SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Does William Kristol really need another platform?
He's the co-founder and editor of the Weekly Standard, which Rupert Murdoch owns.
For years, he's been all over the airwaves, first on ABC's Sunday morning talk show and then on Fox.
And he's been, until recently, a columnist for Time magazine.
So why does the Times want him?
In its December 30 announcement, the Times noted that in the mid-1990s, "Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future." But the Times failed to note another, much more important project that he led: The Project for a New American Century, which did so much to pave the way for Bush's Iraq War.
At the Weekly Standard and through the Project for a New American Century, Kristol kept promoting specious claims about the threat from Iraq. And still today he wants war with Iran.
His role in domestic politics is no better. He was instrumental in torpedoing the Clinton health care plan. In December 1993, he circulated a strategy document among Republicans to kill the Clinton plan because it would strengthen the Democrats' base of support among the middle class. The next month, he urged Republicans to take the stance that "there is no health care crisis."
So why the Times feels any obligation to give someone so disreputable a perch on its paper is beyond me.
And it shows a certain lack of institutional self-respect, as well. "Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of the Times," the paper noted in its announcement. "In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting the Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions." He also, the announcement added, said the Times was "irredeemable."
So why has the Times coronated this unscrupulous neocon and enemy of the paper?
It's a bad omen for 2008.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2007 The Progressive
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Does William Kristol really need another platform?
He's the co-founder and editor of the Weekly Standard, which Rupert Murdoch owns.
For years, he's been all over the airwaves, first on ABC's Sunday morning talk show and then on Fox.
And he's been, until recently, a columnist for Time magazine.
So why does the Times want him?
In its December 30 announcement, the Times noted that in the mid-1990s, "Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future." But the Times failed to note another, much more important project that he led: The Project for a New American Century, which did so much to pave the way for Bush's Iraq War.
At the Weekly Standard and through the Project for a New American Century, Kristol kept promoting specious claims about the threat from Iraq. And still today he wants war with Iran.
His role in domestic politics is no better. He was instrumental in torpedoing the Clinton health care plan. In December 1993, he circulated a strategy document among Republicans to kill the Clinton plan because it would strengthen the Democrats' base of support among the middle class. The next month, he urged Republicans to take the stance that "there is no health care crisis."
So why the Times feels any obligation to give someone so disreputable a perch on its paper is beyond me.
And it shows a certain lack of institutional self-respect, as well. "Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of the Times," the paper noted in its announcement. "In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting the Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions." He also, the announcement added, said the Times was "irredeemable."
So why has the Times coronated this unscrupulous neocon and enemy of the paper?
It's a bad omen for 2008.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2007 The Progressive
Does William Kristol really need another platform?
He's the co-founder and editor of the Weekly Standard, which Rupert Murdoch owns.
For years, he's been all over the airwaves, first on ABC's Sunday morning talk show and then on Fox.
And he's been, until recently, a columnist for Time magazine.
So why does the Times want him?
In its December 30 announcement, the Times noted that in the mid-1990s, "Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future." But the Times failed to note another, much more important project that he led: The Project for a New American Century, which did so much to pave the way for Bush's Iraq War.
At the Weekly Standard and through the Project for a New American Century, Kristol kept promoting specious claims about the threat from Iraq. And still today he wants war with Iran.
His role in domestic politics is no better. He was instrumental in torpedoing the Clinton health care plan. In December 1993, he circulated a strategy document among Republicans to kill the Clinton plan because it would strengthen the Democrats' base of support among the middle class. The next month, he urged Republicans to take the stance that "there is no health care crisis."
So why the Times feels any obligation to give someone so disreputable a perch on its paper is beyond me.
And it shows a certain lack of institutional self-respect, as well. "Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of the Times," the paper noted in its announcement. "In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting the Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions." He also, the announcement added, said the Times was "irredeemable."
So why has the Times coronated this unscrupulous neocon and enemy of the paper?
It's a bad omen for 2008.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine.
(c) 2007 The Progressive