybody wronger than Kristol about the Iraq War and what a cakewalk it was all going to be? What could he possibly add to the public dialog but stupidity, arrogance and wrong headedness?

I used to like to read the NYT, back in the 20th century when you could still count on them for at least an informative newspaper.

I can't understand their motives---do they think conservatism is a new and coming thing?? Worth hearing more about?

Is this "fairness" on their part? Its not like they don't have Brooks and friedman to hold down the conservative side.

the NYT once again proves itself to be another establishment media rag, ready to blat anything the RNC faxes out

•  Tip Jar

  I don't usually do diaries this short but I had to comment on this.

  What could possibly be their motive? Kristol's dumber than a room full of Republican'ts

  by exlrrp on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:41:36 AM PDT

•  The sick and twisted crossword puzzles are the

  only reason I pick up the NYT anymore - and even then they're only used copies.

  Bill Kristol as a columnist?  That's waaaay too sick and twisted even for me.

  Not to mention making the Times that much more - ummmm . . . . what's the word . . . . irrelevant?

  by sxwarren on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:42:16 AM PDT

  •  Sports and entertainment perhaps?

    I wouldn't know, haven't read it in years. Best info is on the 'net.

    by truong son traveler on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:59:49 AM PDT

    •  Ok. So the film reviews are pretty good.

      But the sports section just seems to go on and on about nothing but teams from New York.  

      Booooooorrrriiinnnnnnnng!

      ;-)

      by sxwarren on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:29:18 AM PDT

      •  Snob appeal out here on the West Coast

        OK I admit it--I started reading it the same way I started to like cappucino and wine with corks  in  the bottles. And the people who subscribe to it out here, like my brother, tend to be more of the connoiseur type, you might say. Wine Snobs, Mercedes drivers  and whatnot. (like my brother)

        I really can't say why people like it out here, other than snob appeal---there's plenty of good newspapers out here

        by exlrrp on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 09:14:20 AM PDT

•  does the Times want to become the comic sheet

  of record?

  by testvet6778 on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:44:05 AM PDT

•  didn't he just get let go by Time mag or Newsweek

  when they didn't renew his 2008 contract?

  by testvet6778 on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:45:03 AM PDT

  •  Dunno, but maybe

    I don't follow his career at all but I wouldn't doubt it. Who would want to add such a wrong headed thinker to their staff?

    The man has nothing new to say and what he has said is mostly BS. HIs presence makes the NYT nothing but ass wipe and not very good ass wipe at that.

    by exlrrp on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:48:58 AM PDT

  •  Think

    Time let Krisol and Krauthammer go...

    by nyc in exile on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:52:01 AM PDT

    •  not all publishers are crazy

      by testvet6778 on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:56:43 AM PDT

      •  Kudos to Time

        Now let them can Joe Klein and I might start reading it again

        by exlrrp on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 09:08:07 AM PDT

•  

  I have been a subscriber to the times for several years but stopped receiving it when I moved to Connecticut. For some reason they just don't deliver it to my house - even after several complaints. I have been meaning to cancel the subscription for some time - why pay for it if I'm not receiving it and I usually wind up buying it at the train station anyway. But now I realize that there is a higher reason why I have never gotten around to making that call - I can now say I am cancelling it BECAUSE they are hiring BILL KRISTOL.  I can now cancel in PROTEST. It's all coming together : )

  by nyc in exile on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:50:32 AM PDT

•  I don;t think Billy boy will like my comments on

  my blog about it   click on the link in my signature line  he makes me ill

  by testvet6778 on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:57:51 AM PDT

•  I'm a Times junkie and was about to cancel but

  When I thought a little about the Times' readers reactions to BK's drivel, the prospect seems quite refreshing that this chearleader for the death of innocents in the name of corporate and military power will be explicitly exposed to an intelligent audience that is able to respond. It's hard to believe that the Times actually takes this man's opinions seriously. Is it possible that there's an ulterior motive? Remember, sunshine is the best disinfectant.

  by relapse on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:17:05 AM PDT

  •  Interesting perspective

    I enjoy watching David Brooks get skewered in the LTEs every week... Maybe Kristol will get run out on a rail....

    by nyc in exile on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:20:16 AM PDT

  •  I'm with you on this.

    I often have great fun writing LTEs to them on Brooks, and Kristol's an even bigger, juicier target than he is.

    Also I have feeling that he won't last long, as he doesn't even make a pretense of reasonableness. Look for their Public Editor to get buried under a tsunami of outrage.

    Didn't they hire someone when Safire retired that sort of disappeared shortly thereafter?

    by sidnora on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:43:58 AM PDT

•  Time for some driftglass...

  ....Because the New York Times just announced that, as far as it's concerned, being a mendacious prick is no longer a bad thing.

  Being a slaughterporn whore is no longer shameful.

  Apparently being a walking advertisement for every single thing that is wrong with the blood-caked, sociopathic Neocon Right is no longer even an impediment to extremely lucrative employment at the apex of the "liberal" NYT.
  ......

     Driftglass is the right stuff. It takes a poet sometimes. And see the picture with the article..

  by KenBee on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:22:10 AM PDT

•  other

  He sells product.

  The bottom line is the bottom line.

  by Danjuma on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 08:28:17 AM PDT

  •  Yeah but other people sell product too

    EVERYBODY sells product there but they have choices.  I can't understand it, its not like he was prescient on anything, he's an obvious flak for "Mr 28%" Bush

    Why Kristol? he can't claim truth or the right on almost anything. And in a publication long villainized by the RWNM, they an hardly be appealing to the majority of their readers. A far better choice: Keith Olbermann

    Newspapers are known by their columnists like people are known by the company they keep.  I can only see this as a move to the right for the NYT and its not the first.  

    by exlrrp on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 09:06:47 AM PDT

•  It seems an important qualification

  for pundits and commentators these days to have been totally fucking wrong about Iraq, and to remain totally fucking wrong with pride of a man who invented freeze-dried dog-shit.

  by Subterranean on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 09:06:46 AM PDT