AP's Irving Kristol Obit Refers To Neoconservatism 12 Times; Longer Ted Kennedy Obit Used 'Liberal' Twice

Photo of Tom Blumer.
  • Bookmark and Share

IrvingKristol0909

RIP, Irving Kristol. Condolences to his family and his family and friends, along with intense gratitude from those who believe in individual freedom and liberty.

The Wall Street Journal has a compendium of key passages from Kristol's essays during his time there. The Weekly Standard's blog has links to several of his later columns. 

The Associated Press's Hillel Italie wanted to make sure that everyone reading the wire service's late Friday Kristol obituary (saved here in full for fair use and discussion purposes) came away knowing that "political writer" Kristol was a neoconservative.

It's almost as if AP has a once-a-month minimum on employing the word. Apparently hampered in using it since the election of Dear Leader last November, Kristol's passage gave Italie the opportunity to clean out the closet. Forms of the word "neoconservative" appear a remarkable 12 times in the obit's roughly 1,400 words, accompanied by eight appearances of forms of "conservative." Geez, we get it already, Hillel.

By contrast, AP's David Espo referred to the late Massachusetts senator Ted Kennedy as "liberal" twice in roughly 2,000 words in his late-August Kennedy obituary (saved here).

Here are the first five paragraphs from Italie's report, followed by additional paragraphs with "neocon" labeling:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

APkristolObitFirstParas091909

Additional paragraphs with labeling: 

.... Former Vice President Dick Cheney was a longtime admirer and former President George W. Bush, whose administration was heavily populated by neoconservatives, awarded Kristol a Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2002, praising him as "a wide-ranging thinker whose writings have helped transform America's political landscape."

Kristol himself would regard neo-conservatism as a job well done, a "generational phenomenon" that was "pretty much absorbed into a larger, more comprehensive conservatism." But the Iraq War and the poor economy badly damaged the right's unity and credibility over the past few years.

.... Unlike such earlier advocates of the right as Sen. Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley, whose National Review journal Irving Kristol found "insufficiently analytical and 'intellectual,'" most neoconservatives were not lifelong Republicans.

Ironically, "neoconservative" was not coined by a neoconservative, but is credited to socialist author-activist Michael Harrington, who used the term in a 1973 essay about Kristol and other former liberals.

Active in publishing for more than half a century, Kristol wrote essays and reviews for The New Leader and Commentary; released several books, including "Neo-Conservatism: The Autobiography of An Idea," and co-founded a seminal neoconservative journal, The Public Interest.

.... His reach kept expanding. In the mid-1970s, he acquired a powerful new champion: Cheney, then chief of staff under President Ford and an enthusiastic reader of Kristol's work. Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980 and countless neoconservatives would become government and judicial leaders in the following decades.

"So I deem the neo-conservative enterprise to have been a success, to have brought elements that were needed to enliven American conservatism and help reshape American politics," Kristol wrote in 1995.

Also, Italie referred to Kristol twice as a former radical. Espo, in his Kennedy obituary, never used the word.

I'll leave it to others to discuss Italie's other not-so-subtle digs.

—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Having not become active in

Having not become active in politics until only a couple years ago, I had not known much about Mr. Kristol. Anybody know where he came down on ideology? /sarc off

IMO, Kristol Understood Sensible Conservatism

I think three statements boil it down, though others may have a different take: 

- Capitalism ("growth economics") works; socialism doesn't work, hasn't worked, and can't work, because it runs contrary to basic human nature.

- Family values and respect for life are critical; breakdowns in either ultimately jeopardize representative government.

- Both areas are equally indispensable to a successful, growing society.

IMO he would have no patience for people who want to throw social conservatives overboard, or to slight them. 

I would have to say, I'm in

I would have to say, I'm in line.

that's not funny, bkeyser

I became old enough to vote in 1998 and got interested in politics around 2002. I had no idea who Irving Kristol was until I joined NB.

 

It's true that I had not

It's true that I had not become active in politics until only a few years ago. I honestly did not know of Mr. Kristol until I heard about his death yesterday, and the brief biography put forth.

My sarcasm was in direct reference to the obit. Age notwithstanding.

For the MSM, "liberal" is a

For the MSM, "liberal" is a term to be honored.

For the MSM, "conservative" is something you scrape off your shoe.

Why liberals hate Neo-Conservatives

From Wikipedia's entry on Irving Kristol

In 1973 Michael Harrington
coined the term "neoconservatism"
to describe those liberal
intellectuals and political philosophers who were disaffected with the
political and cultural attitudes
dominating the Democrat(ic)* Party
and
were moving toward a new form of conservatism[5].
Intended by Harrington as a pejorative term, it was accepted by Kristol
as an apt description of the ideas and policies exemplified by The Public Interest. Unlike liberals, for example, neoconservatives rejected most of the Great Society programs sponsored by Lyndon Johnson; and unlike traditional conservatives, they supported the more limited welfare state instituted by Roosevelt.*

In February, 1979, Kristol was featured on the cover of Esquire. The caption identified him as "the godfather of the most powerful new political force in America -- Neoconservatism."[6] That year also saw the publication of a book The Neoconservatives: The Men Who Are Changing America's Politics. Like Harrington, the author, Peter Steinfels,
was critical of neoconservatism, but he was impressed by its growing
political and intellectual influence. Kristol's response appeared under
the title "Confessions of a True, Self-Confessed -- Perhaps the Only --
'Neoconservative'."

Liberals HATE Neo-Conservatives because they are idealogical traitors.  They like SOME of the "social justice" crap, but not the radical immoral motives to get us there.  In the 60's when the Democrat party became more "radical" (putting it lightly), there was a socialist light exodus from the Democrat party to the Republican party.

So what we have now in the Republican party are former democrats who believe in large government, and small government Republicans.  I would lump the "compassionate conservative" Christians into the "Neo-Conservative " group.  They want larger government to help the poor, they see it as "compassionate".

What "compassionate" jews and christians need to realize is that PRIVATE individuals can better help the poor escape poverty, than can any slow behemoth of social justice and wealth redistribution.

*Don't you love how "ic" is always added to the end of the Democrat party title?

http://clearthehaze.blogspot.com

              

              Kennedy has one up on Kristol. Kristol has never commited murder. Chew on that, liberals!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

"The needs of the many

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

So?

If being a neoconservative is a good thing, why is it a sin to repeat it multiple through the article?

Personally, I think neoconservatism is the political philosophy that created the rot, evil  and hypocrisy that maligns my party today. 

Until the far right is ready to admit that we lost elections because we behaved like Democrats (big spending, big goverment, global aspirations, perpetual war)  then former Democrat Kristol will continue to gloat from the grave.

 

 

Because

Repeating a descriptive word over and over causes it to become a label. And, as it's a label the writer and his readers don't agree with, it becomes a pejorative.

Chai

“When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson

frankly I agree

See my post above.  The term "Neo-Conservative" was originally created by a liberal who was upset with the defection of liberals to the Republican party.

They didn't like the radical direction the party was taking, but didn't mind socialism lite.  (social security, some welfare programs)

The problem is, the low tax policies of the Republican party combined with the big government policies of the Former Democrat party, are a sure fire recipe for destruction.

So as a voter should I vote for a slow and painful death of the Republic (Current Republicans), or the quick and dirty one (Obama's cronies from the FAR left wing of the already far left Socialist-Democrat Party.)

It's clear that Bush's compassionate conservatism (AKA, Neo-Conservatism) lead our country into deeper debt than we needed or could afford.  For all the policies that the liberals complained about, they never seemed to notice that Bush was implementing social justice around the world.

http://clearthehaze.blogspot.com

Kennedy may have been a

Kennedy may have been a staunch, unapolgetic liberal, but he was not the founder of any of liberalism's incarnations as Kristol was with neoconservatism.  That fact alone accounts for--or at least helps to explain--the multiple references to this modern ideological movement in the AP obituary.  Note that the WSJ, an unabashed admirer of Irving Kristol, also used the term 'neoconservative' or a related variation four times by the beginning of the fourth paragraph of its editorial tribute--including within the sub-headline. 

Finally, perhaps AP referred to Kristol's youthful 'radicalism' because it happens to be true--an historical fact which even the WSJ tacitly acknowledges by alluding to his early "fascination with Marxism". 

Jer

If Irving was a Neoconservative

RIP, Irving Kristol.  My question is related to the word Neo modifying the conservative.  If Irving was a "Neoconservative", how old is neoconservatism?  Mr. Kristol was a conservative long before Eisenhower was sworn in.

The mainstream media could be called brain dead, but that would presume that they had one.

"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."


G. W. F. Hegel

Kristol and conservatism

"Mr. Kristol was a conservative long before Eisenhower was sworn in."

Of sorts.  This goes to show how much more diverse the Republican and Conservative brand have been over the years, and continues to be the house of diverse ideas compared to the Democrat party.

What's really telling is this article from 2003 written by Kristol:

http://www.weeklysta...

Neoconservatism is the first variant of American conservatism in the
past century that is in the "American grain." It is hopeful, not
lugubrious; forward-looking, not nostalgic; and its general tone is
cheerful, not grim or dyspeptic. Its 20th-century heroes tend to be TR,
FDR, and Ronald Reagan.
Such Republican and conservative worthies as
Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater
are politely overlooked.

Reagan was a great man, but what did he have in common with FDR and TR?  

Big government.  Even though Reagan was still a great free market advocate, he believed (like all Neo-Conservatives that defected from the democrat party) that:

Neocons do not feel that kind of alarm or anxiety about the growth of
the state in the past century
, seeing it as natural, indeed inevitable.
Because they tend to be more interested in history than economics or
sociology, they know that the 19th-century idea, so neatly propounded
by Herbert Spencer in his "The Man Versus the State," was a historical
eccentricity. People have always preferred strong government to weak
government, although they certainly have no liking for anything that
smacks of overly intrusive government.

 Do people really prefer big strong government over a weak government where the people rule over the government, like our founding fathers intended?

I don't mean Kristol any dis-respect, but let's be honest.  Does the idea of another big government "Conservative" really sound appealing?

http://clearthehaze.blogspot.com

I think Kristol ....

.... conveniently mischaracterized Reagan -- or he knows something about Reagan the rest of us don't.