Krugman's Shame
Paul Krugman, the hard-Left columnist who writes regularly for The New York Times writes the following screed on this 10th anniversary of 9-11:
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. Te [sic] 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.
In Krugman’s fevered imagination, the true heros of this event “raced to cash in on the horror.” Rudy Guiliani showed more leadership in one day than our current national leadership have exhibited in the past few years. But no matter—to Krugman, the Mayor of New York “cashed in” on the horror.
In Krugman’s warped view of reality, we should recognize that the aftermath of this event was “deeply shameful” for all of us. You’ll note that in his fantasy world, Krugman never even names the perpetrators of 9-11, because in his world they are but bit-players to a greater drama—the sins of the United States and why we drove these Islamist fanatics to attack us.
Krugman exemplifies a very troubling characteristic of those on the hard-Left—an extreme distaste for his own country.
At the end of his screed, Krugman writes: “I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.” The obvious reason is that at some core level he knows he’s wrong and is unwilling to hear others state why. That makes him a coward.
Krugman’s mind so distorted with a warped ideology that he borders on a form of dementia.” He's a pathetic ideologue who, unfortunately, has been given a platform by The New York Times. His analysis is illogical, his world view is irrational, and his ideas, if they were ever implemented, would do far more damage to our country than anything “Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush” ever did. Paul Krugman is a fool.
Update (9-12-11):
Not surprisingly, Krugman’s op-ed has generated a lot of blowback, none better stated that this by Pejman Yousefzadeh:
As Sa’adi noted, that collective sadness [sbout 9-11], this ability to feel the sadness of others, and to give expression to our sympathy, our empathy, and our grief makes us humans. And Paul Krugman’s inability to perceive it, his willingness–either due to moral myopia, or to an eager desire to give himself to the cause of repulsive propagandizing–to characterize our “subdued” state to the supposed “shame” that the country allegedly feels for not thinking exactly as Paul Krugman has thought for the past ten years makes him the archetypal brute. Allegedly, “in its heart, the nation knows” that Paul Krugman is super-correct about everything, and for the sin of not having listened, the nation is ashamed. And if you don’t believe in that theory, just ask Paul Krugman; he’ll be the first to tell you that you should buy into it with all of the dark thoughts you can muster.
This is a family blog, and so, I make sure not to cuss a blue streak when writing here. As a consequence, it will be impossible for me to use the only words in the English language that have so much as a candle’s chance in a cyclone of expressing the disgust, revulsion, and outrage that any decent individual ought to feel when reading Krugman’s words. How very ironic that the pundit who decries the lack of unity in the post-9/11 world should contribute so mightily to the sense of division that we are experiencing with his divisive and revolting thought that today should primarily be a day dedicated to attacking Paul Krugman’s enemies. How very egocentric of him to try to turn September 11th into “Why Paul Krugman Was Right” Day, with no cogent argument anywhere within fifty miles of his post for why the day should be re-branded as Krugman wishes it to be. “Brute”? The word will have to do to describe what Krugman is, though there certainly are other words I can think of to describe him.
Read the whole essay and watch the accompanying Youtube videos.
A Second Update (9-12-11):
Richard Fernandez talks about another kind of “shame” that a fool like Krugman is simply incapable of understanding. He also talks about forgiveness.
The story of September 11 must for all time become the story of how a certain date became unspeakable to al-Qaeda and its followers; a tale of how this day of all others, became the blackest day in the history of Islam. It should forever be a date that can never be mentioned without arousing a deep sense of shame throughout the Middle East so that in generations hence, people should still come up to strangers unbidden and say, “I’m sorry for September 11.“ Until then it is unfinished business.
We have no right to forgive. We have no right to forget. We have no right to move on until this final condition is met. That in the holy of holies of our civilization’s enemies, in the innermost recesses of their sanctum sanctorum they should say with heartfelt ardor: never again. Never again. Never, ever again.
<< Home