Written Sep 13, 2011 I have read the New York Times for many years. Editors, critics, and reporters come and go, but the newspaper has held onto the best writers for the simple reason that they help circulation. Among that upper echelon is op-ed commentator Paul Krugman. The 2008 Nobel Prize winner has exhibited an uncanny insight into the international influence of wealth on politics and equality. The economist had long defended his liberalism with fierce attacks on the neo-conservatives of America and a recent blog about the lost decade following 9/11 has outraged a principal architect of the Iraq quagmire to the point of canceling his NY Times subscription. The article called THE YEARS OF SHAME attacked a host of Bush era heroes for polluting the memory of 9/11.
The Years of Shame.
Is it just me, or are the 9/11 commemorations oddly subdued?
Actually, I don't think it's me, and it's not really that odd.
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.
A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits — people who should have understood very well what was happening — took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity?
The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.
Donald Rumsfeld found fault in the viciousness of Krugman's blog and announced his wrath to the yawns of many.
I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.
Donald Rumsfeld
@RumsfeldOffice
After reading Krugman's repugnant piece on 9/11, I cancelled my subscription to the New York Times this AM.
The current cost of a 3-month subscription is $70.
The former Defense Secretary must be feeling the pinch of the eight years of voodoo economics and seized on this moment to liberate his wallet from the cost of reading 'all the news that is fit to print' so that he can buy new underwear. ps bravo Paul Krugman
No comments:
Post a Comment