(image via Driftglass)
It's official: Bill Kristol no longer writes a column for the New York Times. Sadly, it took the Old Grey Lady more than a year to realize that Kristol was not only an ideological hack, but a sloppy and uneven one to boot. Today, we were informed via italicized footnote -- the same footnote we've long come to expect from Kristol -- that he will no longer be writing for the "paper of record."
"This is William Kristol’s last column."
Scott Horton has the inside scoop:
The source makes clear that the decision not to renew Kristol’s contract is not related to his neoconservative ideology—Kristol’s proximity to key Washington players ranging from Bush and Cheney to John McCain (whom he supported in 2000) was considered a distinct plus. His leading advocacy of the Iraq War also added to his appeal. Kristol was viewed as a mover and shaker whose ideas had ready impact on the political firmament in Washington.
The problems that emerged were more fundamental. Kristol’s writing wasn’t compelling or even very careful. He either lacked a talent for solid opinion journalism or wasn’t putting his heart into it. A give-away came in the form of four corrections the newspaper was forced to run over factual mistakes in the columns, creating an impression that they were rushed out without due diligence or attention to factual claims. A senior writer at Time magazine recounted to me a similar experience with Kristol following his stint in 2006-07. “His conservative ideas were cutting edge and influential,” I was told. “But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.”