Muddle-Headed, Fear-Mongering, BushCo Shills Still Have a Right to Shout "Fire" in a Crowded Theater

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 cannot imagine why the Times has hired Kristol. Kristol is not merely some rightwing loose cannon like David Brooks or even William Safire, and his hiring by the Times is not a free-speech issue. Kristol has plenty of opportunities to speak, and if he didn't he could blog, like the rest of us. Kristol is a war-monger and a hate-monger, and his lies have been exposed over and over in the last four years. If you think that the Iraq War is a crime, as I do, it is bad enough that he was one of the primary cheerleaders for it, even after every single one of the reasons that the Cheney/Bush/right wing gave for the attack was exposed. But he is worse than that. Until the NIE report, he was actively advocating bombing Iran, preferably with nuclear weapons, even though the civilians in Iran who would be bombed have nothing at all to do with whatever the Iranian government is doing, or as it turns out, not doing to develop nuclear weapons. In Iraq alone, Kristol has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands. He is unrepentant and eager for more.

William Kristol is a man whose time has come and gone. There was a moment, in, say 2002, when some of his arguments sounded prudent, if not reasonable. Now, he only sounds crazy. NOTHING has turned out as Kristol said it would, and the process of finding this out has cost the American people a great deal, and not only money and lives. Why the New York Times would hire such a person boggles the mind to think of. The announcement even made no sense, pointing out, as it did, that "Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of the Times. In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting the Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions. In a 2003 column on the turmoil within the Times that led to the downfall of the top two editors, he wrote that it was not 'a first-rate newspaper of record,' adding, 'the Times is irredeemable.'" Why would the Times hire such a person? Stockholm Syndrome? Some kind if inside-the-beltway joke? An attempt to lure that bloc of American newspaper readers who listen to Rush Limbaugh? Earth to Times! Maybe they can't read!

Day after day, I read the letters to the editor column. After almost every column by David Brooks, I am struck by how few readers agree with a single thing he says, how many cogently disagree with him. Judging by the letters column, readers of the Times are liberal to moderate, and, most importantly, they have a well-developed sense of decency and responsibility. Has the Times now decided just to stick it to us, willy nilly, by giving Kristol a platform and a paycheck? Who's next, A--- C---, who suggested that the Times building be bombed? Even the Times editors themselves, in an editorial printed yesterday, lament that the U.S. has become unrecognisably lawless and inhumane. Earth to Times! William Kristol is as much to blame for this as anyone on the planet!

So, as of next Monday, the Times feed disappears from my home page, and when I get that 1-111-111-1111 number on my caller I.D., the one that reveals how the Times really thinks of itself, I won't pick up. When they send me the money they owe me for my piece, I will divide it between a charity that benefits Iraq veterans and one that benefits displaced Iraqis. You would have thought that remorse for the Judith Miller debacle would have taught them something, but clearly not. Sadly not.

Comments

[Pete22]

Thanks to whoever posted Andy Rosenthal's email address. Here is what I just wrote him:

Dear Mr. Rosenthal:

Your hiring of William Kristol to write a weekly op-ed column is inexplicable and only further diminishes the tattered reputation of the newspaper. I recognize the need for a newspaper to present various opinions on social and political issues and enjoy reading columns by persons I disagree with, regardless of their place on the political spectrum. But I will not read material presented by known liars and war mongers, which, unfortunately, pretty much describes Mr. Kristol. I know that I am not alone in this regard and fully expect Mr. Kristol's rantings to be ignored by most Times readers. Besides, the Times already has a regular column by a totally discredited neocon -- why on earth would you think you need still another one?

After more than 50 years subscribing to the Times, I am seriously considering cancelling my subscription. At the very least, until Mr. Kristol departs from your op-ed page, I will not knowingly buy a single product advertised in The Times.

[jazzman]

Perhaps they are looking to spice up their editorial page with a little hate and war mongering. Maybe they needed Kristol because Goebbels is no longer available.

[PLGORI]

Here is a letter that I wrote to the NY Times today asking to cancel my subscription. We should all do the same.
Your editorial, "Looking at America," was one of the strongest, most courageous acts of the Times and any newspaper in the United States. It sums up the terrible state of our Nation after being entrusted to the Republicans and their intellectual allies, the neo conservatives. As a reader of the New York Times for at least 10 years, I felt a bit of pride that my newspaper of choice would come out so strongly against the Bush Administration. How short-lived my pride was when I heard that the New York Times would be giving a prominent place on its editorial page to Bill Kristol, one of the architects of the very policies that the Times deplored in its current editorial. There is no excuse or explanation that I will accept for this act. The Times already has numerous right-wing conservatives that it gives credence to on its op-ed page, and it certainly doesn't need one more to claim diversity. As of January 7, 2008, I will cancel my subscription to the Times, unless the paper rescinds its offer to Kristol. I will not support this cynical irresponsible war monger or the paper who employees him. Like others, I will exercise my rights by reading my favorite columnists on the Internet and getting my news from others outlets including the Times on the Internet. I canceled a free subscription to Newsweek after it employed Karl Rove, another architect of the Bush policies, so this will not be my first cancellation. I am only hoping that numerous other subscribers will be inclined to do the same so that we can save this newspaper from itself.

[plutorage]

I have really tried hard to imagine what on earth the Times was thinking. Is there a traditional Jewish diaspora desk at the Times that was sitting empty since Safire left? Or perhaps they feel the best way of exposing the errors of the neocons is to give them wider exposure?

Personally I like David Brook's articles. I think a conservative writing an opinion twice per week in the NY Times is a good idea, especially now that the latest version of conservatism has fallen behind the times and is in need of renewal. Kristol isn't going to develop a new paradigm of conservatism. He has an interest to promote and he is going to promote it even if it means lying through his teeth. That should be below the belt at the times, but apparently it isn't.

[yooper2]

You are (unfortunatly) absolutely correct in your observation about what once was a pretty good newspaper. I hardly ever read an article in the times any more!!! Keep up you great posts-Thanks

[FOXYLADY]

THE NEW YORK TIMES "USED" TO BE CONSIDERED THE BEST PAPER TO SUBSCRIBE TO AND READ FROM PAGE TO PAGE........"WHA" HOPPIN?" SO MUCH BLATHER AND UNTRUTHS AND PANDERING TO BUSH AND COMPANY. UGH AND UGH AGAIN.....WHERE DO I TURN TO NOW FOR ALL THE NEWS THAT'S FIT TO PRINT? THE WEB IS GOOD AND CNN, BBC ETC... BUT GUESS YOU HAVE TO READ MUCH AND GO BY YOUR OWN ACCUMULATION OF "NEW' AS IS HARD TO KNOW JUST WHOM TO BELIEVE ANYMORE.....

[Beofuse]

The NeoCons have always counted on intellectual artifact to tilt the system. Kristol, whether in or out of the New York times, along with Bolten, Bennet, Perle, Wolfowitz, Cheney et al will always resort to Noble Lies, twisted Plato and outright falsehoods to achieve total control for the executive branch. Cheney’s been working on it since birth – I have NO doubt. It should come as no surprise that several right-wing intellectually stunted students recently gathered at U. of Mass for a symposium titled “Give WAR a Chance”. I’m glad John Lennon didn’t have to see this! Included below is a blurb I sent to Salon long ago and is titled “What Nice Teeth You Have, Uncle Leo”.
I've written several times about the dark specter of Leo Strauss’ work at Chicago and his little collection of intellectual sidewinders, molting their moral and ethical impedimenta to evolve from bright to clever. They have all but stolen this country and its governance.It’s easy to envision the seamless seduction of the Boy King who can scarcely follow the intellectual breadcrumbs through the woods to Grandma’s house much less survive the visit. What nice teeth you have, Uncle Leo! If GW hadn’t come along, the NeoCons would have had to invent him (perhaps they did). I wonder if the Boy King knows that HIS Oval Office has become the equivalent of the small table for the kids at Thanksgiving dinner.How sad – just another stunted, patrician, entitled adolescent lacking the intellectual and moral architecture to do the job purchased for him by his family and board-member cronies. I hope GHWB doesn’t mourn that decision about not going to Baghdad - it was the right one even if little GW has become an embarrassment and international menace on the world stage.

[wagelaborer]

I don't have a subscription to the Times, but I buy it at the liquor store.
Not any more.
Jane Smiley, you've expressed my feelings exactly.

[grammeister]

Since David Brooks regurgitates as breakfast Kristol's excreted lunch of the day before, the NYT may be hiring Kristol preparatory to firing redundant Brooks. Why publish diluted, gurgling sleaze when you have its clear, essential source!

[parryisle]

The arithmetic in this comment is incorrect. Kristol and the other Neocons did not show up four years ago but played a leading role in supporting Bush41's first intervention in the distant sands. What surprises many Americans and others around the world is the unlimited access they have been given to vent their war lust. never is history has so few taken control of the foreign policy of a nation which thinks of itself as a "Superpower" and inlficted so much harm on so many.

[thebeerdoctor]

It is an honorable, although dubiously effective action for Jane Smiley to become estranged from the New York Times. But canceling your subscription in this country is one of the last true freedoms you have. Let the money, or the lack thereof, do the talking. Economic boycotts are a sometimes very effective form of peaceful resistance.

[sgk]

The Times would love to hear from everyone via Andrew Rosenthal's email: nytimes.comes.com
Keep up the pressure.

[MordechaiShiblikov]

George Wanker Bush is the epitome of the art of failing upward. This man, an utter and complete nonentity if there ever was one, has failed upward to the presidency and hundreds of thousands have died needlessly. William Kristol is another complete nonentity who has failed upward to the New Jerk Times. If you wish to succeed in this country, just become a brutal and stupid right wing humper and you will go far.

[rmreddicks]

Good luck dumping the subscription. I used to get home delivery. After canceling it took many phone calls from me to them, dealing with incorrect billings, constant dunning notices and threats from their collection agency from them before I could finally shake their low-life ass.

Too bad. I even enjoyed a good deal of the paper. "All the news that's fit. And we and the government decide what's fit. At least since the Pentagon Papers. Thank you very much for your perpetual care subscription."

[Beachrunner]

Just goes to show the NYT really DOES care about its circulation . . . .