- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,578
- Points
- 113
Paul Krugman wrote a devastatingly honest piece about 9/11.
Donald Rumsfeld canceled his subscription to the paper it was written for.
This is sort of the core of Krugman's point:
I'd say Rumsfeld is irked because Krugman hit the bullseye on the Iraq adventure: it was Rumsfeld's baby, one he never allowed the Pentagon to game out fully, so he could paint a rosy picture for the president, all with Cheney's connivance, of course.
Of course canceling his subscription won't kill the truth; it won't even hide it from his office staff, since Krugman's pieces are all online, available to be read even without a subscription. The only thing this does is show Rumsfeld for the petty little man he is.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/12/rumsfeld-cancels-nyt-subscription-over-repugnant-krugman-column/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63263.html
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...-calls-paul-krugmans-sept-11-column-repugnant
oh -- I can't leave this reference out:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...ars-of-Shame-blog-Rumsfeld-drops-the-NY-Times
and having given that link, in order to remain fair and balanced:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...imes-subscription-over-krugman-11-shame-blog/
Donald Rumsfeld canceled his subscription to the paper it was written for.
This is sort of the core of Krugman's point:
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.
The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.
I'd say Rumsfeld is irked because Krugman hit the bullseye on the Iraq adventure: it was Rumsfeld's baby, one he never allowed the Pentagon to game out fully, so he could paint a rosy picture for the president, all with Cheney's connivance, of course.
Of course canceling his subscription won't kill the truth; it won't even hide it from his office staff, since Krugman's pieces are all online, available to be read even without a subscription. The only thing this does is show Rumsfeld for the petty little man he is.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/12/rumsfeld-cancels-nyt-subscription-over-repugnant-krugman-column/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63263.html
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...-calls-paul-krugmans-sept-11-column-repugnant
oh -- I can't leave this reference out:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...ars-of-Shame-blog-Rumsfeld-drops-the-NY-Times
and having given that link, in order to remain fair and balanced:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...imes-subscription-over-krugman-11-shame-blog/

























