Jack Shafer: New York Times Shouldn't Replace Bill Kristol

Just because I think that the New York Times should leave vacant the opinion-columnist position just evacuated by William Kristol doesn't mean I think he's irreplaceable. He's completely replaceable: I can name a thousand bloggers who filed better copy daily during the year Kristol wrote weekly for the Times. Why did his work reek? He's a good writer, a smart thinker, well-connected, and a dazzling smiler. Was he being deliberately perverse about the gig, trying to test the crap-acceptance threshold of the Times with his copy? Or just lazy? That's my guess. Has any big-league columnist put less effort into his pieces than Kristol? If he labored more than 45 minutes on the average piece, I'd be astonished.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[swift goat pet for truth]

Oh, yes.

Say, let's get Michelle Malkin.

[DRaymond]

Lesson to be learned...­never accept a gig for an institution that you have built your career around regarding with contempt.

Kristol clearly treated his gig with contempt because he regarded the Times with contempt. The only rational reason for accepting the job was for self-promotion and a quick buck. That will never produce quality.

[dutt]

Replace him with what? Perhaps a magic 8 ball. At least it would have more credibility.

[lapdogs]

The only thing Kristol was "good for" was keeping a person hired at The New York Times who had to insert all the CORRECTIONS for his Op-Eds!!!

Other than that, his writings were a piece of crap!!

[gypsy508]

Personally, I'd like to see a columnist that is not an apologist for Democrats or Republicans and holds both conservatives and liberals to the fire. That's one I would read.

[zedthewizard]

he's already been replaced. check the pod count.

[ReealOne]

I agree.....­. demons should NEVER be replaced.

[IndieBlue]

Hey, every court needs its jester.

[sixx]

Legacy, wrong for our country, business, universities, and news papers.

[robeson]

How could any human possibly replace William Kristol?

[jsgaetano]

Don't worry about lil Billy. There's always Wingnut Welfare to fall back on. He'll be fine, end up with a promotion and nice big office at Fox, or maybe the Cato Institute or another lunatic fringe outfit.

[bluegreenred]

Yes, they should.
Clowns belong in the circus, not writing for papers.

[Lemeritus]

Another misleading HP headline -- Mr. Shafer isn't saying the NYT should keep Kristol, just that he shouldn't be replaced in kind or even with a regular opiner.

To the people who write headlines here at the Huffington Post: what gives? Writing headlines is an art form, a little haiku, a little Readers Digest, sometimes joyous punnery, sometimes just the flat manhole cover on a work-a-day story. Headlines should grab attention, but misleading ones in a forum where people frequently only comment on their reaction to a headline can distort the entire dialogue. Tighten it up, folks.

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Kristol, like all Republicans, is an ldiot.

And the position shouldn't be filled, because nobody needs to read op-ed pieces by ldiot Republicans, when we can't escape the daily fallacious talking points of dittoheads who listen to Rush, Hammity et al.

[elizaconnors]

Kristol writes and speaks conservative fluff. I wouldn't mind him being replaced by a conservative intellectual. Please tell me that there are a couple of those out there, because I would hate to think that we have been wringing our hands over people with the intellectual capacity of Kristol.

How about a conservative economist? A one year contract would keep that person busy, I would imagine.

[greatlardini]

Conservative intellectual? Buckley, perhaps, but after that the pickin' is mighty slim.

[Lemeritus]

Well, the NYT still has David Brooks. Pultizer Prize-winners George Will and Charles Krauthammer are both available on The Washington Post, as is Kathleen Parker who also writes for the National Review. Tony Blankley holds forth at the Washington Times and blows hot air onto Left, Right and Center, NPR, on Fridays. Any one of them -- whether you agree with them or not -- is head and shoulders better than Kristol.

As for a conservative economist.­.. I can't think of a single one comparable to the left's Paul Krugman. Doesn't mean there isn't one; just that no one comes to mind.