VITAL SIGNSrnJ O U R N A L I S MrnThe Rise and Fall ofrna Paleoconservativernat the WashingtonrnTimes (Part I)rnby Samuel FrancisrnAfter nearly a decade of workingrnfor the Washington Times, I wasrnfired last September. Technieally, I “resigned,”rnbut Wes Pruden, the Times’ editor-rnin-chief, asked me for a letter of resignation,rnand I had no real choice but tornagree. Nor, by that time, fiad I any realrndesire to remain on the staff. The reasonsrnfor my defenestration from a paperrnwhose editor styles it “the official voicernof the conservative movement” are complicatedrnand—at least to me and manyrnwho express support for me—somewhatrnmysterious, though in certain quartersrnmy firing and the disappearance of myrncolumn from the Washington market arernreasons for satisfaction, if not outrightrnglee. Not only did Pruden demand myrnresignation, but he also immediately forbadernthe publication of my syndicatedrncolumn in the Times.rnBut the circumstances of my declinernand fall at the Washington Times point torna story more important than what happenedrn(or happens) to me and my column.rnThe story has to do with largerrnmatters: the direction of American conservatism,rnthe boundaries of what isrncalled the “public discourse” and whorndecides where those boundaries lie, andrnthe real meaning of free expression in arnnation that loves to boast of its commitmentrnto “openness.” If I dwell on myselfrnand the circumstances of my firing evenrnat the risk of sounding self-serving, it isrnbecause these issues are best understoodrnin the context of my relationships withrnthe one newspaper I have worked for.rnFrom 1986 to 1995, I served thernTimes as an editorial writer, deputy editorialrnpage editor, acting editorial pagerneditor, and nationally syndicated staffrncolumnist. When, six months afterrnarriving at the paper, the editorial pagerneditor who hired me and four of his seniorrnwriters resigned in anger over an editorialrndispute, I declined to walk outrnwith them and stayed on, helping the paperrnsave face in one of the most embarrassingrnepisodes in its history. In 1989rnand 1990, I won the most prestigiousrnprofessional journalism awards the WashingtonrnTimes has ever won, the DistinguishedrnWriting Awards of the AmericanrnSociety of Newspaper Editors for editorialrnwriting. My twice-weekly column wasrna popular feature that appeared everyrnTuesday and Friday for four years in thernTimes’ Commentary and op-ed pages,rnand its disappearance has cost the paperrnreaders.rnI served the Times as an editorial writerrnand junior editor from 1986 to 1991.rnIn May of the latter year, Pruden offeredrnme the position of staff columnist, writingrntwo signed columns and two unsignedrneditorials a week under the newrneditorial page editor. Tod Lindberg. Forrnthe next two years my column, whichrngained national syndication in Novemberrn1991, appeared in the Commentaryrnsection of the Times and, as the WashingtonrnMedia Guide reported the nextrnyear, as a columnist I “quickly establishedrn[my]self as a force.”rnWhen I began the column, I knewrnwhat I wanted it to be—a hardball expressionrnof paleoconservative principlesrnthat would not hesitate to criticize thernmainstream right and the general politicalrnand cultural direction of the country.rnI had no interest in rewriting RepublicanrnParty press releases or booming the idolsrnof neoconservative or movement conservativernadoration. I also wanted to broachrna variety of issues from a perspective thatrnwas seldom heard in the press—immigration,rntrade policy, questions of globalismrnand national sovereignty, post-ColdrnWar foreign policy, race, and Americanrnconservatism in general. I have, somerntell me, a gift for sarcasm, and I did notrnhesitate to use it.rnI understood that there was a risk inrnwhat I was planning, that I would bernstepping on a great many toes and pushingrnthe boundaries that surround thernfashionable dogmas of both the Washingtonrnright and left, boundaries thernTimes seems petrified of transgressing.rnBut Wes had assured me when he madernme a columnist that I would have arnmuch freer rein than I had as an editorialrnwriter, and I cannot say I found this to bernuntrue.rnIn September 1993, the paper’s Commentaryrnsection underwent a reorganization.rnIt lost one of its three regular pagesrnof opinion pieces, and a separate op-edrnpage was created that would carry opinionrnpieces from outside writers as well asrnthose of the three staff columnists. Therneditor of the new op-ed page would bernTod Lindberg, who continued to run therneditorial page as well.rnIf Hillary Clinton is a “congenital liar,”rnTod Lindberg is a congenital neoconservative.rnIn his college days at the Universityrnof Chicago, he studied with the laternneoconservative guru Allan Bloom and,rnperhaps more significantly, was thernroommate of John Podhoretz, son ofrnneoconservative czar Norman Podhoretzrnand by 1991 an editor at the Times himself.rnTod had previously worked as an editorrnat the neoconservative journals ThernPublic Interest and The National Interest,rnboth founded by the other neoconrnheavy, Irving Kristol, whom Tod once describedrnto me as his “mentor.” As forrnTod’s view of the paleoconservatives, in arnrecent interview with Washington’s CityrnPaper, he called their ideas “horsesh-t.”rnThus speaks the “official voice of thernconservative movement.”rnDespite the obvious divergence betweenrnour views of conservatism, I gotrnalong well with Tod in the four years Irnwrote editorials under him. He was a remarkablyrneasy editor to work and writernfor. He never held editorial staff meetings,rndid not require writers to stay in thernoffice after meetmg their deadlines, andrnseldom altered what I submitted for thernpage-rnAs for Wes Pruden, a notoriously aloofrneditor, I had little contact with him.rnOther than grunted greetings from himrnin passing (sometimes not even that), Irnhad no conversations with him at all betweenrnthe time he made me a columnistrnin I99I and the dav he canned me inrn1995, My talk with him on the latter occasionrnwas the longest I ever had, andrnthat seems to resemble the experience ofrnmost writers and reporters at the paper.rnThe son of a Baptist minister m LitdernAPRIL 1996/35rnrnrn