I can just imagine Kristols interview for the NYtimes;
Editor: Everthing looks good Mr. Kristol. But, what is this last Item on your resume? Led effort to start war in Iraq, before and after 9/11? Didn't that actually turn out poorly for us? I have heard that it is in fact not going as well as expected, or at least that's what Tom Friedman and Judith Miller tell me. Too bad shes gone. a really dramatic writer, that Judith.
Kristol; well, its really just a matter of timing. We will find the WMD. We are still looking. Sure, there was no Al Qeada there before WE got there, but look at em NOW! and in fact, while every single stated reason for starting the war has turned out to be false, in time, say in 15 years, they could all sort of turn out to be true, in a manor of speaking.
regardless, I MAKE the news, not just report on it, just like Judith and Tom Friedman.
The NYtimes is a joke. Their credibility is in the toilet. Even now, they are working to sell war with Iran using the same factually void techniques of reporting.
Right is Wrong: the New York Times Corrects Latest Kristol, Brooks Columns on Obama
In a rare move, the New York Times offered a total of four corrections today, right under its editorials, covering the two latest columns from conservative op-ed columnists William Kristol and David Brooks.
Kristol has been plagued with errors since his column was launched several months ago, keeping internal and external fact-checkers busy. The man is a correction-generating machine. One of my country music friends calls Kristol and his conservative stable mate "Brooks and Dumb," and they are featured in my new book on Iraq and the media.
Several bloggers quickly pounced on Monday when Kristol declared that Barack Obama faced difficulties as indicated by losing the West Virginia primary by 41% -- which Kristol said was unprecedented for a frontrunner in recent memory. In fact, they noted Mitt Romney had trounced John McCain by much more than that in Utah just this year, and McCain had lost a couple of other contests by nearly that margin.
Here are the Times' corrections for Kristol:
In his column on Monday, Bill Kristol said he could not find a recent primary in which the candidate who would go on to win the nomination lost by as big a margin as Barack Obama lost by (41 points) in West Virginia. Mitt Romney won the essentially uncontested Utah primary on Feb. 5 with about 90 percent of the vote.
Also, the California Supreme Court is based in San Francisco, not the state capital, Sacramento.
Along with that, the paper carried two corrections on the latest Brooks opus:
The column by David Brooks on Tuesday said incorrectly that Senator Barack Obama voted last week for the farm bill. Mr. Obama did not cast a vote on the bill; he supported it.
Also, Senator John McCain spoke from Chicago on Monday, not Detroit.
Greg Mitchell's new book, which features more Brooks and Kristol follies, is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq (Union Square Press, $11). It features a preface by Bruce Springsteen.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Kristol is so busy carrying water over at Fix Noise he doesn't really have time to check his facts.
Not too surprising. I guess Bill O' will probably be the next new employee at the NYT. That wouldn't surprise me either
Kristol has made four errors in six months.
Not exactly a "plague".
Really? Ask his editor.
Krisol is a "plague".
Why does the New York Times want to go out of business?
You see, the republican rule of journalism is that you can not let facts get in the way of a good story.
Rule of journalism, hell. That applies to rule of government, too.
One publication of a correction is not enough. Corrections should be in the first paragraph of his column for a full week. If columnists don't take a hit to their credibility, they will continue to be sloppy and inaccurate.
Further, this is the old Republican tactic, get the lie out there. No retraction ever gets the attention that the original lie got.
Repeated "errors" should end careers. There are many better journalists who will never get the chance to find an audience because these halfwits don't get removed for repeatedly turning in poor work.
I like your solution- have corrections be the lead-off on their next column. Excellent!
If a slightly liberal collumnist had that many errors they'd be fired and the Times would be acting like there had been a scandal. Rather than continually apologizing for their errors the Times needs to either start subjecting their columns to much more rigorous fact checking and either correct them before publishing or running corrections BELOW THE COLUMN ON THE SAME DAY. That would be funny. Or just fire the jerks for not knowing their butts from a hole in the ground.
If the immediate corrections worked, maybe we could start using the multiple channels of closed captioning on digital TV to start running immediate correction on Fox News next.
Krystol is one of those right wing lunatics that truly doesn't care if his words are accurate as long as they have shock value and can raise eyebrows and turn heads. The NYT's is too finer a newspaper to employ the likes of Krystol and Brooks. There are plenty of conservatives out there along the lines of George Wills, who are at least honest in their statements.
What I would like to know is.......WHERE THE HELL IS THE EDITOR? DOES HE STILL GET A PAYCHECK?
The TImes needs to fire Kristol. His numerous errors are going to damage their credibility.
As to Brooks, those were factual errors, not errors based on bias. I still respect Brooks as he is pretty fair and open-minded most of the time and is a TRUE conservative, NOT a neocon. That said, he should have caught those silly errors himself.
Thank you NYT for these corrections. These columinists need to be placed on a short leash if we readers can trust the veracity and accuracy of their assertions. Since both corrections concern the presumptive Democratic nominee, extra vigilance is in order since Kristol & Brooks are no fans of the Democratics (or of changing the status quo). Beware the 'lies' that morph into 'mispeak'.
Wow, earth-shattering corrections to be sure. This'll swing many voters back Obama's way. Misstating the percentage of a win for Democrats while knowing full well a Republican beat that is breathtaking. Changes my mind about Obama and Clinton. Plus, add the wrong city in type when the candidate himself had trouble on the campaign trail with the same issue, ohwell, this changes everything.
Clearly nothing would change your mind anyway. That is at the heart of being the 29% left. You have to not be swayed by those pesky facts and that annoying truth. These things must be brushed aside with week attempts at humor and sarcasim.
You are correct that the fact that republican's lie on a routine basis is not earth shattering news, everyone sees it everyday. The real miracle is how people like you can take lie after lie after lie and excuse them away without once stoppeing to question things when what your told by the republicans does not meet the reality you see with your eyes. That is earth shattering!
Ammobob does not understand that the Republican party thinks he is to stupid to understand when they lie to him. I have to agree with them.
I think AMMOBOB was being facetious.
Strangely enough, if it had been a liberal columnist making such errors it would have been trumpeted as prima facie proof that Liberals fail to grasp reality or do research. Since we have now hardened the soft bigotry of low expectations after 7 years of Bush/Cheney failures and incompetence we must forgive and forget any errors on the part of consrvative pundits who are known far and wide as being consistently and persistently in error.
Kristol writes and speaks error-ridden garbage. Most people call that lying.
In addition to that, it seems the GOP hacks can't even get straight on the basic facts of an article. They aren't even good at the fundamentals of journalism. What's more is that the people noting all of the corrections are the bloggers that hacks like Krystol mock as being reckless. The bloggers seem to be the only ones who can distinguish fact from fiction and refrain form outright lying.
Well, the precedent has been set... lying is officially okay! Bush has been doing it daily for seven years and no one calls him to task....
Under Sulzberger, the NY TIMES "Whitewater" 'reporting' was a veritable yellow press of lies, innuendo, false allegations, and the Times trumpeting any accusations that any Republican within 5 miles of a microphone could dream up, including the pathetic "White House Travel office firings", the so-called "Lincoln Bedroom Scandal," and the atrocious "White House TRASHING 'scandal'," WITHOUT SO MUCH as ONE PHOTOGRAPH to support WEEKS worth of NYT screaming headlines accusing departing Clinton-Gore staffers of vandalising White House property!
THAT Karl Rove PROPAGANDA MASTERPIECE drove POPULAR VOTE WINNER vp Al Gore RIGHT OUT OF WASHINGTON, TARRED-&-FEATHERED, on a rail of DISGRACE, setting the stage for Bush and Cheney's insanely partisan, NO OVERSIGHT or accountability administration.
Gene Lyons and Joe Conason's book "The Hunting of the President" is a virtual encyclopedia of the Times awful "reporting," backed up by 25 pages of mostly single-line footnotes!
If the Times' "Whitewater" reporting was the ORIGINAL SIN, their sneering LIES and innuendo about Vice President Al Gore all through the summer of 2000, and their even worse SNEERING SCORN for FLORIDA VOTERS ROBBED OF THEIR VOTES, was the journalistic equivalent of Cain's murder of his brother Abel.
Apparently the children on the far-right like to be lied to.
They like to be told fairytales by the likes of Brooks, Kristol the entire staff at FOX-KIDs and the crack news team at CNN.
Americans love the truth.
Republicans only love the appearance of truth.
My children are like that sometimes but, thankfully, they'll grow up someday.
I think Kristol got spoiled and lazy from yakking in an echo chamber for so long.
Yes, no one has disagreed with him for years on that Fox Sunday talk panel. They like war, too.
it is an outrage that the Grey Lady has these two on their pages. The fact that the NYT needs to check their work should be a wake-up call. Fire them from their jobs and let them go over the Fake News, NY Post. Murdock will welcome them with open arms. The NYT should do better than this. They need to wake up, now.
The NYT has them on their editorial page. They represent opinion, not news. There's a difference.
This having been said, the two columnists under discussion would probably be fired if no one read their columns and responded to them. The Times keeps them on precisely because they generate passion ...and revenue...for the paper. People open their NYTs with relish on certain days to get a hit of outrage from the stupid and inaccurate things they've said that morning. (I'll have an adrenalin cocktail, please; hold the rocks.)
If you want to see them gone, do not read their columns online (where a computer keeps track of their readership), do not respond to their columns online or in print (for the same reason). You want to hurt these guys? Boycott them. Boycott their names.
You'll notice I did not use their names in this post. That:s because I don't want LEXUS/NEXUS to record a hit on their names. I don't want either of these two clowns going to the editor of the Times with ammunition on the order of "See! People READ me!"
I see, no room in the liberal mind for decent or different opinions, some might call that facist thinking.
Some might think you have difficulty reading and comprehension. nancytheragingliberal suggests that NYT fire them based on their work (which has consistant errors). Nowhere does she suggest their writers should not have a difference of opinions. Way to misrepresent.
There is plenty of room in the liberal mind for decent opinions. The opinions expressed by Mssr's Kristol and Brooks, however, are often indecent. Some might call that 'fascist' thinking, but they would be wrong. Fascists are and were arch right wingers, so calling left-wingers 'fascist' is a non sequitor. Now let me re-write your post and let's see if it makes a little more sense, then people can challenge your assertions.
"I see (I've omitted the comma splice) no room in the liberal mind for DISSENTING or different opinions (I put a period here, because this sentence already contains a complete thought and this is another comma splice). Some might call that radical thinking."
Now is that what you were trying to say? Yes? Then, okay. Let me ask you in terms you may recognize: How, much, room, do, you, see, in, the, mind, of, a, conservative, for, decent, or, different, opinions? Some, might, call, that, fascist, thinking.
Or some may just conclude your point of view is an overgeneralizationand guided by the right wing echo chamber. There should be a conservative voice, but one who is occasionally correct and can argue facts without so much ideology.
If the conservatives want to argue their point, fine.
It's telling, though, that they are resorting to lies. I'm glad someone is calling them on this. I hope Kristol gets fired.
Kristol the Bloody has been a fatuous neocon since I can remember. Brooks, on the other hand, used to be interesting on occasion; at least until the 06 elections. I imagine this is why he got his gigs on the Newshour and later on the NYT.
I've no idea why, but several months prior to the 06 elections he suddenly became a transparent Republican shill. And he's stayed that way since. It's too bad really.
"Kristol the Bloody"? Really? That sounds kind of butch for a pansy who's never worked a day in his life. It's not like he's laying waste to villages, sacking the coastline, or pillaging. He doesn't actually DO anything.
Let's not make these folks into metaphors for brutality. Brutality implies doing something. They type. They apparently don't even read, which could lead to a paper cut, perhaps, or eye strain.
He has other people's blood on his hands. His reporting and opining was part of the buildup of lies for the war. He's brutal, but cowardly.
How startled Bill Kristol must be to have a publication where he works finally calling him on his lies. Only one or two of his lies, of course, but that's better than nothing. What would be best of all would be for the New York Times to fire him for his venality and incompetence.
One of my country music fans call him and his conservative stable mate "Brooks and Dumb." Sir, I have a suggestion too, they should be called "Dumb and Dumber". You take your pick which is which.
How about "Dumb and Dumber?"
Kristol should focus his energies on his Faux Noise gig -- a forum where they don't fact-check and the truth is not valued.
Posted May 21, 2008 | 10:25 AM (EST)