Shill Bill

December 29, 2007

If the New York Times thinks it needs another conservative columnist, I might roll my eyes and chuckle about it — just what newspapers need, another op-ed parrot screeching about liberal media bias — but hey, it’s their money to waste.

What I do have a problem with is the fact that the Times is about to hire a lying warwhore wingnut who has been consistently, predictably wrong about the Iraq invasion and just about every other major event in the last seven years. Moreover, he’s a lying warwhore wingnut who is also a Republican Party operative with his own well-funded media platform, the Weekly Standard, supported by Daddy Wingbucks himself, Rupert Murdoch. So by all means, New York Times, even if you aren’t bothered by the fact that the guy speaks and writes with a forked tongue, please tell me what Bill Kristol has to say that isn’t already being heard loud and clear?

The Times editors can’t possibly think they’re buying themselves some relief from the incessant squawks about “the liberal New York Times,” can they? Take away that little shibboleth and nine-tenths of the airtime devoted to right-wing ranters would fall dead silent.

To add to the hilarity, here’s Andrew Sullivan complaining that hiring Kristol isn’t enough because “having both David Brooks and Bill Kristol as the sole representatives of the right-of-center is to focus on a very small neocon niche in a conservative world that is currently exploding with intellectual diversity and new currents of thought.” As Roy at alicublog points out:

The Times adds another winger, but it’s the wrong kind of winger. Eventually they’ll need a fold-out section to accomodate all the different conservative gradations (closed-borders, anti-gay, bullshit libertarian, etc) the committee requires, and that isn’t even taking into account all the free dispatches Michael Yon will demand the Times run when the eschaton is immanentized.

I don’t understand how these guys sustain this level of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, they’re constantly announcing the irrelevance of the MSM. On the other, they lobby the Times to staff up with their buddies, as if the paper were some kind of government public works project that isn’t keeping up with mandated rightwing hiring quotas.

Meanwhile, where is this explosion of intellectual energy on the right that Andrew Sullivan is talking about? The last time I checked, the standard-bearers were still howling about dark-skinned people and gays, Jonah Goldberg was calling liberals a bunch of fascists because . . . well, just because, and Sullivan’s fave presidential candidate, Ron Paul, was muttering about a return to the gold standard.

Yessir, that’s some real intellectual ferment you got going there, Andrew.

One Response to “Shill Bill”

  1. Chucky Says:

    Ahhh, the New York Times gets into bed with Rupert Murdoch! Only fitting since the Gray Lady recently altered a headline on orders of the White House.

    This is the same newspaper that was forced to retract a right-wing smear campaign.

    As for Shill Bill? Shoulda stayed on the unemployment line. He just got dumped from Time magazine along with Charles “The Contras Are Cool” Krauthammer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: