Big Journalism’s Larry O’Connor yesterday highlighted New York Times columnist Paul Krugman’s unhinged screed that marked the 10th anniversary of 9/11 — an attack on common decency for which Krugman (conveniently) refused to allow any comments. But in his mean-spirited and wholly inappropriate post, Krugman revealed more than he realized about the state of liberal/leftist thought in America today — and the frustration leftists foster about the current state of our politics.
To quickly recap, Krugman wrote:
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.
Such a passage makes me wonder if liberals of Krugman’s ilk even hear themselves? I know Krugman thinks Bush is a “fake hero,” because he hates him with a blinding passion. But he wedges W in there as almost an afterthought among his parade of “fake heroes” — ” … and even George W. Bush.” Before that, Krugman calls Rudy Giuliani a “fake hero.”
Now, Giuliani would be the first to reject the “hero” label, because he knows who the REAL heros are. He saw many of their dismembered bodies in the rubble of the WTC. He went to funerals for months on end. But what Giuliani did was of enormous value to the city of New York and the nation: He stayed calm in the face of enormous chaos and fear. And he acted as a leader — as did Bush.
Giuliani suffers in the measure of Krugman (as did Bush) for the same reasons. Both men were non-liberals (non-Democrats) who earned the admiration of the people. Krugman thought he’d be able to belittle Bush for the entirety of what he thought would be one quick term as a “pretender” who “stole” the election from Gore. Only now, of all days (but without comment), does Krugman feel the urge to scratch that long-neglected itch.
And with Giuliani, Krugman is settling an old score of the New York liberal elite. Krugman takes such a cheap shot at Giuliani because he was the REPUBLICAN mayor who — long before 9/11 — made New York City livable again, destroying the status quo of liberal governance of Gotham by the likes of David Dinkins. If Giuliani was remembered only for cleaning up the city, Krugman would still resent him — but with less vitriol. Because Giuliani ratified his wisdom and civic leadership — on a national scale in the wake of 9/11 — the man is simply due for this vicious slur that Krugman could no longer keep inside.
If Krugman thought this post would diminish Bush or Giuliani, he was (as usual) sadly mistaken. He only diminished himself.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.