Ruh-roh: Jew-baiting behind TWT uproar?

Hmmmmm. And hmmmmmm. OK, this is kind of hard to sort out, so we'll bullet-point it:

• Jonathan Slevin co-authors a novel that depicts U.S. foreign policy as "hamstrung and optionless because of Arab and Russian tyrants, oil, Middle East politics, American evangelicals, Israel, and AIPAC."
• Slevin reportedly handpicks Michael Scheuer to review the book for The Washington Times.
• Three senior executives of TWT are ousted, while Slevin is promoted to acting publisher.
• Executive editor John Solomon is reported to be "considering his options."

Quite a pickle here. Of course, I admit that the title of this post is misleading, since criticizing U.S. Middle East policy is not the same as "Jew-baiting." (But tell that to David Frum vis-a-vis "Unpatriotic Conservatives.") I was just looking for a shorthand label.

Having friends on both sides of the paleocon/neocon schism, I'm kind of an odd hawk-dove hybrid -- a Zionist paleo? -- and wish there were some sort of fusionist middle ground or, at least, that the two sides would stop anathematizing each other. Decades of this Manichean either/or game gets tiresome.

Anyway, when I posted about this "atavistic anarchy" earlier, I imagined that the reported turmoil at my former workplace was just a business matter. If, as these liberal bloggers suggest, it turns out to be a function of global geopolitics . . . well, wouldn't that be a kick in the head? Or maybe it's about ethics because of Slevin's hand-picking the reviewer, which violated company policy.

I'm betting there are many people in the Washington Times newsroom who are now fondly recalling the Wes Pruden era as the Good Old Days. As a news philosophy, "Get It First, Get It Right" had the virtue of simplicity.