The Times Gives Kristol the Pink Slip

The New York Times has made it official: today is Weekly Standard editor William Kristol's final column for the paper. His career was brief, perhaps most noteworthy not for Kristol's conservative opinions, but for the errors he made. But hubris wasn't Kristol's problem. Rather the reverse. It seemed like his heart wasn't really in it any longer. Kristol's problem, I suspect, is that he's beginning to lose faith in the conservative movement itself, which is why his column today sounds a rather unusual note.

Instead of frothing at the mouth about Obama's perfidy, Kristol essentially acknowledges that he's the real thing. He even likens him to neocon hero Ronald Reagan. According to Kristol, "Still, there will be trying times during Obama's presidency, and liberty will need staunch defenders. Can Obama reshape liberalism to be, as it was under F.D.R., a fighting faith, unapologetically patriotic and strong in the defense of liberty? That would be a service to our country."

This is a huge concession, at least for Kristol. It suggests, indeed, that, like David Brooks, Kristol is coming around to the view that Obama's election may even be a good thing.

In my view, it's also further evidence that the right itself is cracking up and that Obama is accelerating its destruction. By peeling off leading commentators on the right, Obama has a chance -- not a big one, mind you, but still a chance -- to create the bipartisan political environment that he promised during the campaign. The real retrograde forces are among the House Republicans, who are champing at the bit to prove their ideological bona fides by voting against Obama's stimlus program. Let them. Their antics offer Obama a golden opportunity to continue to marginalize the fringe right.

For now, the comments of Kristol and David Frum, who has been highly critical of the Republican leadership, indicate that there is movement inside the GOP's cadre of thinkers. No doubt many will celebrate Kristol's exit. But after decades on the right, the neocons are returning to their liberal origins. Isn't it interesting that Kristol's most interesting op-ed came at the end and could have been titled "In Defense of Liberalism"?

So much, at any rate for the liberal media conspiracy theory. Kristol was probably let go by the Times, not because he was too conservative, but not conservative enough.

Comments

[TheIdeologicalDyslexic]

Ahhh, with Kristol Jr. gone, there's only one "Bobo In Paradise" 'left at the Grey Lady: Can we hope that the latte drinking, Volvo driving, discredited dimwit David Brooks is nearing the end of the line at the New York Times?

I can only hope and pray to the god Brooks claims to worship...

[TimSearl]

I don't know why people wanted the NY Times to drop Bill Kristol. I am going to miss his awful, chuckle headed foolishness. It served the public good through its demonstration of the complete vacuity of the Republican party. Often, his column seemed to be a self inflicted wound, a means to destroy his own and his party's reputation. You could read his work, and revel in his stupidity and your own comparative brilliance.

In a more perfect world the NY Times would keep Kristol and get rid of that nasty piece of work, Tom Friedman, whose dangerously distorted world view is far too influential in both Democratic and Republican governing classes. However, unfortunately, he would just join that band of NeoCons at the WaPo and write Op Eds there - or else go to the Wall Street Journal.

My only hope is for some truly earth shattering career ending scandal to envelope and destroy him.

[LaurenMarie984]

Of course, they should have gotten rid of the pulitzer prize winner versus the columnist that has often publicly trashed his employer plus hasn't written a memorable column in his year with the Times.

Seriously, Friedman? I'm really curious why you feel that way

[Dameocrat]

More likely they are jumping ship because the republicans can't carry on their war. I don't want them back.

[luke150]

I don't really care if Kristol thinks Obama's inaugural speech was conservative. I know it was not. That is actually the true value of Obama - he makes most sides think he is with them. For a President, I see this as greatly invaluable.

One more thing. Kristol wants Dems to be one more time "patriotic and strong defenders". They have always been, Bill. They just choose not to politicize so often the patriotism and not to use it to justify other concealed actions - such as invading wrong countries. Or fighting a "war on terrorism" which is the most ridiculous, incorrect and dangerous definition of the current conflict between moderate and extremist worlds.

[RanceSpergl]

You had me until the very last sentence:
"Kristol was probably let go by the Times, not because he was too conservative, but not conservative enough."

Have you read the column? Granted, it's hard to know why New York Times management does anything but really, Bill Kristol sucked. Arrogant and supercilious or a concern snark of the first rank, Bill was the man to get it wrong.

Buh-bye.

[RobertHenryEller]

Hoping against all hope, I would like to believe that the NY Times let Kristol go because he is, to put it in the nicest way, intellectually bankrupt.

But, as they put him in the paper in the first place, and kept him there as long as they did, I doubt the decision makers at the Times would own up to that fact.

[drymartini1]

Newspapers are dinosaurs. who needs newspapers these days. with internet news websites, does anyone actually subscribe newspapers these days?

[hyjanks]

Yeah. I subscribe to the afternoon paper in my hometown. I read it while sipping a dry martini.

[mom2luke]

they may be dinosaurs, but a lot of us still like to read ink on paper....and we need newspapers investigative reporting because that's where all the websites get their news (real news that is, not just rehashing of the news by pundits like kristol)... and a lot of us LIKE them. I hate having to go online to do most everything.... Like we tell our kids, we adults should limit our SCREEN TIME...

[Beachrunner]

Ann Coulter is taking his place. The NYT needs the revenue she'll generate.

[sixx]

The legacy President and the legacy Writer, both gone. Legacy a bad thing for your children.

[krocklin]

Palin was the culmination of the entire Reagan Revolution. The final expression of the Republican philosophy.
And Kristol was as influential as anyone in installing her as Vice Presidential candidate. His belief in her was total; until she was ridiculed and lost.

[2wit]

When Palin was rolled out the buzz was so explosive, who didn’t want to buy into her mystique? But, for all the hype she proved so ethereal that now it is hard to think, "Palin was the culmination of the entire Reagan Revolution".

Really? . . . a whole generational cult at it’s summit? I wonder what Ronald Reagan would think of her SNL skit. He had a sense of humor - so maybe he would chuckle. :D

[Robster]

Actually he gets a jump on looking for a job before all the rest of the times's staff do.

[Goose99]

The headline on the NYTimes article on Kristol leaving should read:

"SINKING SHIP DESERTS RAT"

[KickerBoard]

Nice one!

[ankjack]

Excellent. Now if we could only convince the Los Angeles Times to do the same for Jonah Goldberg.

[jkh]

Just maybe they laid him off because we, the regular Times subscribers and readers, didn't even bother to read him. I have only so much time in my day. Why torture myself reading the opinions of someone for whom I could not possibly have an affinity? Yes, I want to be well rounded, educated, etc. but I'd rather read a recipieI know I will never cook than a neocon with whom I know I will never agree.

[VikingQuest]

Who cares, the entire NY Times is just about done.

I guess that whole "alienate 50% of readers" idea didn't work the way they thought.

When you have to borrow $250 million from Carlos Slim at 14% interest, you know you are in your last days.

[acacia72]

"Who cares, the entire NY Times is just about done."

Many daily newspapers are having problems due to not only the economy but also due to the internet. Why read about important news events that occured yesterday when you can read and even watch live video over the internet of breaking news? And I really don't care about American Idol, the comics or social events, which again, I can find on the internet anyway. Also there's the expense and the waste of trees I can live without.

For these reasons and also because they would not print my opinions and letters to the editor criticizing the Iraq war and bush, I cancelled my subscription to the local "conservative" rag, the Arizona Republic. And NO I did NOT vote for McCain. heh

[Monknhall]

Kristol, in his valedictory column, writes that conservatives have been right on most of the big issues. In what sense, Charlie?

[mom2luke]

ha ha , good one ;)