I’m sure you’re all aware that the New York Times has hired Bill Kristol to be a weekly op-ed columnist despite his being Wrong About Everything All The Time. Of course, there’s the usual outrage and bafflement in the liberal blogosphere that once again, the people who were proved fucking wrong are the ones in demand, while the ones who were proved fucking right are fired or ignored.

The reason is simple: Being right or wrong is secondary to whether you’re "serious" or "unserious" – in other words, whether you’re advancing or opposing the establishment* narrative.

If you agree that invading Iraq was a good idea and we mustn’t leave; that torture, unconstrained wiretapping, and suspension of habeas corpus are all necessary for fighting terrorism; that unfettered greed is good for the economy; and that progressives are dirty smelly soft-on-terror hippies who scare Ordinary Americans, then congratulations! You’re officially a Very Serious Person, and you’ll get lots of facetime or column inches to share your seriousness with the world.

On the other hand, if you disagree with all of those establishment views, then you’re an unserious irritant – tolerated at best ("Look! We have a liberal! We’re totally balanced!"), and removed at worst. Whether or not you’re consistently proven right isn’t even a consideration.

The problem is magnified even further when you consider that the media establishment and the political establishment are interchangeable, as we see the same dynamic play out in our supposedly representative government. As digby, Stoller, and hell, even me, have pointed out, a huge bloc of Democrats routinely sides with the establishment over the public good, their own party’s base, and even the American people as a whole.

And do they pay a price for it? Rahm Emanuel became DCCC, then House Democratic Caucus chair. Steny Hoyer was elected House Majority Leader. Nancy "impeachment is off the table" Pelosi was elected Speaker. Joe Lieberman chairs the Homeland Security Committee. And Give-Em-Hell-If-It’s-Not-Too-Much-Trouble Harry is Senate Majority Leader.

You see, everyone knows that betraying the base is good political strategy for Democrats, because all the most prominent pundits say so. And they wouldn’t be so prominent if they were always wrong, right?

*Think media conglomerates, RNC, DLC, Rahm, Broder, Russert, Matthews, and all the other vacuous pundits, consultants, and cocktail weenie-munchers.

(f/t Attaturk for Radar’s excellent where-are-they-now article, which I had trouble finding)


Related posts:

  1. Republicans Suddenly Find CIA Credible, Trustworthy
  2. The “Atlantic 50″ Exposes Liberal Media Influence (or Not)
  3. NY-23: The Failure Of Blue Dogging
  4. Memo to Dems: Rahm, Not Hippies, Caused 1994 Debacle
  5. Democratic Staffer: Blue Dogs are “Hell Nos” on Public Option