You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

February 14, 2008

Don't Even Think About It

By: Bernard Chazelle

Don't even think about reading any further if you haven't read Jon's previous post about Kristol.
It is an absolute must-read. Although I will write here about his lexical cousin, Kristof, I want to preface this by saying that there's a world of difference between the two. I have been on Kristof's case for a long time because I believe he is an essentially decent man who often gets it wrong. Kristol is the sort of human detritus that gives our species a bad name.

Kristof's column today, about a cameraman who's being force-fed twice a day by people whose salaries you and I pay, is required reading, too. If you have the stomach for it.

About Gitmo, Kristof has this to say:

Most Americans, including myself, originally gave President Bush the benefit of the doubt and assumed that the inmates truly were “the worst of the worst.” But evidence has grown that many are simply the unluckiest of the unluckiest.

I commend Kristof for his honesty. But I also charge him with professional misconduct. Kristof is not just like "Most Americans." He is a columnist for the Times. His job is to be to power what a prosecutor is to criminals. Have you ever heard of a prosecutor giving a defendant the benefit of the doubt in a capital case. A journalist's first obligation is never to give a president the benefit of the doubt. It has nothing to do with Bush. It could be George Washington or FDR. Distrust of power must the default position of a journalist.


Posted at February 14, 2008 06:28 PM
Comments

Where was all the shock and indignation 7 years ago? 5 years ago? 3 years ago?

Posted by: Mike Meyer at February 15, 2008 12:48 AM

Mike M., I think the fact that somewhere deep inside most Americans know we're in the wrong help heed Obama's relative success with voters-- he is a narcotic, that tells us we're good people.

But every time he opens his mouth I can't help but hear the voice of Robert Preston, singing about those trombones...

Posted by: Jonathan Versen at February 15, 2008 01:23 AM

oh brother, what a load of ridiculous pontification: " distrust of power must be the default position of a journalist." no, the default position of a journalist is to report news. I trust more a journalist who makes their own decisions, based on reason and evidence, to give or not give any figure the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to some paranoid fruitcake who thinks anyone in authority must be distrusted at all times, and who sees themselves as a tribune of truth, or defender of the people, or speaker-of-truth-to-power person, rather than just a plain, simple news reporter.

Man, I'm a ttenth grade drop-out, but some of the dumbest fucking people I've ever met have been affiliated with Princeton and Yale.

Posted by: xyz at February 15, 2008 02:18 AM

Man, I'm a ttenth grade drop-out

Ah.

Posted by: Mike at February 15, 2008 07:24 AM

well, and last I checked, Gitmo holds 276 prisoners. Jeepers, there are what, maybe two, two and half million? and how many are in prison for drug offenses i.e. sort of victimless crimes, and how many of those people are being systematically raped in prison. I never hear you people talk about this issue, something of magnitude of hundreds greater than Gitmo.

Jerk-off parlor intellectuals. Ugh.

and Mike, your "ah" doesn't seem to convey a lot of meaning.

Posted by: xyz at February 15, 2008 07:52 AM

Hello, Bernard.
It seems as if it would definitely complicate matters to foster distrust while gargling one's sack.

Posted by: Progressive Traditionalist at February 15, 2008 08:19 AM

Hey so I know this is off topic but I'm now certain that xyz is some sort of elaborate chatterbot. So Bernard or whoever, get back to the drawing board because your "AI" just failed the Turing test.

In a similar vein, all the posts here recently has made me think that perhaps AI is not the correct goal. Perhaps there should be more effort in the direction of Artificial Stupidity. Perfecting AS would presumable allow humanity to automate the function of the higher echelon's of the worlds organizations as well as the elite pundit class--Think of the savings! Of course there would be dislocations and economic pain, but luckily there is already a strong welfare system in place for such individuals.

Posted by: Jerk-off parlor intellectual at February 15, 2008 08:51 AM

"I believe he is an essentially decent man"

not the words I'd use to describe him, exactly.

dude's got the blood of millions of Iraqis on his hands and he's gleefully and constantly agitating for what would surely be an even bloodier war of aggression with Iran. he's neocon scum.

Posted by: ran at February 15, 2008 09:31 AM

"Distrust of power must the default position of a journalist."

Not distrust of power alone, a decent journalist should also DISLIKE the powerful.

Posted by: konopelli/wgg at February 15, 2008 09:45 AM

sorry Bernard. you were referring to Kristof, and we agree on Kristol.

my bad.

Posted by: ran at February 15, 2008 10:04 AM

The job of a journalist in this day, age, and society, is not to inform the public, nor to hold power accountable. A journalist's job is to provide some scaffolding around which the advertising can be arranged - preferably without upsetting anyone the Board of Directors gives a shit about.

You can argue all you like about what you think a journalist's job should be, but we all need to recognise reality for what it is. Newspapers today are just advertising vehicles, like Big Brother and Wife Swap. The idea that they're about news is simply another deceptive bit of marketing. Don't fall for it.

Posted by: Dunc at February 15, 2008 10:33 AM

well, you clods are all agitated because Fox apparently tilts right, and the NYT doesn't take people like you seriously. Lookit, there are plenty of good sources of info out there, the FT and The Economist, just to mention two. Well written, by well-informed journalists. And informed by common sense and quite decent values to boot. And with far more subtle and sophisticated humor than the smarmy, unfunny crap you people traffic in. Who indulge in cheap moral outrage and posturing. Ugh.

Posted by: xyz at February 15, 2008 11:36 AM

xyz: HAVE YOU CALLED Nancy Pelosi @1-202-225-0100 and DEMANDED IMPEACHMENT yet. Commonsense? Decency? In America, today? Where?

Posted by: Mike Meyer at February 15, 2008 12:19 PM

Mike, xyz likes things the way they are. That's what he repetitively blathers about over and over again. Well, besides how worldly he is, and something about rabbits and Horatio Alger. You seem to have picked out the least likely possible target for your "call Nan" speech.

Posted by: StO at February 15, 2008 02:45 PM

repetitively blathers about over and over again

Well, I guess repetition in describing repetition is no vice.

Posted by: StO at February 15, 2008 02:49 PM

StO: I must disagree, xyz wishes to be a REVOLUTIONARY, otherwise, why drop by. (It's like when you're a dentist, you read that dentist magazine, or if you're a proctologist you read----???)And as USUAL, I would like to help. (that's why the 1-202-225-0100) xyz, I ask YOU, " what kind of a revolution is it, IF the other side (whomever) don't know YOU're revolting? AREN'T REVOLUTIONS supposed to be a group of revolting people,(ostensibly with the same goal, whatever) revolting against some (assuming here) authority group(whomever)? NOW IF WHOMEVER don't KNOW that whatever is there, don't hear a peep, I mean, just how revolting can that be?

Posted by: Mike Meyer at February 15, 2008 03:47 PM

What can I say, Mike? You're clearly a man of faith.

Posted by: StO at February 15, 2008 09:27 PM

And another thing: WHY did Kristof feel the need to give Bush the benefit of the doubt? Was he that scared? I've never given Bush the benefit of the doubt because, well, when he was running in 2000, did you see a there there? Nope.

Posted by: Dan Coyle at February 16, 2008 02:28 AM

Our man of letters wears many hats-ttenth grade dropout,law skool attendee,Serbian hip-hop maven.
Did I miss the threads where he was an astronaut,brain surgeon,or double-nought spy?

Posted by: BobS. at February 16, 2008 06:32 PM