Ladies and Gentlemen, meet the fifth most influential “liberal” journalist (according to the daily beast):
5. Fred Hiatt
Editorial Page Editor, The Washington Post
Although many on the left would question Hiatt’s presence on this list—his near-neocon position on foreign policy enrages the left-wing blogosphere—there is no doubt at all that he is a traditional liberal in all matters domestic. The steward of a sober and constructive editorial column, he is paid great heed by the administration. He is much less dogmatic, as an editorial page editor, than his counterpart at the Times.
Fred Hiatt’s (based on his columns and his hires) three biggest issues are the neocon dream of empire and permanent war, completely dismantling the social safety net, and climate denialism. How anyone could confuse Hiatt with liberalism simply escapes me- he is a liberal in much the same way that I am a libertarian transhumanist- he isn’t at all.
I do a lot of reading of Hiatt and the WaPo (although not as much as Doug), and what I have come to the conclusion is that Hiatt’s key characteristic is that he is just not very bright. He falls for false equivalencies almost every time he is given an opportunity, he is easily seduced by those he finds impressive and by those in a position of power, and he just isn’t much if an idea person so much as someone who prides himself in serving as the vanguard for the conventional wisdom. Read his writing- the Daily Beast confuses sobriety with caving in to Beltway groupthink. He isn’t particularly clever, his language is dull and pedestrian and permanently without any charm or wit, and I have never once seen what could be considered an original thought. That is the real untold story about Fred Hiatt- he just isn’t very smart.
Which means he is exactly where he belongs in our current joke of a meritocracy.
*** Update ***
It is worth examining what the “liberal” Fred Hiatt has done to the Washington Post:
Speaking of Fred Hiatt’s absurd claim that people who don’t like George Will spreading global warming misinformation should “debate” him, rather than expect the Post to run a correction …
Yesterday’s Washington Post featured op-eds by Henry Kissinger, David Broder, Bill Kristol, David Ignatius, and George Will. Today’s brings op-eds from George Will, Michael Gerson, Charles Krauthammer, Michael Kinsley, and Eugene Robinson.
That’s ten columns total. One is by a liberal (Robinson), one by a contrarian who may lean left (Kinsley), two by centrist Villagers (Broder and Ignatius – and remember, Village centrists are typically to the right of the actual center.) And six are by staunch conservatives – Will (twice), Krauthammer, former Nixon aide Kissinger, former Bush I aide Kristol, and former Bush II aide Gerson.
This was before Hiatt hired torture apologist and Bush’s other speechwriter, Marc Thiessen.
The only upside to this list of 25 influential liberals is that Marty Peretz is not on it.
This list is a Total Crock of Shit
Someone shoot me.
Meh. Just tells you how much credibility the Daily Beast has.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I don’t often read TDB, but whenever I do it confirms my original opinino that Tina Brown was jealous of the attention Arianna Huffington was getting, and thought she could basically do right leaning copycat operation. And I think she largely succeeded, as far as that goes. I rarely look at HuffPo, either.
What. The. Fuck???????
Ebert or Rosen or one of those big tweeps posted today that The Beast just became a joke to them after putting Hiatt on the list. I almost tweeted, what do you mean “just became?” They’ve been pretty much a bad joke from the beginning. Think I’ve read less than a dozen posts there that were worth the gray matter. But I was too lazy to figure out how to do in 140 char.
On another note, I see from your earlier post that you feel crummy. Sorry to hear the recovery isn’t going well. For myself, incessant whimpering and wallowing in self-pity always helps a bit in those situations. Just saying…
carlos the dwarf
It’s written by a guy who used to be regularly featured on the WSJ editorial page. That tells you all you need to know.
This list isn’t a total crock of shit, it’s crock of shit to a great extent.
Jon Stewart at #1 is a fucking travesty
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@carlos the dwarf: and the Hoover Institute, so he’s like all fair and balanced and shit
carlos the dwarf
And features two[!] TNR writers, as well. Fuck you Daily Beast.
The Daily Beast is its own punchline.
Is this the future of media?
“Up to a point, Lady Brown.”
I dislike almost everyone on that list except David Shipley, Josh Marshall, Ezra Klein, K-Thug, and Jessica Valenti. And I *hate* a lot of them.
What do you suppose it means that they called Markos “a proud wingnut”?
And, according to TDB, the four ahead of Hiatt… include Jon Stewart, Arianna Huffington, and Paul Krugman. Does the word ‘journalist’ actually have a definition? One can only assume that the article was written by Ms. Brown Herself.
carlos the dwarf
That’s actually the least of my problems with this list.
At least Tom Friedman’s not on the list.
carlos the dwarf
You dislike Maddow?
I’ve not bothered reading it. When I see “Top X Examples of Y” on the web I assume it’s broken up to generate more hits and to annoy me more. All of cracked’s monthly traffic come from five guys who started reading the top 10,000,000 names in a phone book article.
@carlos the dwarf:
I knew I had forgotten someone. She’s fine, too.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I was surprised to see Deborah Solomon on that list, and wondered what she does besides taht NYT mag Q&A to make her so influential. Nothing that the author mentions. RUFKME?
Isn’t that where Megan McCain writes?
You know, it’s the oddest thing. They list why people on the left don’t like him, but never list why they should, or why he’s considered a ‘liberal’ for the sake of the list. How weird. I’m sure it’s just an omission on their part.
Oh, hey, that reminds me, remember that guy Hiatt hired? That Theissen guy? The one who claimed that Zubdaydah praised us for torturing him and pleaded to us to torture more of his ‘brothers’? Good times…good times indeed.
Damned commie liberal rag, that WaPo.
if they are going to name Hiatt, what about Krauthammer? What about George Will – he’s as close to being a liberal journalist as Hiatt? Hell, why not call Boehner a liberal journalist.
To be fair, Redefining the word “Liberal” is an activity that is hardly new. It has been bantered about with such condescending disdain by right-wingers that the common usage of the word is now as pejorative as throwing the word “Cunt” at someone.
See also, “the Democrat party”.
No Joy in Mudville
[Near-endless string of expletives]
Oh, well, what can you expect from the people who brought you Glenn Beck as the Right’s #2 journalist? Obviously, The Daily Beast is not concerned with unimportant things like defining “left” or “journalist.”
Hmm. Maybe calling Beck the “Number Two” Journalist does contain an element of truth (in the world of scatological science).
I looked a little further down the list of right-wing “journalists” and threw up. That was my first/last visit to the Daily Beast.
Also, liberals use words, whereas conservatives prefer more guttural grunts and screams, so therefore he’s liberal ’cause he writes words and stuff.
I thought Cole WAS a libertarian transhumanist.
Confused in Blogland.
Hiatt being representative of the far left in Washington is pretty much consistent with Village reality. It is how the government perceives “centrist” these days.
So in other words, he “votes with us on everything but the war”?
Sounds about right.
Just Suck Fomehead
The only qualifications to be a liberal these days are to have an IQ over 80 and be able to spell a protest sign correctly.
@jl: That’s the ridiculous title that Republican Glenn Reynolds pretends defines his politics.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
in re the update: I was thinking yesterday that while I don’t actually believe Hiatt hires douchenozzles like Kristol, Gerson and Thiessen to maintain the illusion that David Broder is a centrist, he couldn’t do any better if that were his strategy. Pat Buchanan wouldn’t even be the far right of the WaPo op/ed page at this point.
Don’t forget that Krauthammer used to right for TNR! Them’s solid lib credentials right there!
Yep. Remember, Howie Kurtz told us that the Op-Ed board is full of stinking DFHs and the paper has to balance their exotic soshulisms in the news side of things.
Whoever came up with this list evidently researched it thusly: Go downstairs, go outside, head around back to the alley. Find some wino mumbling to himself and ask him who should be on the list. Return to desk and type out the answer he gave you.
If you’d like to review. If you read through them, many of them are certainly what conservatives would consider “liberal”, so there you go.
Articles by Fred Hiatt
When politics sound the alarm on national security (February 15, 2010)
Where is McConnell’s sense of leadership? (February 1, 2010)
In Obama’s first year, successes outweigh missteps (January 19, 2010)
Humanizing war policy in ‘The Good Soldiers’ (December 21, 2009)
Does Japan still matter? (December 11, 2009)
Fred Hiatt on parallels between the Iraq, Afghanistan troop surges (December 7, 2009)
Fred Hiatt: Will health reform signal progress or paralysis? (November 22, 2009)
Fred Hiatt on stepping closer to universal health care — and bankruptcy (November 9, 2009)
Hiatt on the public option — Talk cloaks political inaction (October 26, 2009)
Obama Policies Risk Bolstering Tyrants (October 12, 2009)
Does Russia Get It on Iran? (October 4, 2009)
Change in Japan Won’t Be Easy (September 28, 2009)
An Alternative for Accountability on Torture: A Presidential Commission (August 30, 2009)
None of Health Reform’s Competing Visions Find a Clear Majority (August 16, 2009)
Obama’s Deficit Plan Can Be Read Two Ways (August 10, 2009)
Obama Needs Long-Term Plan for Deficit (July 6, 2009)
Universal Coverage Demands Real Savings (June 22, 2009)
One-Party Rule in Washington — It’s Not Gridlock, but . . . (June 8, 2009)
Supreme Court Justice Souter’s ‘Safe Place’ (May 25, 2009)
Human Rights Work in Putin and Medvedev’s Russia (May 11, 2009)
The Federal Government’s Broken Hiring System (April 27, 2009)
A Bipartisan Budget Commission is a Bad Idea — but It May Be Necessary (April 12, 2009)
How Bill Gates Would Repair Our Schools (March 30, 2009)
Breaking the Gridlock on How We Pay for Roads (March 16, 2009)
Fred Hiatt: Obama’s War and the Risks of Realism (February 22, 2009)
A Russia Reality Check (February 8, 2009)
De-emphasizing Democracy (January 19, 2009)
One Rap Sheet in Singapore (December 8, 2008)
Can Obama Help Rhee? (November 10, 2008)
On Burma, A Phony Realism (October 27, 2008)
What McCain Hasn’t Tried (October 13, 2008)
The Battle For Hope In Iraq (September 15, 2008)
One Voice on Georgia (September 1, 2008)
Who Made Russia Attack? (August 18, 2008)
Answering McCain’s Attacks (August 4, 2008)
Toehold in Tehran? (June 23, 2008)
‘Bush Lied’? If Only It Were That Simple. (June 9, 2008)
The Belligerent vs. the Naif? (May 26, 2008)
In Burma, a U.N. Promise Not Kept (May 12, 2008)
The Gymnast And the Czar (April 28, 2008)
The Bumpy Road to Congestion Relief (April 14, 2008)
She Brakes for Ideology (January 21, 2008)
Myth of the Strongman (December 24, 2007)
The Anti-Freedom Agenda (December 10, 2007)
Calculation and Conviction (November 26, 2007)
A Rescuer for the U.N. — and Burma (November 12, 2007)
Maryland’s Senator Fix-It (October 29, 2007)
Armenians Who Need Help Today (October 15, 2007)
What We Owe the Burmese (October 1, 2007)
No-Excuses Leadership for the Schools (September 3, 2007)
Pre-K Pragmatism From Tim Kaine (August 20, 2007)
What Clinton (Almost) Doesn’t Say (July 16, 2007)
Buried With Bush (July 2, 2007)
Kremlin Anxiety (June 18, 2007)
Stay-the-Course Plus (June 4, 2007)
Choices That Are Changing Lives in D.C. (May 21, 2007)
A Soviet Memorial — and Mind-Set (May 7, 2007)
The Fall Replacements (March 26, 2007)
Who’s to Blame for Russia? (March 12, 2007)
Clogged Arteries (February 26, 2007)
Kasparov’s Gambit (February 12, 2007)
The Vanishing Foreign Correspondent (January 29, 2007)
The Lives on the Line (January 15, 2007)
A New Mideast, or Wishful Thinking? (December 18, 2006)
Japan Shrinks (November 20, 2006)
A Freedom Agenda for Japan (November 15, 2006)
A Case Study for Washington’s New Mayor (November 6, 2006)
In Tackling Schools, Fenty Will Be Tested (October 23, 2006)
China’s Iron Grip (October 9, 2006)
How We Endorse, and Why (September 11, 2006)
The Democracy Backlash (July 10, 2006)
How to Save Immigration Reform (June 26, 2006)
Burmese Delusions (May 29, 2006)
Signs of Change At Gallaudet (May 15, 2006)
Going It Alone? It Depends (May 1, 2006)
Democrats’ Narrow Vision (April 3, 2006)
The Case for Caring Now (March 20, 2006)
‘Poised to Make a Difference’ in D.C. Schools (March 6, 2006)
Why Kaine Is Different (February 20, 2006)
The Goal Of These Pages (February 5, 2006)
Bush’s Big Silence (January 23, 2006)
Champion Of Freedom? (December 26, 2005)
Chinks in the Republican Armor (December 12, 2005)
The Politics of War (November 14, 2005)
Two Systems, One (Uncertain) Future (October 31, 2005)
Honesty Isn’t the Policy in Virginia (October 17, 2005)
Silent on Putin’s Slide (October 3, 2005)
The Unsung Heroes (June 27, 2005)
The Right Conversation for America (June 13, 2005)
High Stakes at the U.N. (May 30, 2005)
The Cost Of Putin’s Repression (May 2, 2005)
This makes bizarre sense in a wingnutry kind of way; the Right calls everything they dislike or don’t agree with “liberal”. They done it for so that now the definition of liberal means “anything not a wingnut”. So pretty much now anyone who isn’t writing articles ranting about how Obama is a Kenyan meat puppet of the Illuminant’s secret plot to sell America out to Ben Ladin’s secret Chines masters threw gun control and gay marriage is a liberal journalist.
It is only a matter of time before Adolph Hitler and Dwight D Eisenhower appear together on a list of the most influential liberals of the 20th Century.
The wing nuts have already identified them as such.
Hiatt did support Deeds in our miserable governor election last fall, and wrote some pretty good editorials calling out McDonnell for the slick lying snake that he is.
Of course, that just gave the local wingnuts more ammo to tar Deeds as the darling of the liberal lefty pinko Washington Post, so maybe Hiatt was just playing eleventy dimensional chess or something.
In any case, he really has turned the op ed page into a wingnut’s wet dream. Nobody with more than three brain cells in their skull can dispute that.
This has to be a function of some in-house bong-hits for page-hits team building promotion.
Sully now calls it “Cheney Washington Post.”
Every time I read something like this I wish I could drop the family subscription to the Post more than once.
There’s a flag on the play! Personal foul! 15-yard penalty and loss of down for roughing the Overton Window to the right!
It means they want everyone to think Kos is a liberal version of Michelle Malkin.
And really, that’s pretty much all you need to say about The Daily Beast.
“Solomon’s front-of-the-book interview column is every Sunday Times reader’s guilty pleasure. The snarkiest of inquisitors, she specializes in the takedown of her subjects (why do they agree to meet her? Is it masochism?), and is particularly adept at playing gleeful “gotcha” with conservatives. (A recent question for Joe Scarborough: “As a former congressman from Pensacola, Fla., who resigned during your fourth term, do you think your criticism of politicians is tinged with envy”
Evidently this is what Solomon is famous for–harrassing Scarborough, for one. That was good work I guess.
All his positions are right-wing, but, but . . . . Woodward and Bernstein!
I would have preferred a list of the best liberal journalists rather than a list the most influential, which is simply a popularity contest. If quailty of writing and ideas were the goal instead of popularity, the list would include Amy Goodman, Laura Flanders, Joan Walsh, Glenn Greenwald, Joe Conason, Michael Tomasky, Dan Froomkin, Thomas Frank, and Bill Moyers.
It’s amazing how many times I’ve read that sentence here and on other blogs, mostly in reference to Republican politicians, right-wing commentators, and the occasional leftie in Congress.
Basically, it describes a huge, huge percentage of DC.
It is a testament to Fred Hiatt’s liberalism how many conservatives it takes to balance him out.
No wonder the Washington Times is having so many problems.
I guess it’s not impossible that their main criterion for inclusion was how often these people get linked to by liberals as opposed to conservatives.
The Washington Post op-ed page, for example, gets mentioned here and at Washington Monthly nearly as often as Paul Krugman. The fact that people link to Krugman because he keeps calling out the G.O.P. for their disingenuousness on financial matters while people generally only bring up Hiatt after he’s hired yet another crazy neo-con for the op-ed page is irrelevant. If you go entirely by linkage, you can argue that Hiatt is indeed an “influential liberal”.
Who the hell defines “Liberal” anymore?
Who the hell defines “Conservative” for that matter?
What really divides the political spectrum is this: Those Who Have, and Those Who Don’t Have.
In another words, we’re now all Sneetches on Beaches, and it all comes down to who has a Star Upon Thar.
When they couldn’t get Peretz, Fred hired Chuck Lane. Same difference judging by Chuck’s columns and posts.
Don’t forget “war criminal”! He didn’t spend 7 years in Evil Medical School to be called “mister,” thank you very much.
Marc T was totally orgasmic on c span two days ago about torture. I live in no cal and he was on early in the morning here on cspan washington journal. He actually said that the victim thanked the sadists for water boarding. This guy was Rumsfled’s speech writer and Bush’s speech writer, at what point do these guys not get TV time. Oh wait, he has a book. I am new to commenting. These folks are without shame.
Way back in 1997 and 1998, when Hiatt was merely an OpEd writer (as I read him in the Washington Post Weekly edition), I remarked to a friend that I detected a whiff of Krauthammer-ism.
Both men have gotten worse since then.
I gave up reading the daily beast and took it off my morning read list, pretty much because of crap like this.