- ‹ previous
- 2096 of 2731
- next ›
Advice for Pinch
ADVICE FOR PINCH....George Packer says the New York Times should fire Bill Kristol when his one-year probationary period is up in December:
In his year on the Op-Ed page, not one memorable sentence, not one provocative thought, not one valuable piece of information appeared under his name.....Kristol's performance on the Op-Ed page during the most interesting election in a generation is a historical symptom, not merely a personal failure. He wrote badly because his world view had become problematic at best, untenable at worst, and he had spent too many years turning out Party propaganda to summon the intellectual resources that a difficult situation required. Now the Times owes it to its readers to find someone better.
After a couple of months I stopped reading Kristol's columns. It wasn't because I disagreed with him, it was because he was boring. Whatever the meme of the week was in the few days prior to his Monday appearance, you could be almost sure that's what he'd write about. Not only were his subjects often stale by then, but he almost never offered anything more than the tritest conservative conventional wisdom on the subject at hand. Snooze city.
So: who should take his place? Since this is a liberal site, and the Times is looking for a conservative columnist, the answer is probably going to be whoever infuriates you the most reliably. (Kristol didn't. He just put me to sleep.) Consider this an open thread.
Why replace him with a conservative at all? Replace him with someone on the left if that's a good fit for the paper. Don't try to claim balanced coverage by going out and hiring a conservative because you feel it can deflect criticism. As long as he or she is intellectually honest, can back up the writing with facts, and is, well, a geniunely good writer, that's what should matter.
It's like someone said during the election season ? and I paraphrase and wish I had the reference (I think it was Ben Smith at Politico) ? the Mainstream Media isn't bias towards Obama by giving him more positive coverage. It's because McCain ran such a shitty campaign. Same goes here. Hire someone who can defend good ideas rather than someone who tries to defend shitty ideas just so you can maintain the masquerade of "balance." Whether that's a liberal or conservative, at least you make the choice honestly.
Personally, I would rather see Maureen Dowd leave the paper than Kristol. She is a joke of a writer and makes Kristol seem eminently more intelligent by comparison!
Hire a good writer. If that writer is liberal, so be it. If the writer's a conservative, fine. Just don't go out fishing for a conservative because Hannity and Rush are shaming you into it.
Why replace him with a conservative at all? Replace him with someone on the left if that's a good fit for the paper. Don't try to claim balanced coverage by going out and hiring a conservative because you feel it can deflect criticism. As long as he or she is intellectually honest, can back up the writing with facts, and is, well, a geniunely good writer, that's what should matter.
It's like someone said during the election season ? and I paraphrase and wish I had the reference (I think it was Ben Smith at Politico) ? the Mainstream Media isn't bias towards Obama by giving him more positive coverage. It's because McCain ran such a shitty campaign. Same goes here. Hire someone who can defend good ideas rather than someone who tries to defend shitty ideas just so you can maintain the masquerade of "balance." Whether that's a liberal or conservative, at least you make the choice honestly.
Personally, I would rather see Maureen Dowd leave the paper than Kristol. She is a joke of a writer and makes Kristol seem eminently more intelligent by comparison!
Hire a good writer. If that writer is liberal, so be it. If the writer's a conservative, fine. Just don't go out fishing for a conservative because Hannity and Rush are shaming you into it.
Frum-st!
Glenn Beck.
The same should be true at the LA Times and Jonah Goldberg. What a bunch of trite crap both of them write.
Um, someone I read who infuriates me... That would be Sully.
Sarah Palin.
Frum is available, I hear ... but Palin is such a wonderful selection, for all the wrong reasons.
As Anderson says, Frum looks to have a little time on his hands.
Ronald Reagan! wait...
Barry Goldwater! no...
Lee Atwater! umm...
Fuck it I got nothin'. Actually the corpse of Ronald Reagan would probably have more intelligent things to say than Kristol.
They already have Brooks - I don't understand why they need to pack their pages with conservative columnists - isn't one token enough?
I wouldn't really say he is boring. Sure, he offers little that is substantively new. But he adds a flare of insanity that is truly comical. And if you like to bet on current events, you can always count on a wrong prediction from him. I have made some decent money betting against him. Without Kristol, how will I really know what's wrong?
Colbert!
The premise of this discussion is that the Grey Lady doesn't want a hack right-wing propagandist on its op-Ed page. That assertion is not yet in evidence.
his world view had become problematic at best, untenable at worst, and he had spent too many years turning out Party propaganda to summon the intellectual resources that a difficult situation required
And this sets Kristol apart from the over conservatives at the Times....how, exactly?
Colbert!
Co-sign!
Karl Rove!!!
I have hard time thinking of anyone who isn't formulaic. They would all bore me on a weekly basis.
Ron Paul could be entertaining and frustrating in same way that my dog is around squirrels, but I suppose he's having some sort of continuous bailout-related seizure and is unable to pick up the phone.
I also second Palin for entertainment value.
Christopher Buckley.
Sure, he was booted by National Review, but his conservative bona fides remain solid, and he's a rare, moderate and rational conservative. Won't appease the wingnuts, which should be a feature not a bug.
____________________________________________
Daniel Larison or Bruce Bartlett.
If they can hold out until Jan 20th, they could hire a well-known conservative with special credentials in educationary and ... ranching.
Didn't they put up with Bill Safire forever? He was boring and couldn't write to save himself. My bet would be on Kristol staying. His folks probably knew Pinch's folks, after all.
Greg Mankiw. Give Krugman someone to argue with.
I would join the choruses for either Frum or Buckley, but what I really think is they should get a solid conservative economist. Maybe Christopher Friedman?
How about Garrison Keillor? Nothing like a little down home philosophizing to counterbalance MoDo the Macabre.
Serious choices:
Tyler Cowen?
Gary Becker?
Ayaan Hirsi Ali?
Not so serious (but then neither was Kristol):
John Lott?
Joe the Plumber?
John Yoo?
I second Greg Mankiew. Or somebody else who actually knows something about something.
While they're at it, I'd be glad if they could fire Dowd and also replace her with someboedy who knows something about something.
Joe Scarborough
Joe the Plumber! Excellent idea, FXO.
David Frum
Ross Douhat
Reihan Salam
But these guys are clearly on the reformist/Brooks wing of the GOP...
I could see a solid conservative economist too.
Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune. A genuine, non-partisan conservative, who calls both parties on their nonsense. He makes me mad because I know he's often right when he criticizes my guys.
I like the idea of Sam the Tax Cheat taking over
David Frum, Ramesh Ponnuru or Ross Douthat -- three men who are indubitably conservative, but also are independent-minded enough to avoid mere hackery on the pages of the Times.
Huckabee
Christopher Caldwell, but he already writes for the FT. Only 1/3 of his columns are based on the RNC message-of-the-week, and he writes well.
Frum would be a good choice, his "Dead Right" book was excellent, but he is in his Fat Elvis stage, and probably 2/3 of his columns would be derived from the GOP hive-mind. Maybe being freed from NRO might make him interesting again.
Chris Buckley would probably be the most fun.
If they really wanted GOP hacks though, they could browse www.sadlyno.com for ideas for promising recruits. I'm sure Debbie Schussel would be delighted to be asked.
Bruce Fein, a conservative you can learn from and respect, even as you disagree. He's thoughtful and consistent, especially on constitutional issues.
Every so often Jack Schafer of Slate makes recommendations about this. His idea is to give a spot to someone like Heather McDonald of the Manhattan Institute and City Journal who would have no problem writing columns about how racial profiling works and other stuff that would make Upper West side liberals go nuts. I like that idea if no other reason than to liven the place up. The problem is that many of those on the right who aren't academics are either as bad or worse than Kristol. Perhaps they should open up some space for one or even a few conservatives who aren't well known to generate some excitement and site hits. Use it as a business opportunity as much as it will bs used as an intellectual one.
Why, Joe Lieberman, of course. Oh wait, he still has his day job....
David Frum or Chris Buckley. Man that'd be the ultimate NRO shaft.
Fred Phelps. That'll liven the place up.
Chuck Norris. "Black Belt Op-Eds."
Forget the conservatives. Let TBogg take it.
George Packer?
And I like the idea above of Gary Becker. He's an autistic with toy models of human interactions (Chicago School economist), but he is definitely thought-provoking.
Ross Douhat or Andrew Sullivan
Both infuriate me, for different reasons.
Both are conservative.
rush limbaugh, the world's champion of pompous windbags.
Why replace him with a conservative at all? Replace him with someone on the left if that's a good fit for the paper. Don't try to claim balanced coverage by going out and hiring a conservative because you feel it can deflect criticism. As long as he or she is intellectually honest, can back up the writing with facts, and is, well, a geniunely good writer, that's what should matter.
It's like someone said during the election season and I paraphrase and wish I had the reference (I think it was Ben Smith at Politico) the Mainstream Media isn't bias towards Obama by giving him more positive coverage. It's because McCain ran such a shitty campaign. Same goes here. Hire someone who can defend good ideas rather than someone who tries to defend shitty ideas just so you can maintain the masquerade of "balance." Whether that's a liberal or conservative, at least you make the choice honestly.
Personally, I would rather see Maureen Dowd leave the paper than Kristol. She is a joke of a writer and makes Kristol seem eminently more intelligent by comparison!
Hire a good writer. If that writer is liberal, so be it. If the writer's a conservative, fine. Just don't go out fishing for a conservative because Hannity and Rush are shaming you into it.
Who could match the vapidity, knee-jerk conservatism, and stuck-in-the-80's qualities of Kristol?
I know! Thomas Sowell. Take it to the bank.
(Wait, do they already print his column?)
Jack Bauer!
Oh, wait ...
James Leroy Wilson. If you don't know who that is, he blogs here.
Frum
Buckley
Douthat
Sullivan