So the insular clique of Op-Ed writers will be replaced by an insular clique of people who linked to each other a lot in the early days of blogging. Terrific.

No offense Ezra, I'm no fan of Kristol, but I know for a fact he is a regular at the synagogue where his wife was elected to a leadership position so he is a religious man; he just does not wear it on his sleeve. Unless you are more religious than you let on he is not closer to you. Douthat blares his religion, Kristol does not.

Yes, he's a blogger. Congratulations. But brilliant? His "new ideas fo the GOP" seem to consist of the old ideas stated without foam coming out his mouth, leavened with large doses of navel gazing Catholic angst. It seems to me that his selection is really more of an indication of just how shallow the conservative bench is. He wouldn't have gotten anywhere near that gig as a liberal blogger. Wingnut welfare, anyone?

though Ross has, of course, written two books and a bevy of magazine articles, he's also spent the last five-odd years as a dedicated and brilliant blogger, and his ascension to the Times op-ed page suggests that the medium's respectability has come a very long way in a very short time.

Or, it means someone finally noticed hat "blogging" means "writes regularly", which book publishers already took note of; I think we do ourselves a disservice continuing to insist that "blogging" is somehow emphatically new: it's writing, and we deserve the respect (ha!) that other writers get. Douthat's a good choice because first and foremost... he's a great writer.

And second, it's great because he's a smart conservative, something that doesn't need an adjective like "religious" to compound it. Douthat does something to broaden the range of ideas on the op-ed page (something I think Kristol's always held more promise than result on), and challenge lefties to think harder, and deeper, and consider alternatives. That has to help our discourse, generally. I don't think religion, really, is the key to this.

Probably the only nagging concern is that Brooks and Douthat are in many ways very similar, and it reflects a kind of "safe" conservatism that liberals can accept that's way more moderate than the movement as a whole. And that's fine - the conservatives and the GOP could use some moderating, these days - but there's bound to be complaints about NY Times and "RINO" type critiques.

Yeah, Ezra, I always find misogyny and hostility toward sexuality of any and all kinds is "brilliant" and just filled with "insight." However, in this particular case I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.

Kristol is a devout Jew. I doubt Klein is a Jew except in name.

My gut reaction to this news was negative for no reason I could articulate, but I think it's put well in the comments here.

Yes, given for no good apparent reason that the NYT wants to have a partisan Republican on its op-ed page, Douthat is more intelligent and honest than the likely alternatives. But his admirers on the left do a disservice to their readers when they don't acknowledge just how how damning with faint praise that is. "Welfare duchess"? Linking approvingly to St*eve Sai*ler? Arguing that porn = adultery, and closing comments when people criticize him for that?

"the rarity with which the religious conservative viewpoint is articulated on its own intellectual terms"

what does this even mean? What are the "intellectual" terms of a religious belief?

And if you are really suggesting that the "religious conservative viewpoint" is what we need MORE of, then I frankly must wonder what country you've been living in for the last 25 years.

What is this, some species of intrablogger brotherhood that makes it obligatory to welcome the mouthpiece of a loathsome philosophy just because he can write coherently and isn't a raving lunatic? Fuck Douthat and his "religious conservative viewpoint." That "viewpoint" has choked us to death the last 8 years, and would be still if Douthat and his ilk had their way.

I'm disappointed, Klein.

and "well-defended faith." There's another head-scratcher.

Don't know anything about you, Mr. Klein -- but perhaps you have some profound discomfort with religious belief that prompts this weird species of homage.

Douthat's religious beliefs aren't a window into the religious mores of the GOP.

Just because you're conservative and religious doesn't make you an emissary for religious conservatives as such.

The reason liberals find Douthat tolerable is that he doesn't speak for the Christian conservative base of the GOP.

The good news for you, Ezra, is that if the NYT will take a 29 year-old blogger seriously enough to give him a job, there may be hope for you.

The bad news for everyone else is that Douthat is a complete tool who wraps his politics in religion so that all criticism can be called an "attack on his religion".

total suckage

Here are Mark Twain's thoughts on the Ross Douthat's of the world (and that includes all those early Iraq War supporters who later decided it maybe wasn't such a good idea after all) - just change the country names:

"I bring you the stately matron named Christendom, returning bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored, from pirate raids in Kiaochow, Manchuria, South Africa, and the Philipines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies. Give her soap and towel, but hide the looking glass."

Nod to Beyerstein's comment.
Just because Douthat can articulately explain Catholic concerns about abortion doesn't mean he can explain Sarah Palin-style oblivious disdain of rationality. No one can.

Wasn't RD one of the brilliant guys who suggested Sarah Palin was the future of the GOP? Yeah, sounds brilliant to me.

Klein's been over the hill for a couple weeks already. How sad for such a young man. He sure did have a purty mouth, though.