…and this is a 
Kristol? You've got to be kidding
Category: Politics
Posted on: January 7, 2008 6:05 AM, by PZ Myers
I gripe about the NY Times now and then — the newspaper is an infuriating mix of the best and the worst of print journalism. I've had a couple of the people who work there stop by in the comments now and then, and I'd love to see one of them show up now and explain something to us all.
William Kristol??!? Jebus. The man has spent years demonstrating that he's a clueless ideologue who always gets it wrong.
So wy, NY Times, why?
And if you don't know Kristol's litany of failure, Tom Tomorrow reminds us.
Politics
Comments
Apparently the editorial board feeling they needed more "balance." There apparently were not enough idiots there writing columns.
Posted by: John Vreeland | January 7, 2008 7:01 AM
The link to the Tom Tomorrow comic intercepts you with a "subscribe now" page for Salon. Can anybody provide a free link to the comic?
Posted by: Martin | January 7, 2008 7:04 AM
On that "subscribe now" page there's a very small link in the top right that bypasses it. This takes you to the Salon homepage, and if you then click on PZ's link again it should get through.
Posted by: Olaf Davis | January 7, 2008 7:09 AM
Mr. Kristol will fit right in with fellow morons Tom Friedman and Maureen Dowd.
Posted by: SLC | January 7, 2008 7:29 AM
This is actually a big step for the Times. They've never had a comics section. Maybe this is the beginning and they'll find somebody to illustrate Kristolls' columns.
Posted by: Steve | January 7, 2008 7:39 AM
Kristol is the son of the equally clueless Gertrude Himmelfarb, author of the odious "Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution". As one reviewer remarked about Himmelfarb, she had "an advanced case of Darwinitis, a complaint that afflicts those of a literary bent and strong attachments to pre-scientific culture, who find in the theory of evolution a disturbing and mysterious challenge to their values." That's one of the best literary put-downs I've ever seen.
Posted by: Jeffrey Shallit | January 7, 2008 8:01 AM
I like the nickname "Krissandra".
(Also, spelling check: "So why, NY Times, why?"
Posted by: Blake Stacey | January 7, 2008 8:14 AM
That's literally perverse. Cassandra's curse was to prophesy accurately but not be listened to. Our curse is that Kristol's prophecies are wildly inaccurate but are listened to by the US government.
Posted by: Mike from Ottawa | January 7, 2008 8:51 AM
spin, spin, spin ... spin, spin, spin, and more spin.
Translation: LIES, LIES, LIES ... LIES, LIES, LIES, and more LIES!
:-(
Posted by: Ben Abbott | January 7, 2008 8:52 AM
Kristol will represent Likud on the editorial page of NYT.
Posted by: Bob | January 7, 2008 8:56 AM
Haha, while on the Salon site i came across this new Opus comic:
http://images.salon.com/comics/opus/2008/01/06/opus/story.jpg
Posted by: Brian W. | January 7, 2008 8:58 AM
I like Bill's "pop-sociology" remark. I think Al Franken played it 3 times a day for a year
Posted by: CleveDan | January 7, 2008 8:58 AM
They have to balance neocon-lite Brooks with neocon-batshit Kristol. Surely everyone can grasp the journalistic necessity of this?
First the WaPo, now the Grey Lady. Dead-tree papers have officially jumped the shark. Bye.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | January 7, 2008 9:06 AM
You're missing the point; it's got nothing to do with the positioning, vailidty or quality of his views merely that he will generate a lot of traffic on their website in comments. This has been happening over in the UK for a year or so now; the Guardian, Telegraph and Daily Mail print op-ed pieces by the most woefully inept, prejudiced, deluded and uninformed writers. The comments sections go berserk correcting/arguing with the writer; result? Happy newspaper as they pint to the traffic.
Move along, nothing new to see here.
Posted by: AllanW | January 7, 2008 9:22 AM
Kristol represents the sentiments of Americans who desire to maximize US military activities in the areas around Israel.
Posted by: Bob | January 7, 2008 9:40 AM
If it's traffic they want, couldn't the Times hire LOL-Cat instead? The law of averages suggests LOL-Cat would get things right more often.
Posted by: McLir | January 7, 2008 9:41 AM
Like Jane Smiley, I am boycotting the N.Y. Times.
AlterNet:
Next week, I am really going to miss The New York Times. For years now, I have spent at least part of every morning reading the Times, and I love its variety. In addition, I have had a long and enjoyable writer's relationship with the Times. I've written for the magazine, the Travel Section, the Book Review, and the Op-Ed page (once I wrote in favor of divorce, and they received a gratifying hail of shocked, shocked shocked! letters in response). On the day I heard the first rumor about my Pulitzer Prize, I was working with one of the Book Review editors. In a state of disbelief, I asked her if she had heard anything. She said "No, but here at the New York Times, we have a saying that eighty percent of rumors are true." I liked that. It agreed with my experience as a gossip. Just a couple of months ago, I wrote a sidebar for the magazine. The piece was fun, the editor was fun, and they embedded me in an article about Daniel Day-Lewis. Who could ask for more?
Given my attachment to the Times over the years, I have to say that I even forgave them for Judith Miller, difficult as that was. But after the advent of Bill Kristol on the editorial page next week, that's it for the Times and me.
I will get my Krugman fix from the blogs.
Posted by: CalGeorge | January 7, 2008 9:54 AM
I guess since WIlliam Safire left and John Tierney failed to live up to his mantle of complete, toe-curling idiocy they had to find a total f**kwit to enrage us twice a week. As #14 says this is mainly about stirring up controversy but it does also seem that the NYT has aspirations to being a paper of balance, whatever that may mean, and is happy to print absolute lies to try and maintain this abstract position.
Generally I think their op-ed columnists are a disaster (Brooks is slimy and sneaky and wrong; Dowd and Collins seem determined to keep alive ideas of women's shallowness and inability to hold positions of power; I can't even read Friedman anymore he's so ignorant; Kristoff, when he deigns to write, is an egotistical maniac although at least he focuses on matters of import; Stanley Fish is a ludicrous blowhard) and along with their very weak reporting which tends to follow the story as set by others it's a very sad indication of the state of American political discourse that this the most authoritative and widely read newspaper in the nation.
Posted by: Aaron Whitby | January 7, 2008 9:54 AM
Following on; is this the first major policy shift of the new owner? If so it is consistent with the UK 'papers they control. Controversy/traffic not news. Standards poor and declining.
Just my two cents worth ...
Posted by: AllanW | January 7, 2008 10:17 AM
holy shit, JAD adverstising.
SPAM! kill it.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | January 7, 2008 11:09 AM
advertising even...
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | January 7, 2008 11:11 AM
Posted by: Bobby | January 7, 2008 11:26 AM
I liked the first one. It had overtones of 'adverse' which made it appropriate.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | January 7, 2008 11:30 AM
You may be giving the NYT too much credit to believe that they're thinking about their readers at all. If you read Charles Kaiser, you find that Kristol and his family and the NYT editorial page editor and -his- family go way back. Like, last generation back. (hat tip - Glenn Greenwald)
It's about who you know, not whether you can think your way out of a wet paper bag.
Posted by: FungiFromYuggoth | January 7, 2008 11:44 AM
It would seem that the Jehovah Witnesses and Kristol have the same track record for predicting the future. After a while, the JW gave up on that and now pretend it never happened. They have not disappeared. Kristol might one day realize that his old predictions will not disappear and show the same intelligence as the JW. Alas, it would seem he has the same staying power though. And through the power of The New York Times, he can show up at your front door, like the JW.
Posted by: Janine | January 7, 2008 11:46 AM
Well I can see a person calling him self a genius when he repeatedly demonstrates himself to be an increasingly unhinged disgraced Professor in need of serious mental health treatment.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | January 7, 2008 11:59 AM
He needs to polish up his Kristol ball.
Posted by: Christianjb | January 7, 2008 12:01 PM
off topic - Did people hear the Evolution vs ID discussion on Dianne Rehms this morning? The ID proponent was John Calvert (sp?) he went on for a bit about "scientific materialism" vs the mind. Does anyone have a link to a thorough discussion/dissection of the argument he was making? What he said didn't seem to make sense. By scientific materialism does he just mean facts and evidence?
Posted by: Kathryn | January 7, 2008 12:10 PM
Chimpy, you are giving what JAD what he wants. And sadly, I guess I am also helping out his hijacking here.
Posted by: Janine | January 7, 2008 12:19 PM
Yeah I know. sorry. I'm done.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | January 7, 2008 12:27 PM
Bill Maher slams the neocons, and Kristol in particular, in this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtT3HS1UF6s
"You know what Nostradamus, why don't you sit this one out?"
Posted by: McLir | January 7, 2008 12:36 PM
"By scientific materialism does he just mean facts and evidence?"
That's how I've always taken that term. I feel it was made up so it could be criticized as just another ideology.
Posted by: Will E. | January 7, 2008 12:42 PM
Hmm. I think they need to rewrite an episode of "The Boondocks". Lets see, we make it two little girls and their grandma. She brings home a new guy named "Kristol, like the champagne", and her kids keep telling her, "He's a hoe grandma!", but refuses to listen, until someone shows up to find him. Hmm.. Who in the Bush admin has a stupid enough name to be recast as, "A Pimp Named Slickback"?
Some key parts of the show:
Pimps prayer, also rewritten: "Let us pray the Pimp's prayer: Lord, Pray for the soul of this puppet and guide my Pimp hand and make it strong Lord, so that he might learn hoe's place."
Or this one, rewritten: "All Rupublicans are not hoes, We're talking 20-25% tops."
Sorry, I couldn't help it. Its just that name, and remembering that episode of the cartoon... lol
Posted by: Kagehi | January 7, 2008 12:55 PM
I used to only read the Weekly Standard in the morning so that I could shower and scrub myself clean after being violated by Kristols column.
Looks like I'll have to read the NYTs before breakfast as well, or like others just boycott the ignorance.
Posted by: qedpro | January 7, 2008 1:12 PM
#17, I've been boycotting Jane Smiley ever since she told everyone to stop reading Huckleberry Finn because his use of dialect was bad. Go and read "On a 1000 Acres" and I'll show you bad dialect.
Posted by: James | January 7, 2008 1:24 PM
Posted by: Bobby | January 7, 2008 1:30 PM
Just another case of wing-nut welfare. What's worse, is they think it's a meritocracy over there when it's closer to an infinite regression of boss's sons hiring boss's sons...
Posted by: Moses | January 7, 2008 1:36 PM
Odd, I had always believed that Dowd was a humorist. Not a very good one, of course; she couldn't deliver a one-liner as well as Henny Youngman.
BTW, anywone who pays for the hardcopy of the NYTimes has to have his/her head examined. It's available for free over the Internet, but I prefer foreign sources.
Posted by: raj | January 7, 2008 2:02 PM
As part of the rest of the world (RotW), I can't help but be nervous that US pundits and politicians care so much about being righteous and so little about being right.
It is for this reason I hear that Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic is planning a new SpaceShipForEver, designed to carry a specific 3.03 million people into space to search for the mythical planet designated WMD.
At any rate, Billy Kristol should go back to hosting the Oscars.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 2:09 PM
Brownian, you're thinking of Billy Crystal
Posted by: Stanton | January 7, 2008 2:11 PM
No, I'm thinking we'd all be better off 'journalists' such as this clown were rendered harmless by being forced to write Waterworld gags for Hollywood circle jerks.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 2:16 PM
Man, I wish we could up vote comments like on Reddit. +1!
Posted by: gex | January 7, 2008 2:17 PM
"Basically, yes. More specifically, "materialism" has become a code word for "does not provide my religious beliefs with an unearned seat at the table"."
Freakin' Brilliant
Posted by: Lago | January 7, 2008 2:50 PM
Kathryn,
I caught the last ten minutes of the Dianne Rehm show so I missed most of the debate but in that ten minutes the ID guy kept trying to butt in when others were commenting. Dianne had to keep jumping in and telling him to basically shut up and let other people talk.
One commenter called ID creationism and the guy jumped in inisisting that ID is not creationism; he just repeated the same old well pilloried story.
I wish I could remember who the evolution proponents were, they were very good.
Posted by: Todd | January 7, 2008 2:51 PM
Kathryn,
I found the link. There's a link where you can d/l the segment and listen to the right.
http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/
Posted by: Todd | January 7, 2008 2:58 PM
Check out Jim Fallows of The Atlantic on what Kristol brings to the table as a Times columnist. Pretty funny.
http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/the_nyt_introduces_a_wordsmith.php
Posted by: tinisoli | January 7, 2008 3:10 PM
Let's see here:
When Paul Krugman cited a Salon.com story by Jason Leopold on then-Army-Secretary Tom White that was later called into question because Leopold allegedly couldn't back it up (see Leopold's response here), not only was Krugman made to apologize but Salon fired Leopold.
Meanwhile, fellow Op-Edder William Safire was spinning bullshit about Mohammed Atta and Prague and Saddam, and alleged JOURNALIST Judith Miller was slapping up PNAC guru and convicted embezzler Ahmed Chalabi's crap on Page Fricking ONE of the NYT.
Remember when journalists were held to higher standards that Op-Edders, even if the Op-Edders were evil dirty liberals? It all seems so long ago.
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | January 7, 2008 3:31 PM
But, but..... aren't all the people who work at the NYT godless libruls?!?!?!?!? (end of snark)
Posted by: Skwee | January 7, 2008 3:43 PM
Oh noes, JAD's trolling for new friends. I guess his little sycophant VMArtin must have finally swallowed more than he could stomach.
Maybe he'd do better by praying.
How I love it so!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 4:05 PM
Looks like Kristol's first column is going to need a correction. He quoted Michael Medved and atributed it to Michelle Malkin.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2008/01/whoopsie_kristo.php
Although just the idea that he thought Malkin was worth quoting is disturbing.
Posted by: OriGuy | January 7, 2008 4:58 PM
John A. Davison, whoever that is.
You don't like my chosen pseudonym and honorific? Well then, feel free to call me Christ, since that isn't a proper name either.
I love it so!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 5:03 PM
John A. Davison--
Somethings wrong with your blog. I'm at school in the lab and I can't bring it up. It's like, blocked, or something. Oh well!
Posted by: David H | January 7, 2008 5:03 PM
BTW, has PZ "endorsed" any candidate ? Just a few hours from the most important primary of this election...
Posted by: negentropyeater | January 7, 2008 5:06 PM
Although just the idea that he thought Malkin was worth quoting is disturbing.
Ewww. I feel dirty just having read Malkin.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | January 7, 2008 5:06 PM
In the case noone has seen this video, I strongly recommend it,
"I don't want my girls to live in a country based on fear..." Michelle Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqCYFpUAJ2Q
Thought it does resonate very well with most of what New Atheism and PZ represents for me.
I hope it does make people a bit more optimistic about the future than reading about some Neoconservative Dinausaur Crap like Kristol.
Posted by: negentropyeater | January 7, 2008 5:50 PM
Some years back my local rag (a subsidiary of the NYT), feeling an unmet need for yet another "conservative"* columnist, ran a little competition asking readers to vote for one of the authors of several sample op-eds.
I didn't bother to participate, but was mildly gratified when one Thomas Sowell was declared the winner. It seemed his pieces were the dumbest and would do most to discredit the right-wing cause.
Could it be that the editors of the nation's leading newspaper (a) really are liberals, and (b) have finally caught up to the Machiavellian cunning of a burnt-out case from the '60s quietly self-destructing in a small southern town?
* They may call themselves "conservatives", but in their present form they comprise the dominant social force for change in America. (Change, as genuine conservatives used to tell us, and these guys prove, is not always for the better.)
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | January 7, 2008 8:46 PM
If you ever see a conspiracy theory that includes the PNAC in it, remember that the PNAC is William Kristol with a fax machine.
At least that's according to Francis Fukuyama, who has signed off on at least one of those faxes.
Posted by: wildcardjack | January 7, 2008 9:15 PM
Shorter Bill Kristol: "Torture is fun! Kill the the Arabs, kill the Moslems. European and Russian Jews stole Palestine fair and square and those sub-human animals must accept the Israelis as their overlords or be exterminated like the vermin they are. Nuke Iran, bomb Syria, crush the Palestinians. I'm talkin big time. Yep, bow wow, y-e-e-h-a-w: yee haw."
Posted by: noodlesoup | January 7, 2008 9:37 PM
They fired Judith Miller, so they had to hire another one of Dick Cheney's minions.
Posted by: ndt | January 7, 2008 10:27 PM
Don't link to Salon, they suck. Tom can be found at http://action.credomobile.com/
Oh and the NYT is dead to me. USed to love Gail Collins. Who could've foreseen that she steer the editorial page over a cliff.
Posted by: pablo | January 7, 2008 10:49 PM
Greenwald tells you why:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/03/various_items/index.html
Posted by: chadwig | January 8, 2008 1:25 AM
Here's a site that made a few corrections to Kristol's first op-ed:
http://www.236.com/news/2008/01/07/bill_kristol_makes_political_p_3335.php
Posted by: YSTH | January 8, 2008 2:16 AM
Hold your piece P.Z.
Posted by: ichabod crane | January 10, 2008 6:59 AM