Bill Kristol's New York Times column debuted today with a factual error. How appropriate.

[marmar]

from OurFuture.org:



Bill Kristol's Perfect Start
Submitted by Bill Scher on January 7, 2008 - 6:27pm.


Bill Kristol's New York Times column debuted today. It included a factual error, attributing a Michael Medved quote to Michelle Malkin.

That was an appropriate beginning, as Kristol will surely have the Times corrections desk working overtime. Kristol regularly twists facts as he strains to back up conservative talking points.

In 2003, he defended the prospects for the invasion of Iraq, wrongly asserting:

There's been a certain amount of pop sociology in America that the Shia can't get along with the Sunni and the Shia in Iraq want to establish some kind of Islamic fundamentalist regime. There's been almost no evidence of that at all. Iraq's always been very secular.

He four years later, claiming "We’re not in a civil war. This is just not true."

He pretended he was not being "partisan" when he attacked Speaker Nancy Pelosi for meeting with Syrian leaders, yet he did not criticize the Republican congresspeople who did the same.

He falsely characterized Iraq war boosters Michael O'Hanlon and Ken Pollack, as "skeptics," in an attempt to give their optimistic assessments greater credibility.

And he ridiculously claimed that the acts charged to Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay are not crimes. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://commonsense.ourfuture.org/bill_kristols_perfect_start?tx=3

[TomClash]

1. I can't stand Billy Kristol

His ideology is Israel uber alles.

[Jim__]

2. It would be news if his column didn't contain a factual error - n/t

[ToeBot]

3. That he's referencing either Medved or Malkin should speak volumes

I've never understood why the NYT is/was held in such high regard.

[Supersedeas]

4. the Times continues to dig itself deep and deep