Kristol: The New York Times ‘Should Be Prosecuted,’ ‘It Isn’t A First-Rate Newspaper’
Kristol: The New York Times ‘Should Be Prosecuted,’ ‘It Isn’t A First-Rate Newspaper’
For years, Bill Kristol has been at the forefront of a vitriolic right-wing crusade against the New York Times. Sadly, the Times has chosen to reward him for it.
After the New York Times in 2006 disclosed a secret Bush administration program to monitor international banking transactions, right-wing pundit Bill Kristol said this:
“I think it is an open question whether the Times itself should be prosecuted for this totally gratuitous revealing of an ongoing secret classified program that is part of the war on terror.” [Fox News, 7/2/06]
“I think the Justice Department has an obligation to consider prosecution.” [Fox News, 6/25/06]
Beyond calling for the criminal prosecution of his future employer, Kristol has also pilloried the newspaper as the voice of the radical fringe in America:
“It’s no accident that The New York Times has to have a special reporter assigned to the conservative beat. They cover it sort of like a foreign country, to explain to the editors and the readers of The New York Times what’s going on in that strange world of conservative America, which is two-fifths of the country.” [Fox News, 5/30/04]
“I’m not sure, if you’re against a war in Iraq, that you want The New York Times carrying your cause,” Mr. Kristol said. “Because it’s like, ‘Oh, great! The Upper West Side doesn’t want a war!’” [NY Observer, 9/15/02]
“Colin Powell is not a New York Times liberal, you know. Colin Powell is for a strong, assertive American foreign policy.” [Fox News, 7/28/02]
In one of Kristol’s most candid assessments about the New York Times, he wrote this in a 2003 Weekly Standard piece:
Still, the simple truth is that a great democracy like ours deserves a first-rate newspaper of record. And the New York Times isn’t it. [...]
Fundamental regime change at the New York Times is not in the cards. Inspections and sanctions won’t work. Even the French can’t help. The Times is irredeemable. The question is whether a new newspaper of record will replace it.
Kristol seems to understate his abilities to bring about regime changes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What a disgrace that people like Kristol thrive and are rewarded (by NYTimes for chrissakes).
December 29th, 2007 at 11:47 amKristol wrote this one month after the Iraq invasion began:
“Fundamental regime change at the New York Times is not in the cards. Inspections and sanctions won’t work. Even the French can’t help. The Times is irredeemable. The question is whether a new newspaper of record will replace it.”
He isn’t saying they should be prosecuted so much as invaded and a new, conservative-friendly editorial board installed.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:48 amKristol seems to underestimate his abilities to bring about regime changes.
damn… could it be?…
good post, faiz…
December 29th, 2007 at 11:49 amWorking for the enemy…….we knew that was his MO all the time.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:52 amAnd he finds the editorial page a perfect location for sniping at NYT reporters and editors, sort of like a canned hunt: they can’t run, and they can’t hide.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:53 amWhy on earth would the NYT sully themselves with this neocon pundit whose been absolutely wrong about every pundicious prediction he’s made in the last five years?
December 29th, 2007 at 11:54 amDoes the Bush administration have something on the Times? Some eavesdropping little tidbit? Just curious…
I will certainly cancel my NY Times subscription if this is true.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:58 am“Colin Powell is not a New York Times liberal, you know. Colin Powell is for a strong, assertive American foreign policy.†[Fox News, 7/28/02]
And where’s he at now? Disgraced for his UN appearance, he’s been laying low for quite some time. The media hasn’t talked about his presidential ambitions for years now; it used to be their favorite topic of discussion.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:59 amKristol is a literary insurgent soldier for freedom, America, and Gefilte Fish pie. He is a true soldier fighting in enemy territory single handedly and with each precision stroke of his keypad is destroying the treasonous NY Times. POW! BANG! KABOOM!
/Snark off
This is Kristol’s self talk as he reaches for a kleenex to clean up.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:00 pm“a respected academic”
Comedy gold – or perhaps platinum…
December 29th, 2007 at 12:01 pmWhy? As I said earlier, it’s because he’s a well connected beltway insider, a respected academic and he attracts readers of all political affiliations.
Comment by Frank M — December 29, 2007 @ 11:57 am
The reich wing should be pissed at Kristol for “sleeping with the enemy”. But then again, it’s all about the $$$$$$$, isn’t it?
December 29th, 2007 at 12:05 pmA picture is worth a thousand words.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:05 pmAnd the NYT hired this fool.
The NYT is not a liberal paper. It this paper really cared about the safety of Americans, it would have published the NSA spying information before the 2004 elections. Instead, this paper waited until after the last presidential election. The NYT only pretends to lean left. They throw a dog biscuit to the readers occasionally.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pmI applaud the Times in its continuing effort to demonstrate the diversity of opinion that feeds the debate of the great issues of our day, but to do so with one so horribly, objectively and irredeemably wrong as Kristol does nothing but lessen the sum of knowledge and considered opinion. This man has demonstrated nothing but blind obedience to an imperialist world view that is built upon American hegemony and invasion.
Balancing left-of-center views with right-of-center views is fine, and as I said, laudable, but doing so with one as dangerous as is Kristol’s is unforgivable.
This is a sad, sad day for journalism and the advancing the sum of understanding of human events.
What a shame.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pmDear Billy Kristol: you are jsut a worthless lying corporate prick: just another member of the Bush crime family… Seven years of corporate fascistic rule in America seems to be wearing a bit threadbare these days, huh?
Billy: just go back to your sandbox of insanity and stop bothering the other kids…
December 29th, 2007 at 12:08 pmThis shows how totally shallow Kristol is. For years he made his bones ripping on the Times. All of that must have been BS because he has no problem going to WORK FOR THEM!! This is proof that Kristol doesn’t believe half of what he say’s. It’s all about Bill and all about getting paid, nothing more. Remember this next time you see this ignorant fool on TV.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:10 pmPerhaps if he is paid enough he will become a liberal.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:12 pmOff Topic:
http://www.9news.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=83567
Sure. Let’s send our cops over to Iraq. It’s not like we NEED THEM HERE, now is it?
*sigh*
December 29th, 2007 at 12:13 pmSo, NYT; who next? Ben Domenech?
December 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pmOr Jeff Gannon?
December 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pmOh no!
I just mentally-pictured Kristol, Safire, and Bobo in an editorial page three-way.
I have to go get drunk… and I mean now!
December 29th, 2007 at 12:24 pmUnder that premise, shouldn’t Bush sign the SCHIP legislatiion then? To make him look more liberal?
December 29th, 2007 at 12:30 pmUnder that premise, shouldn’t Bush sign the SCHIP legislatiion then? To make him look more liberal?
Comment by evil_framers_of_the_constitution — December 29, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
According to MSNBC, he just did. But without the increase.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:39 pmIf the NYT is considered left leaning by many/most people; doesn’t it make sense to balance the paper with a right leaning conservative for both financial and philosophic reasons?
Except…you know, that only works when the perception matches reality. When that’s nowhere near reality, all it serves to do is push the discourse further right. You know, S.O.P. for the media in general these last few years.
The NY Times disgraces itself by hiring someone not only utterly wrong about EVERYTHING he touches, but one who was adamant about stringing them up on federal charges.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:40 pmAs I’ve said before, animosity is temporary; residuals are forever.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:46 pmBill Kristol working for the NYT is a step towards a more rational discussion.
Comment by CaptainMantastic
…………..Or at least an improvement of the funny pages.
December 29th, 2007 at 12:52 pmHarbinger of things to come. RIP MSM, hail to the new king: the internet.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:21 pmSad though. The one paper I thought would resist an ass like Kristol was the NYT. As to the fiction of balance- Kristol is a common liar. He has no use for facts if they do not jibe with his opinion. I welcome counterpoint opinion, not lying advocacy. Check the compilation at “crooks and liars” of the bullshit he’s shoveled over the last few years.
“His statement that the times wasn’t a “first rate paper†has become a self fulfilling prophecy.”
Comment by BARTLEBEE
Great one Bartlebee! I couldn’t say it better!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 1:22 pmOne has to wonder why the NYT is hiring Kristol. He hasn’t been right on any of his predictions as far as Iraq is concerned and he is decidedly right wing. Does the NYT really think that the public views them as being left of center? I don’t. They already push the RNC talking points, so why the need to bring Kristol on.
It’s going to be interesting to see what happens to our MSM when the country has turned decidedly blue.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:29 pmI suspect that the times thinks that by hiring Kristol, they will silence his criticisms of the NYT and it will probably work. What they don’t realize is that the only people who are interested in what he has to say is the 24%ers. The rest of us are insulted by his opinion pieces. I’m done with the NYT as a news source.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:34 pmIs it more rational to formulate your positions based on information from people that all share the same opinions?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
No, it is not, that is why I’m not a republican! Most posters here are able to distinguish between serious opinions and the bullcrap that Kristol and trools like you spew out.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:34 pmIs it more rational to formulate your positions based on information from people that all share the same opinions?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
The NYT already has plenty of right wing columnists and they are all more intelligent and well thought of than Kristol. If the NYT wants to appeal strictly to the 24%ers, it’s fine by me. And when they find their share of the market to be 24%, they will be in financial trouble for sure.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:36 pmKristol’s constantly red (literally) face tells me that that clown is drinking too much.
Watch that blood pressure, Bill.
On second thought………..
∞
December 29th, 2007 at 1:36 pmAccording to MSNBC, he just did. But without the increase.
Comment by RUCerious
And how can he do that? He doesn’t have the line-item veto and Congress has not sent him a SCHIP bill without the increase, at least not to my knowledge. What has he done this time?
December 29th, 2007 at 1:39 pmI believe that I am advocating that from different viewpoints, we can formulate a more rational observation. Is that ‘bullcrap’ to you?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
If you believed that you would watch something other than Faux Noise and you would listen to Air America. I doubt you do either. Your mind is a steel trap and it is firmly shut on anything other than what the RNC feeds you. Nothing you have said on this site is rational nor is it backed up by facts. So, yes, anything you say is bullcrap.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:06 pmWilliam Kristol may be really pissed when he sees his first editorial published on The New York Times cartoon page.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pmBut, if you content with staying in the Garden and not eating the fruit…
Comment by CaptainMantastic
Oh really? I tried to “open my mind” to conservative thought by visiting sites like redstate.com. Funny thing, though. The minute I posted an opinion that differed from theirs, I was banned. Not only banned from posting, but banned from even being able to view their site. So much for conservatives encouraging differing opinions. They are firmly ensconced in their own version of the garden of eden and they will not allow anything in that doesn’t agree with their point of view. At least you are allowed to post here, unfortunately for us.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pmcaption:
“A tewwowist? I tink he went a tataway…..hyuk…hyuk………..”
December 29th, 2007 at 2:19 pmhe’s … a respected academic
Comment by Frank M — December 29, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Frank, listen up: Kristol is not an academic. Not by any stretch of the imagination. He is a propagandist who has zero interest whatsoever in scholarship or any activity related to gaining and understanding knowledge.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:23 pmPerhaps the NYT will let Kristol in, and allow him to post some hideously out of line editorial. As a result, the Times will then fire his fascist a**. Kristol will be humiliated, as damn well he should be.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:31 pmKristol: The New York Times ‘Should Be Prosecuted,’ ‘It Isn’t A First-Rate Newspaper’
Ok, so, uh, Bush and Cheney shouldn’t be prosecuted because they’re first rate leaders???????????????????
December 29th, 2007 at 2:36 pmWhen Kristol inked his deal with the NYT, he unequivocally showed himself as a money-making poser, rather than any serious student of American culture. A man of his own principles would have stayed with his original observation instead of taking up bedfellows with his professed disdain. Yes, Kristol and his ilk are money-making whores first, commentators on current events second. Blather after blather comes from the likes Mr. Kristol – just a rich baby who grew up on third base thinking he’d hit a triple. Kristol is a fool’s fool!
December 29th, 2007 at 2:52 pmcaption:
Word to your mother.
/kristol ice?
December 29th, 2007 at 2:55 pmComment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
Have you been banned here?
December 29th, 2007 at 2:59 pmBilbo, I too have been banned from Redstate at least 3 times. Looking back, I suppose I had it coming each time. If you read their guidelines, it’s self explainatory. You should realize that that is their little corner where they amuse themselves and they prefer you not, uh, I think they put it, “track mud” in their home. I think the majority there break out in hives when confronted with reality.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:03 pmI believe that is what led to my banning.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
You are off topic now and briinging mud from another site, basically being confrontational and you have not been banned, whereas if you did that on Redstate you would be.
Therefore, I wont accuse you of having a martyr complex (projecting a false ‘truth’) but I dont think you have a valid argument when you have not been banned here.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:15 pmI believe that I am advocating that from different viewpoints, we can formulate a more rational observation. Is that ‘bullcrap’ to you?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
Yes Cap, I believe your advocating is bullcrap, that is my belief. The words you post here are basically the same as what comes out of a bull’s rear end.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:20 pmMarch 8, 1992: Raw US World Dominance Plan Is Leaked to the Media
The Defense Planning Guidance, “a blueprint for the department’s spending priorities in the aftermath of the first Gulf War and the collapse of the Soviet Union,†is leaked to the New York Times. [New York Times, 3/8/92; Newsday, 3/16/03] The document causes controversy, because it hadn’t yet been “scrubbed†to replace candid language with euphemisms. [New York Times, 3/11/92; Observer, 4/7/02; New York Times, 3/10/92] The document argues that the US dominates the world as sole superpower, and to maintain that role, it “must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.†[New York Times, 3/8/92 (B); New York Times, 3/8/92] As the Observer summarizes it, “America’s friends are potential enemies. They must be in a state of dependence and seek solutions to their problems in Washington.†[Observer, 4/7/02]
The document is mainly written by Paul Wolfowitz and I. Lewis “Scooter†Libby, who hold relatively low posts at the time, but become deputy defense secretary and Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, respectively, under George W. Bush. [Newsday, 3/16/03] The authors conspicuously avoid mention of collective security arrangements through the United Nations, instead suggesting the US “should expect future coalitions to be ad hoc assemblies, often not lasting beyond the crisis being confronted.†[New York Times, 3/8/92]
They call for “punishing†or “threatening punishment†against regional aggressors before they act. Interests to be defended preemptively include “access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, [and] threats to US citizens from terrorism.†[Harper's, 10/02] Senator Lincoln Chafee (R) later says, “It is my opinion that [George W. Bush's] plan for preemptive strikes was formed back at the end of the first Bush administration with that 1992 report.†[Newsday, 3/16/03] In response to the controversy, US releases an updated version of the document in May 1992, which stresses that the US will work with the United Nations and its allies. [Washington Post, 5/24/92; Harper's, 10/02]
People and organizations involved: Lincoln Chafee, United States, Soviet Union, Lewis (”Scooter”) Libby, Paul Wolfowitz
January 1993: Cheney Releases New Global Domination Strategy
While still serving as Defense Secretary, Dick Cheney releases a documented titled “Defense Strategy for the 1990s,†in which he reasserts the plans for US global domination outlined in the Defense Policy Guide leaked to the press in March 1992 (see March 8, 1992). [Harper's, 10/02] Clinton’s inauguration as president later in the month precludes Cheney from actually implementing his plans.
People and organizations involved: Richard (”Dick”) Cheney
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&geopolitics_and_9/11=centralAsia
July 7, 1996: A Clean Break Outlines New Middle East Strategy for Israel
Richard Perle.
The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, an Israeli think tank, publishes a paper entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.†[Chicago Sun-Times, 3/6/03] Lead author Richard Perle will later become chairman of President Bush’s influential Defense Policy Board. Several other co-authors will hold key positions in Washington after Bush’s election.
In the paper, Perle and his co-authors advise the new, right wing Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a strategy “based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism. …†The first step is to be the removal of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. A war with Iraq will destabilize the entire Middle East, allowing governments in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and other countries to be replaced. “Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them,†the paper concludes [Guardian, 9/3/02] , citing the original paper at [The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 7/8/96] .
Perle will be instrumental in moving Bush’s US policy toward war with Iraq after the 9/11 attacks.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:24 pmKristol is a foreign operative of Hasbara:
And thus we arrive back on the shores of the United States and examine the admitted Cabal of “Neocons” (code for “Zionistsâ€) who installed themselves in positions within our governmental structure to enable the successful attacks on 9/11 as the pretext for the implementation of their PNAC/Zionist plan.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
You know their names, and you know that most of them are Jewish. That some are afforded dual-citizenship in Israel is said to imply that they have dual-loyalties. Clearly this in not the case. Their loyalty is to Zionism. They just operate in the United States and hold US Citizenship (until we revoke it for their Treason).
This is the same network that operated within the Department Of Defense under the watchful eyes of Dick Cheney (The Office Of Special Plans), to manufacture false “intelligence†with which to create the pretext for the invasion of Iraq while blocking actual intelligence from reaching the desk of the President.
Mossad has the perfect cover to operate within America. It is legal for them to spy on us, in fact, according to Sharon, they “Control” us. The only recourse is deportation, and Zionist Chertoff has dutifully deported hundreds of Mossad agents when he found it politically necessary to. They are easily replaced. When over 200 Mossad were operating within the United States in the lead up to 9/11 (purportedly shadowing the real Arab terrorists) they operated with all of the freedoms afforded them within the United States. In the days prior to 9/11, it is said that Mossad alerted agents within the US government of a pending attack. Were these agents Zionists or loyal US Citizens? Was this purported “alert†a warning, or merely final planning and coordination?
The results seem to speak for themselves.
Considering that Mossad prides itself on operating in secrecy and by way of deception, it must have come as a massive shock to see the news accounts of their undercover agents celebrating and filming the attacks on 9/11. The Intersection of Big Oil, The Religious Right, The Military Industrial Complex and Zionism all caught on one precious video tape. The evidence of this crime was captured by the perpetrators themselves. Their actions, the subsequent behavior of the Zionists within our own government to cover it all up, and the subsequent “spiking†of all news accounts related to this event all serve as Evidence of their role in the greatest crime ever committed.
http://www.bigmagic.com/pages/blackj/column100.html
Zionist Chertoff was not only tasked with quietly deporting these Mossad agents, he was additionally tasked with covering up the money trail. These facts are known to all who purportedly “serve†our interests in the halls of our government, yet when Mr. Chertoff was put forward as the nominee to head up our Department of Homeland Security, he was approved UNANIMOUSLY. Any vote against him or any question as to his loyalty would have resulted in the wrath of AIPAC – a career-ending position to be in.
Control of the United States Government has been lost. Our destiny is presently in the hands of a foreign power (Israel) and an ideology (Zionism) as a direct result of a proven tactic (False Flag Terrorism) as proscribed by the “Roadmap for War” (PNAC).
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
December 29th, 2007 at 3:28 pmcaption contest: “Look at me, Ah am George, I got my smirk on and this here six shooter.”
December 29th, 2007 at 3:29 pmhe ‘intolerant’ treatment he recieved on redstate is there for you to see firsthand. -Mantastic
I’m not interested in becoming a part of your argument. I asked if you were banned and obviously your not. What you ran into was the filter fairy that many people here have had problems with. You weren’t banned.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:36 pmOccupied Jerusalem: 3 October, 2001 (IAP) — According to Israel radio
(in Hebrew) Kol Yisrael, Shimon Peres warned Ariel Sharon Wednesday
that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire
with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and “turn the
US against us.”
At this point, a furious Sharon reportedly turned toward Peres, saying
—-
“Every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and
will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don’t worry
about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control
America, and the Americans know it.”
The radio said Peres and other cabinet ministers warned Sharon against
saying what he said in public because “it would cause us a public
relations disaster.”
IAP News
Jimmy Carter said it too!
“The Israeli lobby is so powerful that no man could become president
without gaining their support.” – Former US President Jimmy Carter
after leaving office.
George H.W. Bush quote!
“There are powerful forces out there.” – Former US President George
H.W. Bush, referring to the power of the Israel lobby during a heated
foreign aid dispute after the first Gulf War. Israel demanded
billions of US taxpayer dollars to expand illegal Jewish settlements
on the West Bank, and Bush refused. This led to a dispute with the
Israeli lobby, which then helped elect Bill Clinton as president.
———-
Below is a PARTIAL list of Jews who dominate the United States media,
and who control what we see, read, and think. The overwhelming
majority of those listed below cheerleaded the illegal war on Iraq,
and many, but not all, are now actively promoting a new war against
Iran.
———-
WILLIAM KRISTOL, Editor, Weekly Standard, Exec. Director
December 29th, 2007 at 3:37 pmProject for a New American Century (PNAC) William Kristol is the top
voice of the pro-war, pro-Israel “Neoconservative” cult that now
controls the Republican Party. Ironically, many if not most of the
Jewish Neocons started their political lives as Marxists.
Consider it an opportunity to re-examine your possible solipsism.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Possible projectionism? Heh.
December 29th, 2007 at 3:44 pmFunded by Republican Jewish Coalition / Freedom’s Watch
“Working behind the scenes through most of the summer” 2007, Freedom’s Watch president Bradley A. Blakeman “assembled big-dollar donors and quietly helped pro-war groups ranging from the American Legion to Rolling Thunder make a case for Bush’s war strategy. Freedom’s Watch also formed partnerships with other groups backing the war, such as Families United, Vets for Freedom and the Veterans of Foreign Wars,” Jim Kuhnhenn reported September 28, 2007, for the Associated Press.[11]
VFF staff and members have extensive ties to George W. Bush, Bill Kristol and Republican Party
* VFF Executive Director wrote article in pro-War Weekly Standard:
o Pete Hegseth, VFF’s Executive Director since May 2007, wrote the article “What Would Lincoln Do? Civil War Woes Emblematic Of Those Faced In Iraq,” published June 26, 2007, in neo-conservative William Kristol’s The Weekly Standard magazine. Hegseth addressed statements made by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) in a June 21, 2007, Washington Post op-ed[12] which “bothered” Hegseth, “all of which run counter to realities on the ground in Iraq,” Hegseth wrote.[13]
* Note: William (Bill) Kristol is an original co-founder of the Project for the New American Century, as well as a member of and an advisor to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, with which Vets for Freedom has become associated.[14]
* VFF National Field Director has worked for other pro-War groups and works for McCain’s presidential campaign:
o An Iraq veteran, VFF National Field Director Joel A. Arends is a U.S. Army Reserve Captain [15] who served 2003-2005 as Platoon Leader and Company Commander for the 1st Cavalry Division.[16][17] He is a member of[18] and previously worked with Families United for Our Troops and Their Mission, another pro-war in Iraq organization.[19] In 2000, Arends ran unsuccesfully for the Iowa Statehouse “while living in Sioux City”.[18] He is listed in May 2007 as a paid staffer for Republican 2008 presidential hopeful John McCain[20] and, when appearing at an August 8, 2007, O’Brien County Republican Summer Gala in Paullina, Iowa, Arends was described as “now a surrogate for Senator McCain’s campaign”.[21] Also in August 2007, Arends was identified as the replacement for Craig Dewey as Americans for Prosperity’s South Dakota Assistant State Director.[22]
* VFF member wrote article in pro-War National Review and is a “course assistant” for William Kristol at Harvard:
o VFF member Alex Gallo, a West Point graduate who served in 2004 as an infantry officer in Samarrah, Iraq, wrote a pro-war in Iraq article[23] that was published July 18, 2007, by National Review Online.
o Gallo is currently a “masters in public-policy candidate” at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government,[23] where he is “course assistant” for Kristol’s “Can America be Governed?”[24] Kristol, whom David Corn calls[25] “the No. 1 cheerleader for the Iraq war,” in 2006 assisted VFF-AF in its pro-war in Iraq campaign support of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.).
* VFF member organized against Democratic congressional candidate in 2006, is challenging Republican congressman in 2008 primary, published essay in pro-War, Kristol-owned Weekly Standard:
o Eric Egland, another VFF member who is a Major in the U.S. Air Force Reserve who served on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan[26], announced July 31, 2007, that he will challenge Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) in the 2008 Republican primary.[27]
o Egland helped Doolittle “defeat Democratic challenger Charlie Brown”[28] in the 2006 congressional elections. In the fall of 2006, he “organized a group of veterans to oppose Doolittle’s Democratic challenger, Brown, a retired Air Force officer who is seriously weighing another run next year.” [27]
o Egland is the author of the March 2007 self-published The Troops Need You, America: Six Ways to Help Them Win, [29] a book “based on an essay he published” in Kristol’s Weekly Standard.[30] The book “shows average Americans how to help the troops win in Iraq.” [31]
* VFF State chapter leader was recruited by GOP to challenge Democratic congressman in 2006 elections; was profiled in Weekly Standard:
o Vince Micco, VFF’s New Jersey chapter leader, was recruited by the GOP in March 2006 to challenge five-term Democratic Rep. Steve Rothman in the 2006 congressional election.[32] Micco was profiled in an October 23, 2006, article in Kristol’s Weekly Standard, in which he was described as “unabashedly pro-Bush and hawkish in his political outlook.”[33]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Vets_for_Freedom
December 29th, 2007 at 3:44 pmOld GOP trick, ‘if you can’t shut them up, hire them.’
December 29th, 2007 at 3:53 pmOh, I get it…. Kristol is a whore, and the N.Y. Times is a co-dependent.
Cheers,
December 29th, 2007 at 4:09 pm#4 Captain Mantastic:
You may not, and may never, agree with Bill Kristol. Bill Kristol’s ideas may be wrong. But, if the reader’s of the NYT, strive to form their positions on rational thought, it follows that different views be at least considered.
Yep. Just like Sen. Hruska, who defended rejected Nixon Supreme Court nominee Carswell this way:
“So what if he is mediocre? There are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren’t they?”
Captain Mastication here takes that a step further. Nowadays, rational people need not only put up with mediocrity, they have to consider even wrong ideas. Talk about “moral relativism”, the RW foamers have gone on to “rational relativism”….
And so falls the empire.
Cheers,
December 29th, 2007 at 4:19 pmWell, David Brooks is about to seem rational and way liberal.
December 29th, 2007 at 4:24 pmThe NYT is going the way of the Washington Post. Soon, there won’t be any national newspaper worth reading. It will all be propaganda.
December 29th, 2007 at 4:42 pmJust like Charlie Krauthammer foists himself off as an intellectual, Kristol tries to make himself sound learned, well schooled, but the tripe that dribbles out of his mouth and pen is clearly neocon horse droppings. Good luck with this point of view helping boost your subscriptions, NYT. If readers need Faux snooze, there’s that channel 48 thing.
December 29th, 2007 at 4:47 pmThe Peter Principle, live and well.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:02 pmneeds to be repeated:
… As to the fiction of balance- Kristol is a common liar. He has no use for facts if they do not jibe with his opinion. I welcome counterpoint opinion, not lying advocacy. …
Comment by moondancer @ 1:21 pm
me too…
December 29th, 2007 at 5:05 pmThe NY Times needs to rescind their offer to Kristol.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:31 pmCan you our any one else here throw me a bone and concede the point?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
I was banned from from redstate; I was banned from another conservative site a few years back; and Free Republic decided to put disclaimer under my comments when I was posting there a few years back.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:33 pmSince when did the edict go out that we all had to reconsider the ideology of the Nazi’s?
Comment by BARTLEBEE — December 29, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
When the Neocons gained power.
December 29th, 2007 at 5:35 pmIf the NYT is considered left leaning by many/most people; doesn’t it make sense to balance the paper with a right leaning conservative for both financial and philosophic reasons?
Comment by CaptainMantastic
The NY Times already has David Brooks and John Tierney and occasionally the semi-retired William Safire (a former speechwriter for Nixon) representing the right-leaning point of view. Please tell me which right-learning journal, such as the “Weekly Standard” or the “National Reivew” or blogs like Redstate, Townhall, etc., has a regular columnist on the left/progressive side to balance their content.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:40 pmIf CaptainMantastic wants a bone he can arrange to meet Larry Craig in Denver or D.C.
I have come to the point where whenever a troll posts off thread or justs posts some really stupid crap I hit the abuse button on every post they make on that thread. I would like to see a system where fellow posters could rate the trool tripe and ban the poster post haste.
December 29th, 2007 at 6:46 pmI would like to see a system where fellow posters could rate the trool tripe and ban the poster post haste.
Comment by Saint Augustine — December 29, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
This would be really kool… Let us see the “Report Abuse” count just like the “Recommend”!!!!
Or an “Ignore” feature with a count too!!!!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 6:52 pmCan you our any one else here throw me a bone and concede the point?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
No, I cant, because I myself had posts deleted by the filter fairy quite a few times even though I was not ‘banned’
December 29th, 2007 at 6:53 pmNo, I cant, because I myself had posts deleted by the filter fairy quite a few times even though I was not ‘banned’
Comment by Xisithrus — December 29, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
And that’s why TP is the BEST, most PROGRESSIVE BLOG SITE ON EARTH!
TP ALWAYS KEEPS AN OPEN MIND!!! Mind you manners here and all is well!!
I LOVE THIS SITE!!!
PS. GO TO HELL TROLLS!!
December 29th, 2007 at 6:57 pmI just dashed off a letter to letters@nytimes.com asking them if perhaps William Kristol is now a “New York Times Liberal”.
There is one thing that the general public have: a voice. All we have to do is to start speaking up and out. Every publication has a way to contact it. Use it.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:02 pmI will certainly cancel my NY Times subscription if this is true.
Comment by meister08
Be sure to let them know!
December 29th, 2007 at 7:04 pmAs a life-long resident of “flyover land”, other than two brief stints in San Diego, I have always considered the NY Times to be rather irrelevant. Politics doesn’t even enter into the discussion. I, frankly, don’t care what East Coast urbanites think. They might as well be a different species.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:20 pmI, frankly, don’t care what East Coast urbanites think. They might as well be a different species.
Comment by pete — December 29, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Phu(k you too FROM the WEST!!!
December 29th, 2007 at 7:27 pmIf people stop listening to this gerbil he’ll fade away. I don’t care what he thinks about prosecuting the times or whether the info was classified or spurious bullshit about the Time’s revelations damaging the war on terror. There is no war on terror…fighting a concept with conventional armies is bogus to the nth degree. If the Times revealed anything that protects us from this administration, I’m all for it. In the meantime Kristol why don’t you just take some immodium.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:46 pmI have always considered the NY Times to be rather irrelevant.
Comment by pete
Well, ya know Pete, I mean pete, did you ever see/read/read about Cheney and Rice using references to stories in the New York Times as part of the reasoning to go to war with Iraq?
(If not, go here and view the video: Buying the War.)
The New York Times is only “liberal” in terms of that is how wingnuts abuse the term liberal — and Kristol is a wingnut. Whenever the NY Times publishes and article that a wingnut does not like, he or she will cry “Liberal”.
But the NY Times had, at one time, people like Judith Miller. The NY Times failed miserably as a “Liberal Newspaper” up to and for sometime after the “Selling of the War on Iraq” and the subsequent Invasion.
The danger of a Kristol (or any of the many other wingnut “columnists”) writing for the New York Times is precisely because the New York Times is extremely relevant to the political discourse in this country.
Have you never heard a Congressman refer to an article in the New York Times in a speech on the floor of congress? Well, you would have if you ever watched Senate/House sessions on C-SPAN over the years.
People need to stop being involved in petty bickering. (”I was banned more than you!” “No I was!” *yawn*)
Get involved. READ! LISTEN! WATCH! LEARN! Then come back and post something RELEVANT.
December 29th, 2007 at 7:56 pmMy mind is open. Is yours?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 29, 2007
(Captain Breeze Between The Ears)
December 29th, 2007 at 8:05 pmComment by mr.frazzlebottom — December 29, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
I think you and dixie blood misunderstood. The NY Times, and the editorial policies thereof, have zero effect on the forming of my opinions. I recognize them as a valuable source of information, without accepting them as a source of values; though I’m fully cognizant of their complicity in the Iraq “war”. They don’t “speak to me” or reflect my opinions. And, my two local papers do. The NY Times could hire “The Great Satan” and it wouldn’t change my opinion.
That being said, I object to Bloody Bill having any forum. He’s profoundly dangerous and offensive as heck. Luckily, I don’t know a single person who would be swayed by his opinions, or the op/ed page of the NY Times. I am quite capable of sifting through real news, which may include stories from the NY Times (Reuters and McClatchy are favorites.) and forming my own opinions.
And, you can take your opinion, about the relevance of my comments, and shove it all the way up with a red-hot poker.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:33 pmthe focus of criticicm, in all the left leaning blogs, should be on kristol, and not on the NYT. every newpaper should strive for a diversity of opinion, not just left or right, and the NYT certainly made a bold move for kristol.
will he actually be working as a “journalist” and not an editorial writer? or both?
and if kristol really feels this way about the NYT, he should not have taken the job.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:36 pmAnd, I might add, anyone who accepts an editorial without checking the facts is part of the problem.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:59 pmIf the NYT is considered left leaning by many/most people; doesn’t it make sense to balance the paper with a right leaning conservative for both financial and philosophic reasons?
It might make sense if they had chosen a right-leaning individual with a proven track record of policy insight and/or the ability to recognize and tell the truth. It’s one thing to have well-considered opinions that differ from the liberal perspective, but Kristol is regarded as an idiot even by thinking people on the right. His biggest claim to fame is his uncanny ability to be 100% wrong on any topic he addresses. He lies and unlike some others on the right, he actually knows he’s lying, yet he has no shame about it. He has zero credibility as a pundit and less than zero credibility as a journalist. There is no justifiable reason for the NY Times to give him space. Damn! Now I’m going to have to cancel my subscription.
December 29th, 2007 at 9:05 pm#107 Captain Masticator keeps flooding the thread with his whining…..
So give him sumptin’ to whine about … flag him.
Cheers,
December 29th, 2007 at 9:08 pm#110 jerseyboyblue:
The NY Times needs to rescind their offer to Kristol.
Don’t worry, be happy. It was a typo. They offered the job to Billy Crystal. Which makes eminent sense.
Cheers,
December 29th, 2007 at 9:11 pmNo one is a better spokesperson for opposing the neocons than the trolls they send in here.
One neocon troll can do the work of ten liberal bloggers.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — December 29, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
This would make a reasonable explanation for the hiring of Kristol, if the NYT were truly a “liberal” paper, which it is not.
I’ve thought for a long time that Kristol is a very effective face of neocon loonery. Giving his ideas wide exposure can’t help but convince reasonable people of the bankruptcy of the neocon agenda.
December 29th, 2007 at 10:19 pmWhooooeeeee! This is an amazing number of illiterate lunatics all in one place! And guess what; they all seem to think the NY Times is/was a good paper! Tells you something, don’t it?
December 29th, 2007 at 10:56 pmWell, I don’t mind.
December 30th, 2007 at 12:36 amThat’s just another place where I can avoid this Machivellian/Straussian deceiver. Or read it to study a delusional mind :)
Comment #114: “If CaptainMantastic wants a bone he can arrange to meet Larry Craig in Denver or D.C.
I have come to the point where whenever a troll posts off thread or justs posts some really stupid crap I hit the abuse button on every post they make on that thread. I would like to see a system where fellow posters could rate the trool tripe and ban the poster post haste.”
Comment by Saint Augustine — December 29, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
I’ve been calling for such a system for a long time. I have been ignored by ThinkProgress, and by many of the so-called “progressive” posters in here.
I hope your pleas are heard, Saint Augustine!
December 30th, 2007 at 3:45 amIt is evident that the old grey lady is getting senile. Else why the horrific blunder of bringing on Bill Kristol as a columnist.
I for one am fed up — and intend on giving up the paper in favor of the blogs, wires (where a lot of their news seems to come from these days), and local NY news: the New York Daily News. Enough is enough.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:53 amNormally, people are hired by an employer looking at their resume, the applicants proven skills, and their interview. I find Kristol, being personable, just like Dubya has been described by those to talk with him. Another testament that bigoted and criminal behavior can come from a likable person.
As the years have wore on, I have experienced Kristol as being a consistently bigoted ideologue just as fierce as Dubya. Facts and rationality are irrelevant to him to both. CaptainMantastic says we can benefit from his argument in the marketplace of ideas. I can only ask how. I thought the idea was to elevate the discussion not to seek a lowest common denominator.
He refuses to argue with facts or use reason. Kristol believes in his ideology and sees his mission to push institutions and this country toward his ideology. Pat Robertson and his ilk do that, so why doesn’t the NYT hire those demagogs as well.
His past and proven skills belie his honesty and integrity to be a NYT columnist. They do speak admirability of his capacity to be a mouth piece for a bigoted and ideological paper The Weekly Standard. So, NYT please post all the lies and wrong-headed statements after each column he writes as a disclaimer. I do not understand why any one wants to read him. Why couldn’t they just let him write an occasional editorial with his record attached. It is horrific. What a bummer!!!!
December 30th, 2007 at 11:05 amI rather agree with Kristol, the Times has become a second rate newspaper and now that they are again playing in muddy puddles and hiring the well-known Billy Boy alias “the son of his father” Kristol they will sink even lower.
Does the Times actually believe, I doubt they do much thinking anymore, people are going to pay even devaluated dollars to read what it is evident he is going to say. He is notorious for his repetion of, this time I will get it right mantra, all we need is another war.
December 30th, 2007 at 11:39 amQuit whining losers…now you’ll get a dose of common sense at least once a week…
December 31st, 2007 at 12:58 pmI dont read the times anymore because it has gone way to Neo Con and is a propaganda tool of the Bush Administration. Mr Majestic why dont you jump off a bridge. You dont get it. We are NOT interested in any Neo Con opninions any more…We arent interested in your BS anymore! There is enough of it on Fox News AND the NYT. I hope people like you just vanish. I have no interest in conversation with people who support the present administration. BYE BYE!
December 31st, 2007 at 1:21 pmThe fact that anyone would respect anything Kristol says really speaks terribly about America, and the fact that the NYT would even think of hiring this joker really speaks terribly about the NYT. Come on! Wake up everyone! This guy is evil. He fed us a line in helping to goad us into Iraq. He is a freakin hypocrite who bites the hand and then accepts food from it in the NYT. He is a butt head!!! Wake up America. You have fallen under Morder, oops I mean Murdoch’s evil spell.
It will take an Obama to wake America up. To guide us out of this mess. The right won’t listen to anyone else with any sense.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pmalso:
anyone that calls themselves Neo Con is the scum of the earth!
BYE BYE.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:25 pmScoreboard, baby: check out the US progress in Iraq.
December 31st, 2007 at 2:21 pmI love to see losers whine…
Q: How do I cancel my subscription?
A: To cancel your subscription, please call 1-800-NYTIMES (1-800-698-4637).
press #4
then press #2
You will be connected to a customer care representative.
Be sure and mention Kristol as the reason.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:27 pm