Changing of the guard: Hugh Hewitt on who might replace William Safire at New York Times

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, November 17, 2004 | Hugh Hewitt

[JohnHuang2]

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

---

---

Changing of the guard

---

Posted: November 17, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Hugh Hewitt

---

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

With the announcement of William Safire's retirement, the New York Times faces an important choice: Will Safire be replaced with a center-right scribbler, or will the Times be content to let David Brooks carry the entire burden of representing non-liberal America?

Given the paper's wildly left-of-center op-ed cast, it seems likely that the Times will find a replacement for Safire. There are five writers with the talent to hold down such an august spot. Let's hope the Times is open to outside suggestions. In alphabetical order, they are:

1. Jonah Goldberg. Jonah's the voice of traditional conservatism mixed with a very loud party. He's connected and irreverent, funny and piercing. He'd be the most controversial of the choices available, but he's the only New Yoker on the list.

2. Stephen Hayes. Time and again, Hayes has out-reported other center-right pundits, and would help replace Safire's occasional reporting forays. Like Safire, Hayes is also the sort of writer you can imagine receiving phone calls from senior politicos looking to float or smote an idea or an adversary, respectively.

   Handicap for Hayes: He's tied to the Weekly Standard, like David Brooks.

   Plus for Hayes: He's tied to the Weekly Standard, which means he's tied to pretty much every Republican source.

3. James Lileks. Admittedly, this would be a bold and unexpected choice. It would also be brilliant. Lileks is the best funny-serious writer out there, and though he will curse me for saying so, he could be the Maureen Dowd of the center-right, only funny. Downside: The annual Hummels column. Upside: His output is staggering when one adds up The Bleat, the Newhouse columns and three a week for the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The Times probably wouldn't have to pay him for the work.

4. Peter Robinson. This Hoover Institution fellow is a PBS host, a former presidential speechwriter (for Reagan – "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall."), incredibly well-read and a William F. Buckley protege. Elegant. Learned. Old school with talent to spare. Very New York Times. Everyone at the paper would marvel at how someone as smart as Peter could be a conservative. Wears bowties.

5. Mark Steyn. He's the best columnist working today, period. The four above would probably acknowledge this, and his limitless output is just staggering. If the Times wanted to be the best of the best, they'd do whatever it took to get Steyn's byline twice a week. Much of their readership would be aghast and informed – exactly the role of a columnist.

It will be interesting to see what the Times comes up with. Chances are it won't be another Safire unless they draft from this list.

---

[Allan]

Changing of the guard: Hugh Hewitt on who might replace William Safire at New York Times

Who Cares?

[blanknoone]

I vote Steyn. Steyn in the NYT would cause PEST so bad that NY's electoral college value would drop.

[Red Phillips]

Good grief. If Brooks, who has endlessly lobbied for the adoption of "big government conservatism", is the only voice on the right at the NYT, then things are worse than they appear. Brooks' big government rantings need to be balanced by a real voice on the right. Joe Sobran perhaps. Won't happen but it is nice to dream.

[Arkie2]

I didn't see Ann Coulter in that list. Wouldn't that be a hoot!

[InvisibleChurch]

please let it be michaelmoore

[anniegetyourgun]

I would think that Hugh would want to give up two things he's worked hard for:

1. Nice home in SoCal
2. Credibility in association

[OldFriend]

NYSlimes always reads as tho it was written by Ramsey Clark.

[Max Combined]

"Mark Steyn. He's the best columnist working today, period."

True, and he gets my vote.

[Max Combined]

"I didn't see Ann Coulter in that list."

As much as I love Ann, Steyn is head and shoulders above her in wit and urbanity.

[goldstategop]

ANN COULTER! Of course she's criticized Little Pinch, so that might be a strike against her, bad-mouthing the boss and the paper all these years. She's probably too incendiary for New York's libs. Hehehehe

[gridlock]

If the NYTimes landed Lileks or Steyn, I would renew my subscription, and throw away the rest of the paper every day, and the entire paper five days a week. They're that good...

[Brilliant]

Hewitt probably wrote the article so that they'd put his own name on the short list. He would not be a bad choice, but I suspect that the NYT won't want a genuine conservative.

[december12]

I agree with you that Steyn or Lilecs would be fantastic, but that's the exact reason why they won't be considered. Only a very stuffy conservative has a shot at being on the Times op-ed regularly. Safire and Brooks can be funny, but they've been forced to keep they're humor in check when writing there.

[kittymyrib]

You notice Ann Coulter is not on the list...talk about getting people to read a column...but they would never admit it!

[smiley]

Better question is who will pick up William Safire?
Fox News?

[JohnHuang2]

Hugh Hewitt MEGA PING!!

[JohnHuang2]

I didn't see Ann Coulter in that list. Wouldn't that be a hoot!

Indeed! *Evil grin*

[JohnHuang2]

lol

[jalisco555]

I believe that the job actually requires the writer to work in the Times newsroom and therefore live in the NYC area. I don't see Hewitt or Lileks or Steyn doing that. Also, the writer would have to work alongside Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman day after day after day. Could the Times possible pay enough to get any of those guys to do that?